|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.user164399   | sent on November 07, 2018 Pros: Optimum sharpness at f 5.6-8 from 70 to 135 good at 200mm f8 Cons: Soft at the edges at 300mm but for the 88 euros paid: No cons! Opinion: I bought, for 30,000 lire (about 104 euros today), in the far 1978 a 200mm f 4.5 Galaxy A preselection: a real bottle bottom. Today, for 88 euros (used as new), the performance of this tele zoom makes the miracle scream. Over 200mm just close a couple of stops and keep the subject in the middle and go big up to 300mm. Bearing in mind that the APS-C frame is equivalent to a 105-450. Umberto |
 | sent on July 03, 2018 Pros: Price, weight content. Macro?!? Cons: Loses a bit in sharpness when used with maximum focal length. Opinion: Purchased a few years ago as the first tele-zoom "true". Currently it is at very attractive price. Constructively well done, even though it is almost all made of plastic material. The plastic however allows to contain the weight. The attack is metal. In general the yield is good, it is at the chromatic level that of definition, even if it suffers a little with the maximum focal. In this case the image softens slightly. At full aperture you notice some chromatic aberration. Good resistance to flare and parasitic light, I have taken backlit photos without any particular problems. Autofocus fast enough. It's also really noisy, but this is not a problem in itself for the photo. I noticed some uncertainty in critical condition. I used the lens also freehand with satisfactory results. The focus ring is very fluid, that of focal selection a little less. Originally purchased for wildlife photos, I started using it with interesting results even on the street. |
 | sent on July 03, 2018 Pros: Good construction, reasonable price, mechanically I do not mind, lightweight, macro 1:2 Cons: Slightly sharp at 300mm between f 5.6 and F8. You have to close to F11, overexpose by 1 stop. AF Noisy but accurate. Opinion: What about, I bought it used (mine is identical to the one in the picture but it belongs to the previous series, the D, with aperture ring and without AF motor) to just over 60 euros. The lens in itself does not disappoint, provided you use it in full light or on tripod. Discreet sharpness up to 200mm by closing a couple of stops. Up to 120mm keeps the F4 aperture, I would say not bad if you want to make some portrait. At 300 mm you have to close to F11 to match the sharpness of the less pushed focals. I think it is a normal thing given the price (it is an amateur zoommetto, light, to carry around without big claims). I mount it on the Nikon D7200 and I have no problem since my machine has the AF motor, and the lens focuses smoothly, by the way also quite quickly (but it is a bit noisy). The construction is good, it has the metal mount and, contrary to many other optics of similar price range, it has an internal "tunnel" behind the rear lens that allows to minimize the reflections and not expose the mechanics inside the sensor, when zooming. Funny the macro function, you have abundant 70cm and the 1:2 magnification is not bad. At 300mm F11 you get good results, the distortion is minimal, it has no chromatic aberrations. Given the price paid (as a 18 55 used), I feel satisfied, and to be true does not seem to suffer excessively the 24 MP of my Nikon. |
 | sent on October 04, 2017 Pros: Surely the price and construction. Cons: Obviously not particularly intricate. Opinion: Favorable price. Good construction. Honest optics. that's what we can not think of having a Maserati. Anyway, to be a pretty focal zoom, it's obviously heavy and not bright. > Good focal excursion ring. Thinking about a DX is actually a 450 mm. we can say that it can be a compromise between price and quality to be taken quietly into consideration. |
user128541 | sent on August 09, 2017 Pros: Surely the price, and no less the weight, especially by working hand-free. Cons: Price performance! Opinion: Buddhist Opinion !!! As long as you are aware that you can not claim the performance of a Ferrari from a Fiat 500. It's all good and against useless to buy a Ferrari if you've always driven a Fiat 500. So why live with performance anxiety ? Everyone does what they can, the important thing is the fantasy and the inventive that this hobby or work that is required! Good Shots |
 | sent on August 09, 2017 Pros: Focal excursion, considering the price is very sharp at least up to half zoomed. Cons: A little soft as it gets closer to 300 Opinion: Bought again, I can't talk bad about it considering the price. Sure, a 70-200 f2.8 will do much better always and anyway, but there is to spend at least 5 times as much and would not get to 300mm. Considering that we are talking about a cheap lens, I do not want to understand a defect the noisy and relatively slow focus or the not too pushed brightness. But it's certainly light, with good light it's fine (always considering the price) and as for the materials... my specimen until now has not suffered in the least use, and I use it quite often for two and a half years. I have done several portraits also very sharp and without post production. Missing the stabilizer? No problem, I use Pentax. DON'T FORGET WITH THE FF, and sorry if it's cheap. For me it is promoted with very good grades. In judging, in my opinion, one must always consider the membership. If I spend 200 euros I can't claim benefits from 1,200 eute. It would also be macro (not properly, but it is a more this too..). In the meantime I bought the 55/300 PLM Pentax, but this I do not sell, because it covers me the k1 FF, and if not used at the extreme canvases in good light conditions makes very very very well in portraits. For me, for what it costs, I did well to buy it along with the first reflex |
