What do you think about this photo?Do you have questions or curiosities about this image? Do you want to ask something to the author, give him suggestions for improvement, or congratulate for a photo that you really like?
You can do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 243000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on October 27, 2018 (15:49) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
This is the exception: how to use well a 200 Questa è l'eccezione : come usare bene un 200 |
| sent on October 27, 2018 (15:52) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
And the answer is like the other, here Eroa ven closer maybe it was a 120 mm you are conditioned by the MM that you read on the EXIF data but in reality is not that the focal ;-) look at the picture leave the shutter data alone e la risposta è come l'altra, qui eroa nche più vicino forse era un 120 mm sei condizionato dai mm che leggi sui dati exif ma in realtà non è quella la focale ;-) guarda la foto lascia stare i dati di scatto |
| sent on October 27, 2018 (16:22) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
and that Cazz.. And say it no OO! Otherwise one who studies to do :-D
You can explain the focus Breaking.. I haven't seen it on Google E che cazz.. e ditelo nooo !! altrimenti uno che studia a fare 
Puoi spiegare il focus Breaking.. non l'ho visto su google |
| sent on October 27, 2018 (17:09) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Here is full of topics.... at the slightest distance a lens affected by this problem, all zooms more or less, will not be the actual stated focal point, the Tamron at 200 mm at 0.95 minimum distance is a 115 mm PIA plane going up by focal I mm increase , becomes effective 200 to infinity, and cmq say that 10 meters already is 200, but for example at 5 meters is about 150.... so you're the classic case that has been influenced by the shutter data instead of looking at the photo ;-) QUi è pieno di topic.... alla minima distanza un ottica affetta da questo problema, tutti i zoom più o meno, non sarà la focale effettiva dichiarata, il tamron a 200 mm a 0,95 minima distanza è un 115 mm pia piano salendo di focale i mm aumentano, diventa 200 effettivo ad infinito, e cmq diciamo che a 10 metri già è 200, ma ad esempio a 5 metri è circa 150 .... quindi sei il classico caso che si è fatto influenzare dai dati di scatto invece di guardare la foto ;-) |
| sent on October 27, 2018 (18:22) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
In fact this photo reminds a bit ' what I get with the 105 Sigma to about 150 cm, in fact I could not see the crush, but I thought it was a game of the position of the face
Thanks for the explanation
sure that photographing is wonderful. Every now and then I wonder what comes out and makes you come back baby and say Oh! in effetti questa foto ricorda un po' quello che ottengo con il 105 Sigma a circa 150 cm, infatti non vedevo lo schiacciamento, ma pensavo fosse un gioco della posizione del viso
Grazie per la spiegazione
certo che fotografare è meraviglioso. Ogni tanto mi stupisco di che cosa ne esce e ti fa tornare bambino e dire Ohh ! |
| sent on October 28, 2018 (2:33) | This comment has been translated
 |
|
Publish your advertisement on JuzaPhoto (info) |
![[retina]](shared_files/layout/retina_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
3.8 MEGAPIXEL
Resize to fit window
