|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on December 19, 2017 Pros: It has a good focal hike. It's light and cheap. Cons: Nobody. Opinion: I used the lens with a Nikon D3200 for about 6 months. I am very satisfied with its sharpness at all focal lengths, especially with intermediate diaphragms. With short and medium focal lengths even at full aperture. I had some problems only at 300 mm, in low light conditions, with fast moving subjects, a little ' even for the autofocus not very fast, instead with the tripod there is no problem. I also like the color rendition, I find them very pleasing and vivid. I added this lens to the 18/55 of the kit to photograph a little ' of everything and are very satisfied, even by the value for money, of course if the need is to photograph avifauna in a professional way is not the best choice, but they change decidedly Even the prices. I would buy it back immediately. My vote is: 9. |
 | sent on October 27, 2017 Pros: Price, weight, stabilizer, good sharpness. Cons: ... honestly I did not find any big flaws. Opinion: Very good value for money nowadays is easily at just over € 200 ... rnBuy sharpness, maybe a bit dark and autofocus is definitely slow, but the stabilizer is of a good level but we are not talking about a 'optical "pro, so it's OK for me, and I did not use it very much I did not feel sorry for it. |
  | sent on October 27, 2017 Pros: Good NitidezarnLength focal length Cons: AF imbarazzantern speedAt maximum extending over vignetting FX, in DX no Opinion: I used it for a few days, borrowed from a friend, on the D7200 Nikon body, I have to say that definition and sharpness is good (especially coming from a 55-200 nikon with which I do not have a great relationship), disconnecting from the background and nice bokeh effect, perhaps it's a bit dark, but Autofocus is embarrassing, definitely too much too too slow, it makes you go up the crime, definitely not a recommended purchase.rn Battery grip unbalance leggermenternUnweighted weight rnTo the top of my little experience |
 | sent on July 06, 2017 Pros: Lightness, length, stabilizer, cost. Cons: In my opinion no one. Opinion: I read many reviews that do not give any credit for this. I read of sharpness problems, which at the maximum opening kicks the details. I have serious doubts that those who have expressed these views did not take photos of moves ... I 300 I find the single pixel. I had also convinced myself to mix the details. But how come if I shoot at 1/4000 times, the photos come out sharp at all focuses? So it's not a slow issue at all ... I think it's a great goal. Dark? Obviously, it's a zoom and weighs less than half a pound. But mounted on dx is very comfortable, it is a 430mm full size. I am very satisfied. |
 | sent on March 13, 2017 Pros: efficient stabilizer, good light output, zoom range, good price performance ratio Cons: AF a bit 'slow, focus also breath the minimum focal length Opinion: Used for 6 years and then D7000 to D5000. Excellent stabilizer, I always got perfect shots with 1 / 60s at 300mm focal length (450mm equivalent) and often acceptable to 1 / 30s, there are three stops all. Moreover, unlike the FX 70-300 in which the stabilizer produces a vibration or audible squeak, this is silent. The AF speed is about half of 70-300 FX, in a bench test employed approximately 1-1.5s to hook, where the one for full frame around 0.6s.rnLa optical performance is good, the average of goals from kits, but not less than 70-300. Good zoom range, especially the comfortable 55mm, although the breath focus become 65mm when focheggia short distance. Rating: 8 |
 | sent on August 21, 2016 Pros: For the focal 300mm is compact and brandibile freehand. In the intermediate focal it is sharp. Cons: dim Opinion: I used it for a distance portrait with focal approximately 200mm and it is very clear result, you can distinguish the individual capelli.L'ho also used in photographic safari with focal 300, 1/500 times and apertures, great !! ! But how scarce light ....... opaque and less sharp. But the figure that is goes well, rnse you want to do photo hunting is best to buy a set. |
 | sent on August 14, 2016 Pros: vr Cons: af slow, poor sharpness at 300mm Opinion: provided that use this lens for quite a while and d40..ma, various tests done on the best of my loooong machines gave the same results. Vr actually is really good, even if they are on the aziono safety times, strangely if I do the photos are mossissime..bah! Af ... The really tragic! Also tried on modern machines and ff: leeeeeeeeeeento. A 300mm then, you expect nothing ..! I had taken because of it ..! in short, it is a perspective we say to stop a moment of life lived, but without thinking of being able to make a great photo. If the subjects are at close range and there is a beautiful day from 55 to 100 is sharp, then starts the decay. My vote is 4. |
 | sent on May 17, 2016 Pros: Light, cheap and with a good hike Cons: Hood ridiculous perhaps manufactured by lego Opinion: Bought a little more than € 200 and mounted on my d3300. I am new but I think in relation to its focal length is very great. I can in the beautiful sunny days just hanging out with what the 55mm back undoubtedly useful. Unfortunately is 300mm f5.6 and 55 is only 4.5; Whereas the 300mm are few for birdlife, Safari and photos to the stadium for other sporting uses and more than enough the af ultrasound does his duty. It is not a target for special purposes or special effects using wide open and just, will always be sharp. the hood interlocking is obscene, makes just disgusting! Compared with slightly more expensive Tamron 70-300 vc I have not noticed big differences perhaps in a bit darker but on the 70mm Dx force to continuous optical transmissions for more close-ups on tamron compared and overvalued photos that returns find them anyway a little too soft, then for use on Dx better this more versatile, lighter, cheaper andis primarily NIKON. The vr works fine I took 1/60 and 200mm without problems. Personally I do not think I go to FF because of the exaggerated costs of optical fx. Considering this vote 9! Metal bayonet! |
