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 251000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
| sent on February 25, 2025 (13:54) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
You were quite close and the detail on the pens speaks for itself. We should be at the level of the fixed. Eri parecchio vicino e il dettaglio sulle penne parla chiaro. Dovremmo essere a livello dei fissi. |
| sent on February 25, 2025 (14:54) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
But he doesn't have almond-shaped eyes... :-D Però non ha gli occhi a mandorla... |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (6:46) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
However, these lenses should have been created to be used at f4...... Comunque queste ottiche dovrebbero essere state create per essere usate a f 4...... |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (7:32) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
But also no, if you want pdc you can forget f4... only on subjects perfectly parallel to the sensor and at a certain distance you will get a good PDC, the detail will be pleasant but never engraved as with an F8, these are incontrovertible things ... For now... He doesn't have almond-shaped eyes but not even focused, the MAF is on his chest... Happen... but the quality of the optics is certainly of high levels. To affirm at the absolute highest levels is definitely excessive for me... :-D Ma anche no, se si vuole pdc ti puoi scordare f4...solo su soggetti perfettamente paralleli al sensore ed ad una certa distanza otterrai una buona pdc, il dettaglio sarà gradevole ma mai inciso come con un f8, queste sono cose incontrovertibili...per ora...non ha gli occhi a mandorla ma nemmeno a fuoco, la maf è sul petto...capita...però la qualità dell'ottica è sicuramente di alti livelli. affermare ai massimi livelli assoluti è decisamente eccessivo... |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (8:00) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
However, we can say that even on the blur we have removed a doubt. It looks nice even though it's not at f4. You can't complain... It would be nice to see some shots on the last ML. Who knows how I'm attacking L. This one doesn't have Af on the eye... just to understand. I'm not a fan of the genre but it seems to me a well-studied optic.
Stephen Comunque possiamo dire che anche sullo sfocato ci siamo tolti un dubbio. Sembra gradevole anche se non è a f4. Non ci si può lamentare...sarebbe bello vedere qualche scatto sulle ultime ml. Chissà come va son attacco L. Questa non ha l'Af sull'occhio...giusto per capire. Non sono un appassionato del genere ma mi sembra un ottica ben studiata.
Stefano |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (8:15) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Thank you all for the comments!
Regarding the diaphragm, you have to use what you need. Here already at f/8 we are at the limit with the depth of field; it would have been better f/11... Shooting at f/4 would only have led to a throwaway photo, with the head out of focus.
The great advantage of the very high-end super-telephoto is not only the brightness but also the quality (even if many recent zooms around 2000 euros are very close) and the possibility of using teleconverters (and this alas is a huge limitation for the 300-600 at Sony) Grazie a tutti per i commenti!
Riguardo al diaframma bisogna usare quello che serve. Qui già a f/8 siamo al limite con la profondità di campo; sarebbe stato meglio f/11... Scattare a f/4 avrebbe solo portato a una foto da buttare, con la testa fuori fuoco.
Il grande vantaggio dei supertele di fascia altissima non è solo la luminosità ma anche la qualità (anche se molti zoom recenti sui 2000 euro si avvicinano parecchio) e la possibilità di usare i moltiplicatori (e questo aimè è un enorme limite per il 300-600 in casa Sony) |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (9:18) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
very bad limit... bruttissimo limite... |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (10:25) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Repeat.. an f4 should be used at f4... If the autofocus function is placed on the eye... and must focus on them. This is the rule. then if you are happy.... that's fine
At f4 you can also see how the blur works... If not, what did they design to do?
To keep the isos low? Ripeto..un f4 va usato a f4...se l'autofocus funzione si posiziona sull'occhio...e li deve mettere a fuoco ..questa e' la regola..poi se voi siete contenti....va bene così
A f4 si vede anche come lavora lo sfuocato...se no cosa l'hanno progettata da fare?
Per tenere bassi gli iso? |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (11:19) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
“ However, these lenses should have been created to be used at f4..... „
I asked myself the same question " Comunque queste ottiche dovrebbero essere state create per essere usate a f 4....."
Mi sono posto la stessa domanda |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (11:26) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
“ an f4 should be used at f4 „
Now I don't want to beat you up, but in your galleries you will have 1 shot out of 100 at f4... :-D :-D :-D " un f4 va usato a f4"
Ora io non voglio menartela, ma nelle tue gallerie avrai 1 scatto su 100 a f4... |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (12:52) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Many at 5.6 because I use multiplier... The lion is f4.. when you have to blur ....
Go Then it depends on what's in the picture Molte a 5.6 perché uso moltiplicatore...il leone e' f4.. quando devi sfuocate ....vai
Poi dipende da cosa ce' nell'immagine |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (13:34) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
The crocodile is at 7.1...
I understand that brightness must be exploited but let's contextualize it. Other shots will probably come more suitable for pure blur. Not being in Sony... I don't know if the III already had the AF on its eyes. Il coccodrillo è a 7.1...
Capisco che la luminosità si deve sfruttare però contestualiziamola. Verrano probabilmente altri scatti più indicati per lo sfocato puro. Non essendo in Sony...non so la III avesse già l'Af sugli occhi. |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (14:00) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Quoto all.. I have always had the habit of being as close as possible to the winged subject. I have the 200-600 and very often I throw away the shots open below f11 because rarely three-dimensional subjects are parallel to the focal plane and
it's a cry when you've focused on the eye and the prey in the beak is blurry. I even used f 16 and I didn't notice significant losses and the blur, if at a safe distance from the subject, is beautiful especially if I use 1.4x. In my opinion the F4 is useful for distant subjects that then crop, for the speed of the AF and for some pleasant effects in the early hours of the day. Quoto tutti.. Io ho sempre avuto il vizio di stare più vicino possibile al soggetto alato. Ho il 200- 600 e molto spesso butto via gli scatti aperti sotto f11 perché raramente i soggetti tridimensionali si trovano paralleli al piano focale ed
è un piangere quando hai messo a fuoco l'occhio e la preda nel becco e sfocata. Addirittura ho usato f 16 e non ho notato perdite significative e lo sfuocato, se a debita distanza dal soggetto, è bellissimo specie se uso il 1,4x. Secondo me l' F4 è utile per soggetti lontani che poi croppi, per la velocità dell' AF e per certi effetti gradevoli alle prime ore del giorno. |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (14:06) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
My speech was related to the fact that Juza is testing a new f/4 lens and I think that most photographers are more interested in the rendering at full aperture than in the beautiful photo taken with this lens, in any case the eye of the female pintail is not in focus but her chest Il mio intervento era riferito al fatto che Juza sta testando un nuovo obiettivo f/4 e penso che la maggior parte dei fotografi sia più interessato alla resa a tutta apertura non alla bella foto scattata con questa lente, in ogni caso l'occhio della femmina di codone non è a fuoco bensì il suo petto |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (14:07) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
And.. I add that the f4 is very useful to then have spare apertures by mounting TCs which, however, in this case on Sony for now is prohibited. E .. aggiungo che l'f4 è utilissimo per avere poi diaframmi di riserva montando i TC che però in questo caso su Sony per ora è proibito. |
| sent on February 26, 2025 (17:06) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
I had the d810... no mirrorless... It seems elementary to understand Avevo la d810...no mirrorless...mi sembra elementare da capire |
|
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.
39.6 MEGAPIXEL
Resize to fit window
