|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on April 24, 2017 Pros: Lightweight, rugged, weather sealed, bulky at the right point, Sharpness Good, as expected. Cons: yield Calo at maximum focal if it can be a defect. Opinion: I bought to match the Canon 100D, so I replaced my Sony 10RX Bridge, I have gained in versatility and a little acting. The need was to have a versatile solution, not cluttered and decent quality to keep in your backpack. I'm using for several months even in combination with a Canon 7D Mark II, with this body is a bit slow in making fuoco.rnComunque happy with the purchase. |
  | sent on February 28, 2017 Pros: Lightweight, small dimensions, comfortable and fluid ring. Stabilized. Macro simulation. Zoom dial lock. It does not stretch alone. 16 mm. Price. Shut up if you close a bit ' Cons: Sharpness at TA, AC, barrel excursion, mm 270-300 Opinion: Impossibility to get to 300mm effective. Even though not being ultrasound is fast and almost never mistaken. RnOnly sharpness mostly closed a little, it enhances the d5200's highly-aps-c sensor. The biggest problem is the presence of purple and green fringing ... chromatic aberration is always around the corner. The barrel travel could allow dust input. 270-300 mm drops in sharpness and performance, for the other focal points it is a good sharp target for the great excursion and also quite contrasted. There are no good qualities such as the ability to simulate a macro lens; The weight is really low for a 16-300, and allows even without blocking the barrel hike this does not even move when the camera is hanging around the neck, so it is well built; For added security there is a convenient lever that securely locks the zoom range. Fantastic zoom switch for choice af%2Fmf, just above that of the stabilization switch. True value added to me, compared to other tamron superzoom and competition, are 2mm for the wide, really good. The lens is generally fast and powerful, in relation to price and features is a real bomb, flies around At € 400 for nikon, and at this price there are no valid competitors. The lens is even tropicalized, what do you want most? Ultimately the amateur lens for excellence, for travel, panoramas, portraits, street, exaggerating for birdlife and macro too. Do it all and do it discreetly or very well. |
  | sent on December 06, 2016 Pros: Perspective, multi-purpose, lightweight, compact, well stabilized and tropical conditions and with almost macro propensities. Cons: physiological yield decline in real and declared 300mm focal less than that value. Opinion: Its mission is very clear, a view from the wide focal range for addressing the most varied photographic opportunities without losing the moment .rnPotevo choose between 18-270mm VC, the 28-300mm and the 16-300mm vc vc II . Mainly by mounting the lens on APSC have rejected the 28-300mm VC (born x ff), I have rejected the honest 18-270mm because I was intrigued as to 2 mm less in the wide-angle and for the superior performance of 16-300mm vc II species in the center and mid lens .rnHo found very interesting the blurred, its almost macro capabilities (Rep. 1: 2.9 and minimum focusing distance of 39cm fire)), stabilization (4 stops), weight (540 gr ) and compattezza.rnIl PZD ultrasonic motor allows fine-fast, silent auto focus. RNLA advice in situations where weight and space are critical |
 | sent on October 27, 2016 Pros: Robustness and zoom range Cons: At the time, the hardness of the ring on ZOMM Opinion: I state that I just got the goal and only took some photos in interior lighting conditions pessima.rnPrimissime impressions on the lens: Tamron 16-300 rnil it is strong to the touch and in hand "feels." get rough the zoom ring, but not sorry, indeed, seems synonymous with ruggedness ulteriore.rnHo took some pictures at home, with poor lighting conditions, but reacted well ... now I look to try it at all focal field but it seems that expectations should be fully rispettate.rnSono sure that someone will turn up your nose, but you have to buy in the knowledge of a super tele which certainly has its limits. If you prefer the convenience of quality, in certain situations, I go benissimo.rnMi promise to soon publish some fotornrnhttp: //www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php? T = 2059737 & l = itrn |
 | sent on February 21, 2016 Pros: Great versatility for the entire zoom range and tropical conditions, good value for money. Cons: The 300 mm stated are not those. Opinion: Good optics, has the advantage that it can be used as a single lens while traveling. It has the defect that to 300mm, compared with the Tamron 70,300 returns comparable images to a perspective of 270mm or so. In any case it is still versatile and above all has the tropicalization which is a good thing. I advise. |
