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 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on February 26, 2024 (14:00) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Nice photos,especially this one,blurred colors and details. Belle foto,in particolare questa,colori sfuocato e dettagli. |
| sent on February 26, 2024 (16:06) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thank you Claudio!!
The landscape puts a lot of its own into it!! Grazie Claudio!!!
Il paesaggio ci mette molto del suo!!! |
| sent on February 27, 2024 (16:09) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Very nice....
What a zoom.... Molto bella....
Che Zoom.... |
| sent on February 27, 2024 (16:20) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thank you Simo!!
Old zoom makes good broth!! :-D Grazie Simo!!!
Zoom vecchio fa buon brodo!!! |
| sent on March 01, 2024 (18:30) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Nice shot, nice lens (I tried it from a friend some time ago, the problem is the non-stabilization, having two nikon bodies not stabilized... but who stabilized in 1987?). Bello scatto, bella lente (la ho provata da un amico tempo fa, il problema è la non stabilizzazione, avendo due corpi nikon non stabilizzati... ma chi stabilizzava nel 1987?). |
| sent on March 02, 2024 (14:01) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thanks Claudio, yes in fact it is a lens born for film, and to make the best even with the slides, which were fantastic but mangy...
Today, however, with modern digital cameras you can raise the ISO without having major problems and therefore decent shutter speeds are fine...
My example is a second series or mkII, produced from 92 to 97, taken 2 weeks ago in Japan and practically new... You can find them at great prices.
I highly recommend it...
Thanks again
Greetings
Alessio Grazie Claudio, si infatti è una lente nata per la pellicola, e per rendere al meglio anche con le diapositive, che erano fantastiche ma rognose...
Oggi comunque con le digitali moderne si possono alzare gli ISO senza avere grossi problemi e quindi i tempi di scatto decenti si trovano bene...
Il mio esemplare è una seconda serie o mkII, prodotto dal 92 al 97, preso 2 settimane fa in Giappone e praticamente era nuovo... li si trovano a prezzi ottimi.
Te lo consiglio vivamente...
Grazie ancora
Saluti
Alessio |
| sent on March 02, 2024 (14:34) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Actually, if you can now use stellar isos without major problems, you should also be able to live without a stabilizer, and, in 1987, the isos we currently use were science fiction... I don't see it as bad just for 200 mm (and therefore having to shoot at least 1/200 and 1/300 on APSC), unless you are outdoors on a preferably sunny day, it can easily take over iso 12800.
Greetings.
C.
Effettivamente, se ora si possono usare senza grandi problemi iso stellari, si dovrebbe poter vivere anche senza stabilizzatore, e, nel 1987, gli iso che adesso usiamo correntemente, erano fantascienza... La vedo male giusto per i 200 mm (e quindi il dover scattare ad almeno 1/200 e ben 1/300 su APSC), a meno che non si sia all'aperto in una giornata preferibilmente di sole, può facilmente richiedere oltre iso 12800.
Un saluto.
C.
|
| sent on March 02, 2024 (16:38) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Anyway Claudio, I guarantee you that even at full aperture i.e. f2.8 it is already very sharp and very usable, so even at 3200 iso you can shoot in almost any situation... then clearly it depends on what one has to do with it, we would miss it...
I did a little test at home with the cat as a model :-D and at 3200 iso I went quietly...
This photo, for example, is taken at f4 and if you zoom in a lot on the tower you can see a seagull... That says a lot about the quality of this optics....
A friend of mine uses it in the theater with the d800 and he has never had any problems either...
And I'll tell you more: the autofocus isn't as slow and noisy as they say, in my opinion... Maybe it's because mine is as good as new... bohhh!!
Comunque Claudio, ti garantisco che anche a tutta apertura cioè f2.8 è già molto nitido ed usabilissimo,quindi anche a 3200 iso si può scattare in quasi tutte le situazioni... poi chiaramente dipende uno cosa deve farci ci mancherebbe...
Io ho fatto un piccolo test in casa con la gatta come modella e a 3200 iso sono andato tranquillo...
Questa foto per esempio è scattata a f4 e se si ingrandisce molto la torre si vede un gabbiano...questo la dice lunga sulla qualità di questa ottica....
Un mio amico lo adopera in teatro con la d800 e anche lui non ha mai avuto problemi...
E ti dirò di più l'autofocus non è poi così lento e rumoroso come dicono secondo me...forse perché il mio è come nuovo...bohhh!!!
Ti faccio di nuovo tanti saluti e grazie ancora della visita
|
| sent on March 02, 2024 (16:46) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Yes, the autofocus, while not instantaneous, didn't create problems in fact. I tried it during the day, it was sunny, the photos were good because it was shot between 1/250 and 1/2000 (Nikon D800), so there was no risk of blur, but I imagined it indoors (the friend who had a D700 took pictures of it, but with some difficulty because he often shot indoors) and I already saw it shooting to 12800 like nothing. Now with AI-based noise reduction techniques, 12800 are often usable, but at the time (it must have been 2016) they are not.
It's a lens famous for blurring, I think. It was very beautiful indeed, even if it was worn out among the weeds and trees of a park. Si, l'autofocus, pur non istantaneo, non è che creasse problemi in effetti. Lo ho provato di giorno, c'era il sole, le foto venivano bene perchè si scattava fra 1/250 e 1/2000 (Nikon D800), quindi non c'erano rischi di mosso, ma me lo sono immaginato al chiuso (l'amico che aveva una D700 ci scattava, ma con qualche difficoltà perchè spesso scattava al chiuso) e già me la vedevo schizzare a iso 12800 come niente - scatto quasi sempre in iso automatici. Ora con le tecniche di riduzione rumore AI-based, 12800 sono spesso usabili, ma all'epoca (sarà stato il 2016) no.
E' una lente famosa per lo sfocato, mi pare. Era molto bello in effetti, anche se provato fra erbacce e alberi patiti di un parco. |
| sent on March 02, 2024 (19:01) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Yes, I totally understand what you mean... Si capisco perfettamente quello che intendi... |
| sent on March 14, 2024 (19:24) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
This is also a very nice realization. Good evening Realizzazione molto bella anche questa. Buona serata |
| sent on March 15, 2024 (10:32) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thank you very much Daniele!!
I am very pleased with your message
Greetings
Alessio Grazie molte Daniele!!!
Mi fa molto piacere il tuo messaggio
Saluti
Alessio |
|
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.
23.7 MEGAPIXEL
Resize to fit window
