|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Regolus www.juzaphoto.com/p/Regolus  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sigma 170-500mm f/5-6.3 APO DG Pros: Lightweight, economically unchallenging, excellent performance at medium apertures at least 400mm Cons: The stabilizer could be comfortable, but it can be done without Opinion: Bought 2 years ago used in excellent condition for my lady, who wanted a light tele to follow me in the photonaturalistic outings. While not lightning-focused, at least on Canon, is fast and without uncertainties. Tried at distances between 4m and 40m (then even beyond that useful in naturalistic) behaved admirably. Well sharp at full aperture at 170mm, it softens up a bit by stretching the focal length as logical to expect in such a zoom, at 400mm it gives the best at F/9-10, at 500 better close to still; From F/16 begins the physiological decrease by diffraction. I do not know if I happened a particularly happy specimen, but compared with my EF400/5.6 It turned out (clearly!!) a little lower as detail at 400mm, to recover something at 500mm thanks to the major focal. My wife is delighted, manages to handle it freehand without problems or at most with the monopod, certainly 300 euros well spent sent on June 06, 2018 |
 | Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: focal range (on FF it is a good all-rounder); compactness, fast and precise focus; sufficient close-up capacity at the major focal length Cons: if we really want to find the brightness and the lack of stabilizer Opinion: I state that the following is related to the first version, produced in Japan up to 2000 and with 5 blades of the diaphragm, since there is also a 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM II produced from 2000 to 2010 in Taiwan and with 7 blades diaphragm. In my hobby activity of small photographic repairs, I had this lens in my hands and I took the opportunity to do some test shots. Mounted on APS 18Mpx, despite the dated project and amateur address, has behaved very well; just looking at 100% I could see a slight less sharpness than the good 18-55IS in the central areas, just more evident and with a little 'color edge. One can therefore think that on non-hyperdense FF the yield can be even better, which, combined with the low price on the used market, could make it a valid all-round for those who do not need large openings. sent on December 14, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Pros: excellent optics, autofocus fast but want to pass in a shot from infinity to 31cm, and price is not an exaggeration; missing the hood but does not seem to suffer easily flare and reflections Cons: plastic construction, if one side has perhaps helped to keep down the price, it is not up to the lens, although very little with the hand clutching at certain points you feel the barrel fixed yield slightly Opinion: It's still a great goal, quiet, perfect not only for the macro, but also for general use and portraits and also has a price / performance ratio very favorable, good looking you can find on the net a little more than what they cost competitors, but more offers in the internal focus that is not a trivial matter especially if you are photographing insects in the field sent on June 06, 2013 |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