 | sent on January 11, 2016 Pros: Versatile, comfortable, lightweight, stable, macro, weather sealed Cons: AC backlight, vignetting in TA, 300 mm Unclear Opinion: It 's my first and only lens handyman. I purchased it because I wanted a lens that would allow me to take pictures of different focal lengths without changing optics every 3 to 2. I was aware that I would have to give up something in certain situations but to start and to take pictures of an amateur is just fine . Many defects such as AC backlit, vignetting and distortion at TA (16mm) you can safely correct in PP. Really convenient macro function. I use it with a Canon 100D and I must say it is a great combination to carry around effortlessly. Stabilization is good and also the AF. In dark situations it has its difficulties, but it is understandable. At 300mm the sharpness leaves something to be desired, up to 200 (or so) it is good. It 'an expense that would do it for lack of alternatives for the same focal. To learn well you better start with a lens so that spending money on more expensive targets but at the risk of not knowing what you really want. |
  | sent on August 16, 2015 Pros: Compact, versatile. 16mm block. Vr. Cons: Progressively slim after 220mm to any diaphragm. Opinion: Taken as a stockbroker for ceremonies and the like besides the Sunday non-engagement trips. I was impressed by the quality at the focal court, between 16 and 24 is good at all opening and great at 5.6-8. And f8 is the default diaphragm, which is fine up to 200mm. Rn I usually use it on the Nikon D5300 but I've tried it on the D610 and it looks like it's better at least up to 250mm, then it's out of sight. RnIt is decent, focusing if the camera is fine, with the single point of Focus, it's good, if you're chasing a gull hook it up pretty well. At my photo galleries I have one dedicated to the 16-300 in which I put the lucky shots. RnrnI do not understand why Tamron wanted to "infiltrate" the focal beyond 200mm, proposed it as 16-240 would sell it more: -) rn The D500 is incredibly better, especially at longer focal lengths thanks to the best fire focus. RnProtected the D5300 micromouse even with critical times, 1/125 to 200mm for essaysMpio, it can always be used. |
 | sent on August 10, 2015 Pros: Unique comfort ... for all occasions .. works well with my Canon EOS 7D Mark II Cons: only the brightness does not excel ... but you can not expect more Opinion: I have this lens by June 29 ... I am fine ... I made several shots ... from sporty to landscape .. with my EOS 7D MKII also autofocus responds benissimo..Su https://500px.com / lucone_photo can find some foto..ovviamente are a photographer .. but very very amatoriale.Cmq stra recommend this aim that as money is unrivaled. |
 | sent on June 15, 2015 Pros: versatility, comfort, build quality sharpness at all focal lengths Cons: I do not know, then it depends on what you expect and what you do, of course is not the stuff of professionals but go very well for all the other home users. Opinion: Purchased after reading various reviews I gave my 18-105 and 55-300 nikon to have a lens to do everything putting into account the fact of worse in quality but unexpected surprise was when I started usarlo.Sorprendente in all aspects , superior sharpness, stabilizer superior handling and comfort they not made me regret the two also sold very bene.Sulla my nikon d5100 works well so I'm very satisfied I got it and I highly recommend it to all photo enthusiasts do not set too high with openings etc. ecc.Qui is not satisfied or not, you're just talking about a very valuable product in all occasioni.Buone photo. |
 | sent on June 07, 2015 Pros: range of focal lengths, autofocus, image stabilizer, image quality (especially in the center), macro, small size, light weight, construction, weather sealing, hood, perfect for 70D Cons: chromatic aberration in the light, a bit dark (but you can not have everything) Opinion: I own a Canon EOS 70D with optical and L series, tired to take trips and excursions in the weight of 3 goals and to continuously change lenses, I decided to take this slow-rounder. Before deciding to buy it thinking to assume a great risk for the quality of the image but I had to think again. I compared snap to snap to 100% magnification with EF 24-105 f / 4 L IS USM and EF 70-300 f / 4-5.6 IS USM, and I can tell you that, although obviously not exactly the same quality level, produces the images accettabilissime up to a magnification of 50%. The autofocus and stabilization system are outstanding. The construction is solid and quite good. So if you also want a view handyman for travel and trips to recommend: do also prints up to A4 size without problems. If you are addicted and look pixel perfection at 100% magnification forget it. I have taken on Amazon at a great price and have it delivered to me in two days. The DESCRIPTIONand more appropriate for this lens in my opinion it is: a great all in one well-built, a goal honest. |
