JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
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?
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 21, 2014 (15:23) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
savior this is the previous model. the current Tamron 90 is 1:1 to 1:2 it stops. said this served perhaps better illuminate the subject and a greater care of the maf. good subject, however, is not easy. hello salvatore questo è il modello precedente. l'attuale tamron 90 è 1:1 questo si ferma a 1:2. detto questo serviva forse illuminare meglio il soggetto e una maggior cura della maf. bravo comunque soggetto non semplice. ciao
sent on February 21, 2014 (15:38) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
thanks for the clarification dear Guz in fact I had not noticed that it was the 'f2, 5 while the second version as the one in my possession is a f 2.8
I agree that it is not an easy subject
greetings to you and to David hello
Savior grazie per il chiarimento caro Guz in effetti non avevo notato che fosse l' f2,5 mentre la seconda versione come quella in mio possesso è un f 2,8
sent on February 21, 2014 (17:16) | This comment has been automatically translated (show/hide original)
Sorry for the delay with which I answer, first of all thanks for the positive comments. I confirm what was said by Guz on the lens. For the maf I would have to close at f16 but I would have risked a blur. Raise the ISO would have resulted in a loss of quality. Until last year I used a tripod junior 190 of nearly twenty years, still great for landscapes but definitely limited to the macro. For Christmas I am given us a 055-head rack that will allow me to use a longer time. Again, thank you, hello! Scusate il ritardo con cui vi rispondo, anzitutto grazie per i commenti positivi. Confermo quanto detto da Guz in merito alla lente. Per la maf avrei dovuto chiudere a f16 ma avrei rischiato un micromosso. Alzare gli iso avrebbe comportato una perdita di qualità. Fino allo scorso anno usavo un treppiede junior 190 di quasi vent'anni, ancora ottimo per paesaggi ma decisamente limitato per la macro. Per Natale mi son regalato uno 055 con testa a cremagliera che mi consentirà di usare tempi più lunghi. Ancora grazie, ciao!
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
Resize to fit window