| sent on August 09, 2017 Pros: Focal excursion, considering the price is very sharp at least up to half zoomed. Cons: Very soft over half the zoom Opinion: Bought new, I can not speak badly considering the price. Of course, a 70-200 f2.8 will make it much better always and in any case, but you have to spend at least 5 times as much and it will not reach 300mm. Considering that we are talking about an economical lens, I do not feel a fault in the noisy and relatively slow focusing or the brightness is not too much pushed. But of course it's light, with good light it's fine (always considering the price) and how much the materials ... my specimen so far has not suffered the use, and I have used it quite often for two and a half years. RnrnHo Made different portraits also very sharp and without post production. Is the stabilizer missing? No problem, I use Pentax.rnrnNON DO WE HAVE TO COPE ALSO FF, and sorry if it is too little. RnrnI am promoted to me with very good grades. In judging, in my opinion, one must always consider the band of belonging. I will never be able to compare a 100-euro compact with a 600-euro reflex. If I buy 200 I can not claim performance of 1,200. |
 | sent on July 19, 2017 Pros: Weight, Price, Versatility, Macro, beautiful colors Cons: Brightness in adverse weather conditions Opinion: An excellent lens in terms of price quality, a must have as the first zoom experience. Lightweight and excellent lens for photographing distant pets without getting faint. Very good results even in freehand (with good weather and light conditions). Even the quality of the materials is more than discreet for the price it has. |
 | sent on May 16, 2017 Pros: Versatile, useful for those who want to get closer to Macro and naturalistic photography but can also be used in architectural details for particulars. Cheap, discreetly priced, not too heavy. Cons: Strongest sharpening to maximum focal length test (200-300) rnrn Opinion: It was my first goal but not the one that made me passionate about nature photography, I have had some beautiful adventures in the woods and I recommend it as a quality price for beginners who like me want to approach this photograph, coupled with a Manfrotto Compact MCK3-H02 works well, the macro function from its satisfaction, but as I said the fact of the sharpness is very penalizing. |
| sent on May 16, 2017 Pros: The pros of this lens is versatility on some fronts such as the "macro" function that has come back to me very easily in many naturalistic situations, and not how everything works discreetly even for particulars in architecture such as ancient churches etc. (Tested by my undersigned) Cons: The opposite, and it is very penalizing, is the clarity, I used it on an old canon 350D that does not make text, but I realized that at maximum focal length it does not burn well and is very heavy from Take a close look at it. Make sure that you are well blurred and use it in full light because it is not very bright. Opinion: I can recommend this lens to those who do not have much money to spend and would like to approach naturalistic photography, thanks to the macro function, which does not work badly, you can take pretty good pictures if combined with a compact MKC3-H02 manfrotto as I said Above is a bit of a handyman, to me personally has stimulated a lot, but certainly not an objective that I consider qualitatively high. |
 | sent on May 04, 2017 Pros: Weight, price, versatility, Macro Cons: Sharpness, constructive quality and "plasticose" optics Opinion: Great zoom with generous focal coverage, economical and versatile. Really great for lively and vibrant landscapes, but unfortunately it has little contrast and the detail leaves much to be desired, especially in the macros where you notice its limits but we are always talking about a lens of 230 € and I think it's better not to Absolutely claim. Of course the best of all his rivals (I also possessed the tamron I gave the day after taking it ...). Autofocus slow and noisy and 20-25% of the time can not focus (so not suitable for photographic hunting). On the other hand I would highly recommend it if you want a decent lens all to do without spending a fortune |