 | sent on May 21, 2015 Pros: 16 mm as minimum zoom, stabilization, weather sealing, small size, sufficiently clear in relation to the type of lens, lens hood Cons: Not particularly bright, sharp maximum achievable only in a narrow range of stop. Opinion: In my opinion, this lens should be compared with a bridge superzoom.rnIl reference segment is quello.rnSe I have the chance, I go for three lenses that I cover from 10 to 400 mm, but if I have to travel light, this is an excellent Tamron scelta.rnInsieme to the body canon 70D has a footprint of slightly higher than that of my bridge fuji, compared to much better performance, thanks all'accoppiata with an APS-C.rnE 'obviously a lens compromise, which will not return results spectacular at any focal length and, however, will give excellent soddisfazioni.rnLa sharpness is better than almost any compact super zoom you can find on your hands, as well as the performance at high ISO (here the credit goes to the body and not the lens, but there it is) .rnLa stabilization is excellent and the action ring zoom well calibrated and precisa.rnContrariamente to sigma 18-300, which I've had for a short period of time, this is the manual override of set fire, Which is particularly convenient in low luminosità.rnRispetto competitor also has the added advantage of the minimum focal length of 16 mm (25.5 on aps-c). At the other extreme, I had the impression, trying them both, that magnify slightly more (after all, even on paper, has a viewing angle of 5 ° and 20 ° and 40 against 5) .rnrnA my opinion, the maximum sharpness is reached between F8 and F11 more or less for all focal lengths (the shorter ones also work well with the diaphragm a bit 'more open) .rnLa lens, thanks to a distance of focus contained, also has some macro capability, which can be utile.rnIn summary, good lens "all in one" for a obbista or for those who must travel light, with the caveat that will be limited if you want to print in A3 or superiori.rn |
 | sent on April 15, 2015 Pros: Extraordinarily efficient, very sharp at all focal lengths, 300mm. It is better than many others, stabilization fabulous, smaller burden, 16mm. (When others stop to 18), also very good in the yield on Close Up, exceptional (5 stars) in the backlight and in difficult situations where other objectives had phenomena of ghost or flare or lack of definition, has the Full Time Manual Focusing (exceptional, if you try once a goal that has it then do you do more for less), has the window of distances, is weather sealed * * (and this is a parameter that eventually becomes indispensable). Cons: almost no cons: wanting to be very picky maniacs and you can see that some focal lengths are not selectable and is selected just before or just after (such as trying to set 28mm or 85mm. or 105mm.) but honestly I do not find a limitation; The hood has a consistency that seems light but probably just an impression; the maximum focal may be seen at the edges of the frame some chromatic distortions that are still correctable in PP, but in any case the pictures in the center are exceptionally Crisp. basically I do not find defects. Opinion: I've had a few days but I have already conquered and * * pleasantly surprised, I was afraid to find defects picture and instead I found a Sharpness sometimes impressive. Even in macro (would have to say "Close-Up") is doing very well, keep in mind that my basis for comparison is the Micro Nikkor 85mm. IF ED VR II I own for years and that -as you know- is almost a legend for its definition. the zooming ring has a significant friction that I like, there is no danger that you will shorten or lengthen if you strike something slightly (as it happened to me with the Nikkor 55-200). The MAF is * fast precise and quiet *. Five stars for the accuracy of MAF, as accurate as a surgical instrument. Price issue: here a note Mystery * how can a Target cost in UK (and only, do not send outside of the UK, I contacted the store, ed) € 470, via the Internet (from Germany) to 521 -: - € 570, and € 700 in store (in a shop) and"800 euro!" the second store contacted, how can it be that in Italy we have the things * * ALWAYS pay more? Not controversy, is * * portfolio, from 521 (best price Internet) to 800 (worst price Italy) are 279 € of difference are so many, too many, :( are 50% more! Why? Returning to the objective, the building looks solid and very well taken care of, we have the impression of having in his hands a lens Very high quality, I think it's a cut above (..but a beautiful span) to various 16-85, 18-55, 18 -105, 18-140, 18-200, 18-300, both Nikon Universal. Judgement: Good, very good. Some photos taken with this objective: http://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria. php? t = 1373202 & l = en |
