Yes, indeed. I don't think I've used the 55-300 once since I got the Bigma. Sods law says, of course...

Yes again. Ironically, I'm getting the K-3 with a 18-135, which as you may remember, I had before. I'm under no illusions about its IQ, but I'm just fancying the fast focusing, compactness and WR.

I think perhaps I'll keep the 55-300. Thanks.

It's harder still to decide what to do with the SMC-A 400 F5.6. Bought it from McBrian originally, it's lovely optically, and a thing of beauty, just MF and heavy. I haven't used it for quite a few years...

... really regretted it?

I'm about to get a K-3 and am dithering about whether to part-ex the 55-300 along with a bunch of other stuff.

I have the Bigma, so the range is covered, just wondered whether I'm going to regret it if I gtet rid of the 55-300.

I'll be definitely keeping the 10-20, the 17-70, and the 50-500 out of the lenses below, but I'm not sure about the 400mm SMC-A or the 100mm F4 macro.

Do we pick up a camera with the intention of being a good photographer, or of taking a good picture?

I think you can only become a good photographer on the basis of the good pictures you've taken.

They're two very different things. One is what you do, the other is how people judge you.

Are these bigger pictures that the forum software has reduced to 800px?

If so, it's created some horrible jaggies, especially on the deckchairs.

Well there we are. Our difference in a nutshell.

How can anyone be so selfish as to expect that others should comment on their pictures, without being prepared to offer something in return?

I can understand fragile individuals being initially intimidated, but that's where it's important to reassure the novices - the emotional impact another's image has on them is just as valid as someone else's has on those that have been round the block many times.

And in some cases, more so.

I can imagine a horrible parallel universe, where the moderators kept count of images posted against comments offered. And then banned those that didn't meet some equation's requirements.

Only a fool would imagine that such was being advocated here. But that is a world apart from encouraging even beginners to believe that their naïve impressions are just as valid and often more interesting than the jaundiced views of those that have seen it all before.

No one is suggesting that any objective standards should be applied before people post pictures. So any notion of snobbery is just silly. You're arguing against a position that no one is taking.

It's not in anyone's interest to post a load of poor pictures, without any apparent thought for the sort of responses that may be desired, and then go away dejected when the task of critique is virtually impossible, and nothing much is forthcoming. Obviously they might like a bit of random 'nice shot' style affirmation, but they are clearly not the ones that I've lost count of the number of threads over the years where my reaction to a substantial number of posted images is just 'huh?', and I simply can't find the energy to comment truthfully on them. Clearly I'm not alone in that.

Whereas the people that clearly do put some thought in have somehow given something themselves, so it makes it easier to be motivated to give something back.

Of course, arbitrarily increasing the number of posts and posted images will of course increase the advertising revenue from the site. So it's not entirely true that no one benefits from the mediocre.

A beginner that puts a lot of effort and thought into their hobby will be very obvious from the thoughtfulness of what they ask about.

They won't need pity.

Beat me to it

No idea what the judges would be looking for here - this sort of thing is incredibly subjective. Of them all, the first one stands out the most. It's bold and simple, and addresses the theme (relevant to both world, and motion).

The second and third are way too abstract - I wouldn't have realised it was trees without the caption, and the third is too much coloured lights and not enough motion to speak the theme to me.

4 and 5 are too much motion, and not enough world. 6, 7 and particularly 8 are too abstract as well - the long exposures have lost too much of the subjects for it to be clear.

If you do enter the contrail pic, clone out the sensor dust spots!

This is a straw-man argument.

It simply does not follow logically that because it is desirable to put some thought into what gets posted, it is also desirable to be at a professional standard before you can post anything.

It's a nonsense, and no one is suggesting it or even implying it.

Of course, as I hinted to Smegs above, it's entirely possible that one person may post some images they think are great, having put a great deal of thought in, and others, viewing them, think that they are a pile of crap posted at random.

However, it's usually possible to spot the beginners, and people (even me ) are usually fairly gentle with them.

There's no snobbery, just insecurity.