  | sent on February 08, 2017 Pros: Price, "macro" 200mm absolutely good, light weight and portability, quality of 70 to 220.rn Cons: It stretches like zoom if worn around the neck ... To the rest considering the price no one Opinion: To say that is an honest lens is unjust. For what it costs really it gives much. I tried even on a demanding sensor such as the D7100 and has not disfigured. If we limit ourselves to use it is between 70 220 (holding the 300 as "reserves") has always given me very good results. Autofocus is not lightning but this is not a specialized lens for sports or photographic hunting. Using it to 5.6 by a pleasant blur for portrait (always between 100 and 200mm). The convenience of taking pictures at close range (200mm) with good quality is really a first plus.rnIl I had I gave to my son ... then I bought another one because it regretted the versatility, lightness and the quality. And I had goals also more expensive and famous! |
| sent on August 20, 2015 Pros: Versatility, macro mode, price, construction Cons: Slow autofocus (version without motor, mine), soft to 300mm Opinion: Sometimes I say "take a long zoom serious" and then always portrayed as I have fun with quest'ottica.rnLa macro mode, which actually goes up to 1: 2 on a 300 mm allows the shots really interesting. .. all while maintaining a perspective that is also mounted a tele! RNE 'all plastic, but I appreciate the right hardness of the rings, more ergonomic than many other more noble goals, and the fact is not absolutely obvious on Nikkor to have such distance focusing stamped on barilotto.rnrnCon the same lens can do shots from a distance or detail, using the focal; portraits fabulous (9 blades, 300mm@5.6), and macro not 1: 1 but with the advantage of working in more than 90 cm from the subject. Not bad for a small object that MMT can be purchased at 80 EUR! RnrnI against you see when you go to look in detail at 300 mm length ... this is quite soft to make the lack of detail visible without magnification particolarmente pushed. And 'indeed quite common in this price range - let's talk about one of the objectives absolutely the cheapest on the market! For example, I see it when I try to use it to photograph birds from far away ... Despite the focus in theory would allow it, you can not get results, particularly incoraggianti.rnrnReputo AF slow, I state that I have a version antediluvian no AF motor in board (based on that of the body, if you have one) .rnrnIn ultimately hilarious perspective, a must for the novice as it introduces to the world macro without going too pushed on. Shows its limits in those genres in which a major expense is a must; I doubt that his peers money to compete. |
| sent on May 27, 2015 Pros: Focal length, versatility, quality / price ratio. Cons: Lack stabilizer, poor sharpness between 200 and 300mm. Opinion: I bought this lens and used as new to the modest sum of 77 €, and it was a 'super deal! The lens looks solid and the dials are hard right; 70mm files produces very sharp and up to 200mm is beautifully used; between 200 and 300mm the sharpness falls a lot and moved increases the risk; requires electricity and adequate time to get good results otherwise you have to use a tripod; In conclusion, given the prices at which you can buy, the straconsiglio. rating 8.5 |
 | sent on May 26, 2015 Pros: Construction, quality lenses, focal length, sharpness Cons: Lack of sharpness between 200 and 300 Opinion: The first focal ultra zoom to coprare. The value for money is excellent. I use it for portraits and wildlife. Up to 200 mm is very clear, after losing a lot. In conditions of high brightness is excellent, 70 mm scares. Avoid use with low light, indeed shoot at 1/80 with a lens so far and it is almost impossible not stabilized. |
 | sent on April 20, 2015 Pros: Price, versatility '. Cons: None. Opinion: Objective honest and that keeps its promises, quality 'and good mechanical, definitely lives of other optical price and higher .... Focal claims from 70 to 300 mm, good for portraits and hunting fotografica.Luminosita' in the standard glass similar and of course in need of good luce.Si get good shots without blowing a fortune, I think is a fair compromise for money! |
| sent on May 31, 2014 Pros: Great focal length, versatile, small and compact barrel, metal clutch of good quality, focus distance reduced quality / price ratio. Cons: A bit soft over the 200-230mm, autofocus accurate but a bit 'slow, missing stabilizer, external finish economy. Opinion: I bought this objective used to prezzaccio (65 €) as my first canvas for my D3100, I must say that I was immediately quite well: although undoubtedly a supereconomico in optimal lighting conditions takes pictures of all respect, the 'I used to last Monaco Grand Prix with excellent results. It is obviously not suitable for a type of sports photography, due to the autofocus is not fast, except that quite accurate. The construction is undoubtedly economic, and the finish has a tendency to deteriorate in the long run (especially the Zoom ring rubber), this found on objectives of some friends; on my own, even though third-hand, the finish still resists. The lack of optical image stabilizer makes itself felt especially in non-optimal lighting conditions, making it necessary to use a tripod to avoid the blur. However, this lens has amazed me for its versatility, lending without excessive demands even in portraiture did not push it to the minimum focal length, returning bokeh high turnoverra also closing a bit 'the diaphragm to recover nitidezza.rnIn ultimately I do not feel I recommend this barrel, cheap and without much expectation, perfect as a "school ship" for novices, but it will also give some satisfaction to the semi-pro . |