 | sent on March 26, 2015 Pros: focal length, macro surprising, weight, well built compact and lightweight, but in the hand is felt, stabilizer amazing, perfect, tropical conditions Cons: focus ring is not just convenient, but you get into the habit, is a handyman pushed so you have to study it thoroughly to get the most Opinion: stabilizer exceptional for me better even of 70-300 that I had already done a miracle .. I work primarily in video and you can also fine hand even at maximum excursion --- full aperture distortion is minimal .. not I was shocked ---. very crisp on short and medium focal .. sure 300 begins to lose a bit '.. but here everything expected and no scandal .. and in good conditions of light you will not even notice it --- blurry for me is much best of 70-300 and this cheered me a lot '--- used for interviews and portraits makes very well even under ideal sunlight .. ---- averages focal gave me more satisfactory results of a 24-105 L series that remains for me always overrated ... |
 | sent on March 15, 2015 Pros: Zoom range, Cons: Dim, 16mm distorts, true focal length but very much lower than the nominal, if you focus on a short distance. Opinion: Good evening everyone. I state that I am not a professional. I own a Nikon D7000 and Sigma 105 macro HSM. Until two weeks ago I had the Tamron 70-300 and 18-105 vr vc kits. I sold the last two to buy the 16-300. Well at first glance very unhappy: the 70-300 being also for FF was heavy index but also stability and robustness, compared the 16-300 seems like a toy. I immediately noticed a difference on the focal lengths. Let me explain: focusing on infinity, both Tamron return the same image in terms of distance, that approach to 'object in the same way (I hope to be clear) .rnDi negative I noticed that to 300mm focusing on a close subject, it seems to use a much shorter focal length of 300mm, in fact, two days ago I was able to make a direct comparison. I photographed a girl always placed at the same distance from the stand, first with 16-300 then with my old 70-300. The result was that with the 70-300 at 300mm I managed to do a close-up, cut the front and dethe chin; with 16-300 at 300mm I had a lot of space on both the front and under the chin; last test I found that to get closer with the 70-300 as I approached with the 16-300, I had to use a focal length of 170 mm alas. How is this possible ?? rnAmo portraits that occasionally happened to me a close-up but with the new Tamron seems really impossible. What do you recommend? RnHo the opportunity to make Tamron purchased only five days ago. I thought of a nice Tamron 24-70 2.8 or sigma 24-105 f4, but I'm afraid to regret the choice because of reduced focal I'd like wide angle. DI against yet I would have no zoom lens, having at this time only the sigma 105, pro only two goals but I would very valid; with this solution, however, I'll be forced to add a wide angle so that I lose again the convenience of everything to do, when I'm around with famiglia.rnAiutooooooo what do you recommend? |
 | sent on February 05, 2015 Pros: Comfortable .. I'm there ... I have yet to evolve from the world of Bridge .. but it's vital when you can not change optical .. or you do not have optical alternatively .. Convenient because you switch from a landscape to the foreground in a lightning ... Cons: E 'with compromised .. so the actual resolution is natural fiber and the average quality of a just result ... Opinion: Very comfortable .. despite everything ... I'm happy for tourism is fine ... I wouldnt .. although I was expecting a more pelino. I would have spent twice just to have a little 'more resolution and brightness. Unassuming, good thing for all the objectives could be to have the distance, etc. stairs. written with fluorescent material. Size and weight are not a problem for me .. All in all I managed to do even picture theater .. where the lights and the shooting location are not ideal. In the audience, and during a concert is already so much that the neighbors endure the noise of the SLR. The only alternative, theoretically a bit 'more engraved is the old nikon 18-300 of 2012. It seems that all seek to reduce to the detriment of the quality dimensions. It makes sense for only 20 mm? Eye .. the new Sigma and Nikon are not very different. |