 | sent on March 20, 2016 Pros: weight, high output up to 250mm Cons: a little dark, but nothing shocking Opinion: I was torn between this and the tamron 70,300 vc. In the end I bought the nikon, also because 'the Tamron weighs 200 grams. in piu 'being compatible for ff. Before the 'purchase I tried them both, and I have to say that equal' and focal settings, I have not found substantial differences. Then, maybe it will seem silly, but for me it is Nikon Nikon ........ rnContento dell 'purchase made. |
 | sent on January 26, 2016 Pros: .. Cons: .. Opinion: I'm not really a "professional" but I would like to buy a telephoto lens to shoot details of old houses, drip type, strings of time, heads, etc .. Having found an offer good enough, rather than write my opinion, I would like to know if This telephoto lens is compatible with the D3000. Thank you. |
 | sent on January 03, 2016 Pros: Price, handling, focal structure Cons: Dim, AF slow and not always accurate especially after the 200 mm Opinion: Taken to the old 3200 with a kit for the 18/55 price and focal length very spddisfatto. After several shots the VR value that makes the difference. But very versatile: Little bright colors a bit dull, Unclear after the autofocus 200 and not always accurate. Over 300 serving patience. Anyway now I am using it on 7200, but you notice that something is missing. Do not change 'cause we do everything and to replace it should go to class with different costs! Overall not bad for amateur shots and beginners (like me) |
user34391  | sent on July 06, 2015 Pros: lightweight, easy to handle, stabilized Cons: some flaw in engaging the auto focus Opinion: I bought this with the goal of nikon d3100 kit with the 18-55mm stabilized ... it is a good compromise between quality and price for those who want iniziare..rnla minimum focus of only 1.5 m and thus allows shooting close with a nice blurry ... stabilizer works well and helps a lot .. works well both as objective as telephoto lens for portraits, provided you do not go to the maximum focal length, I used improperly as macro lens, matching it to a lens close up and I must say that the results were surprising. It can not replace a true macro, but coupled with this there is a lot of fun ... rnuna flaw I found is that sometimes fails engagement of autofocus ..rnin ultimately a great goal for beginners and want to have fun, that allows you to do many different things without spending a capitale..rn |
 | sent on September 04, 2014 Pros: Low price, stabilizer, weight and size, a dedicated DX format, quality / price ratio, bayonet in metal Cons: overall sharpness, especially after the 200mm autofocus particularly slow, rotating front element, lens hood fragile, dark, but you can not have everything at this price. Opinion: For what it costs, especially in used but also new websites on the classics, it's a pretty interesting lens by the excellent quality / price ratio. E 'light and not very big, so the small bodies DX is not too unbalanced, though with all the optional BG is much more balanced. The AF is slow, especially if there is not enough contrast or if the subject is moving fast, you may miss some shots. The VR is very effective, I managed to keep 1/60 to 300mm without apparent shake-. The sharpness is not that great in general and falls dramatically over the 200mm. The colors are a little saturated. I did not notice reflections. Suffers a bit 'of AC. Distortions? Something, all correctable in PP with a single click. It must be said that compared to the 55-200 has a metal bayonet and a diaphragm better. I will also do portraits, using focal 55-100 or so, if one takes care to choose the right approach to the subject and the background are also some nice bokeh without opening the diaphragm. The ricomprerei? At that price, yes, on the run, has no rival. Together with the 18-55 one makes us a beautiful layette to start without a lot of sacrifices. Who could ask for more? |
 | sent on March 16, 2014 Pros: lightweight lens, focal length good, handy, great value / price especially if you buy used Cons: a little dark. Opinion: good hike, a full canvas, comes to 420mm on the right, have fun, needs a good luce.Buon auofucus, silenzioso.Stabilizzatore great, at least in the model I tried, you see the difference between him and added that no.Ottica I changed just because the past nikonj 70-200 f.2, 8, otherwise I have always had a great time, you see the difference, but not worth all the difference in euro. |
 | sent on February 27, 2013 Pros: Compact and light enough, practical and economical, 170 focal has an excellent performance. Cons: Little light, the autofocus is not particularly fast and the minimum and maximum focal loses sharpness Opinion: In my opinion, if you take an average focal (170) is sharp even on cloudy days, 300 loses a lot of sharpness and brightness, overall value for price is good and does its job. Easy transport, with another lens could be a 18 55, you have already a fairly complete kit to begin with and to travel. |
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