user36759 | sent on January 29, 2014 Pros: Versatile, lens quality beyond expectations, ergonomics with an entrylevel body, minimum focus distance 0.95 to 300mm(!), sense of robustness in version with fun glossy finish Cons: Sharpens over 200 mm, obscene with matte finish, AF quite precise but noisy despite being HSM Opinion: On Nikon D60 he married perfectly; it was a perfect pairing. In addition, the minimum focus distance of 0.95m with which "almost macros" can be made for me is an added value. I recommend always keeping the lampshade on, even if it clutters a little, but protects against unwanted reflections. A great travel companion. |
 | sent on October 09, 2013 Pros: Price, lightness Cons: Sharpness after the 200, slow AF Opinion: It 'was my first telephoto zoom, and I served as a training ship. The sharpness is good until the 200mm gets worse. The af and noisy and slow, the lens hood is pure plastic without the internal fabric of the Canon and in any case was included in confezione.E 'very light, with the 350D I kept it in the neck even while trekking in the mountains without feeling very the weight. Although it is quite dark I used a lot as optical concert with decent results at times. I bought it in 2007 because it was relatively cheap and as long as I tried, if I started today I would spend perhaps a little 'more, and would take the Tamron that time there was not. |
user29462 | sent on August 11, 2013 Pros: price Cons: poor material; af slow; noise af Opinion: I think, however, for the price you have in hand a great lens and you can get great photos see pictures that are down 'goal that even noisy can' be satisfactory obviously good to start with but then I think unless you want to remain at these levels change objectives in search of something meglio.rnin conclusion in his hands was an excellent lens for value for 'price |
 | sent on March 04, 2013 Pros: great price of used, versatile and lightweight, non-critical condition returns a good quality Cons: Slow and noisy autofocus in low light conditions poor performance to 300mm lacks sharpness. Opinion: Goal must-buy used (maximum of 80 euro) for beginners and want to get closer to longer focal lengths without svenarsi.rnOttimo to determine whether or not to approach in the future to super telephoto lens very costosi.rnCerto not suitable for purists sharpness much less to those who must live in photography but very light and versatile suitable for any scampagnata.rnrn |
 | sent on January 31, 2013 Pros: Price Cons: Slow AF, poor mechanics, the collapse of clarity over 130mm Opinion: All in all a good lens to start or if you take a little to long focal lengths, although sharpness is pretty poor, but the mechanical is really bad, after only six months or less and less than 3000 shots of the gear Focus has broken out of the blue, without ever having taken a shot nor have done work under minimal proibitive.rnDa after the repair I did not understand if you suffer from back or front focus and sharpness is expired further! rnNon sure it worthwhile to spend a little to begin with this lens if you realize after a while that if you want to progress, even slightly, you need to change and add another spending more consistent ... perhaps it's better to start from a perspective little 'less "base", perhaps you spend less by making a single purchase of a good standard! |
 | sent on January 28, 2013 Pros: Quality / price ratio, good sharpness, treatment lenses. Cons: Low light (58mm lens), AF noisy Opinion: I've used it on a entry level attack sony (sony alpha 330) and judge him now a good buy, a modest lens at a fair price for those entering the world of photography and you want to create a first park objectives. And 'quite handy even if initially requires a little practice to use. The lens 58 mm maybe a little bit of damage overall though still at a good level. |
| sent on July 02, 2012 Pros: Price Cons: Slow AF, poor mechanics, the collapse of clarity over 130mm Opinion: A lens after all good to start with, although sharpness is pretty poor, but the mechanical is really bad, after only six months or less and less than 3000 shots gear focusing broke point white, without ever having taken a shot nor have done work under minimal prohibitive, I hope now assisting sigma.Da after the repair I did not understand if you suffer from back or front focus and sharpness is expired further! Non I'm sure it's worth spending a little to start with this lens if you realize after a while that if you want to progress, even slightly, you need to change and add another spending more consistent ... perhaps it's better to start from a 'perspective a little' less 'base', forsand you spend less by making a single purchase of a good standard! |
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