 | sent on February 05, 2015 Pros: Focal Range Stabilization Weight Tropicalisation Quality Construction Cons: A little dark Opinion: I purchased this tele all do is not having many claims, I'm very happy, as you snap it seems increasingly malneabile and with a bit of experience you can make beautiful photographs both short lenses that lunghernCONSIGLIATISSIMO. I've paired the canon de 70 I am fine, being tropical conditions as the same 70 d. An advantage in my opinion it is important that part of focal 16 and not 18 as focal .Yes is a perfect all-rounder |
| sent on January 07, 2015 Pros: Price, Focal Range, Weight, Stabilization, Tropicalisation, Construction, General quality. Cons: Focus in the slow transition from the short focal length ones. Opinion: Objective handyman really attractively priced and excellent build quality. Speed ??Focusing not meteoric. The lens is of great quality, with a feeling of use of an object really done well. At longer focal lengths the lens extender is not excessive and in any case everything remains absolutely solid. Objective suitable for travel and to limit overall dimensions. Steel flange with seal waterproof and dustproof. Version for Nikon. |
 | sent on November 05, 2014 Pros: excellent build quality, focal range, light, weather sealed, remote focus Cons: a little 'dark, Opinion: Having many claims, I find it spectacular ..... does everything, of course the quality is not the best, a bit dark. rnSecondo me if you are looking for a handyman this is the best, excellent build quality, incredibly compact, thus reducing a lot of the weight, weather sealed, and this is no small part of 16 not 18 like the others, and is as wide, has focusing too close to the maximum excursion. What else are happy with the purchase so I recommend to all, without prejudice as I said at the beginning ... NOT HAVING A LOT OF CLAIMS |
 | sent on August 19, 2014 Pros: 16-300 focal range, light, crisp, short distance focusing. Cons: read AC in shots with strong contrast. Opinion: After twenty days of use, I can say with tranquility 'that have not regretted having sold the Canon 28-300L and that he bought the Tamron 16-300 ..... I was puzzled because' the 16 to produce an article as 300 is not 'simple thing, I was expecting a lot more' compromises, but in the end I must say that if it is bought for what it is intended to do is definitely not a bad choice because lente.rnL'ho with a kit I needed a very structured product that would give me a good zoom range with a weight content (content for those who use SLR ....) rnLe my outings are often aimed at hunting and photographic macro, fixed that often go with the 1.5 kg, so 'it was difficult to as a handyman who was inside the backpack 28-300L (another 1.7 kg) .rnCon the 16-300 I created a kit that allows me to be very light but not to give up much of what gives me the kit done heavy artillery. The use in coupled with the sigma 12-24, 90 macro, and the whole mounted on 400f5,6 100d (see machine that ideal with 16-300), all in about 3 kg.rnPer as riguarda to specifications I find the 100D with the 16-300 an extremely balanced, the af is not 'the L-series but it anyway and' fast and accurate, the stabilizer does its job pretty well, finishing outside the considered type of product is in my opinion very good, given the lens hood supplied is a plastic and a thickness decisamnete which I think is better than the one provided by the Tamron 24-70 2.8 vc.rnUna consider extremely personal view is that this lens (like other lenses of this type) is a lens that you have to learn how to use ...... let me explain better, being a compromise in everything is easy in the beginning not to be satisfied with the results, and 'logical that the search for some shots should be much more 'weighted using that lens specialist, if one wants to make portraits of the lenght of 85mm will not have to' wonder if it blurred the Tamron is not 'one of the canon 85 F1.8 ..... if one wants to macro (function and characteristic present in 16-300) will not have to 'stupiri if the macro made with the Sigma 180 2.8 os and' better .... etc..etc.., but I can guarantee that with some care you can get some good out of focus and macro interessanti.rnCredo in conclusion that Tamron for value / prezzzo has proposed an extremely valid, but where 'and' important utilizzarolo and make a pochina experience before judging it. I decree a gallery in my profile where I'm going 'to include some images taken with the 16-300 in jpg without any processing. |
| sent on June 12, 2014 Pros: Versatile and excellent build quality, clear and quiet, exceptional zoom range Cons: Price a little high Opinion: Just bought after selling the nikkor 55-300 and I must say that the pictures on the focal length of 300mm are much better in the Tamron, more definition to f.8-F.10. I am very pleasantly surprised by the size and manageability. The build quality is much better than Nikon. The defects complained rightly by some (myself included) are fully adjustable PP. Indeed, the only drawback is the price, which seems a bit high, but certainly in the next few months, unfortunately, will drop slightly. But .. you always pay the first fruits. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED |
 | sent on June 03, 2014 Pros: Versatility, exceptional clarity, wide zoom range Cons: Not found Opinion: I bought this lens for my Nikon D7100, replace the 18-55mm kit and have a wide focal length range. My lens and my priority now is taking a lot of pictures with different focal lengths. I have this lens to 15 days and are highly and positively affected by this light. Sharpness impressive, good resistance to flares in the light, good bokeh, focal length is perfect for my use (from landscape to portrait). The level is constructive in my opinion, excellent. The hood is equipped with robust and useful series, is also given a UV filter. rnPer someone like me has to "learn" this lens allows you to not buy so many lenses and practice. Who does not know "what" he likes to photograph, can experience from landscapes to macro. But it is a perspective that can be useful to any amateur photographer who wants to have in your kit a great handyman to hang out with "light" and take good photos. |
 | sent on June 03, 2014 Pros: Amazingly versatile, dignified rendering of detail, perfect interaction with the camera (Canon EOS 60D), rapiditàrnnella focus equal to the original objectives, excellent manufacturing accuracy and quality of the materials that fannornpresupporre robustness and reliability, the lock to prevent accidental lengthening of 'optic is virtually inu-rntile because, at least in the sample in my possession, the barrel does not slide individually rather provides a fair resistance to change focal length, the complete absence of games of the rings of variation of focal and MAF (games sometimes instead present on the original optical!) surprisingly, then the minimum distance of focus which makes it, in addition, a macro from more than acceptable definition; in contrast to what reported in the data sheet I would like to add that the manual focus is continuous possibile.rn Cons: Some uncertainty in the focus at the maximum focal length in low light (but it happens sometimes with obiettivirnoriginali), maybe a tad less bright colors of the original 18-200 with whom I made the comparison, a stabilizer po'rnin difficult to focus maximum (but perfect up to 200 mm), slight but understandable decrease in the maximum focal definition, price is not cheap but certainly justified by the focal range covered and the build quality. Opinion: I've always been a staunch supporter of the superiority of the original optical compared to the universal but this lens (which I bought because, I admit, I have a soft spot for the zoom on wide!) Made me re-rncredere both for its perfect compatibility with my Canon 60D (quick focus, with the understandable exception of the MAF to the maximum focal length in low light) than for the more than decent performance at all focal lengths: rnun real wild card handyman practical and versatile, compact, lightweight and looking truly robust and reliable; is true, RNLA image quality will not be excellent, but I've always been of the opinion that not seize the fleeting moment if seirnindaffarato to change the optics! |
 | sent on May 22, 2014 Pros: Versatility, light weight, wide zoom range, sufficient in almost all conditions, reduced distance focus Cons: Soft edges to the maximum focal species, reduced brightness, chromatic aberrations especially in passages of high contrast and especially at the edges, price. Opinion: I got it yesterday, and I went out to do some shooting by mounting it on a 100D. The first impression was of a set camera / lens light and handy. It 'very comfortable blocking excursion nela 16mm position to prevent unwanted stretching during transport. I went on the pedestrian path along the Tiber that I have in the house, and I made some shots a little 'in all situations: landscapes, portraits, birds (there's my friend Heron that now I also know by name) and close -up. I preferred to try it "on the ground" rather than put me to photograph targets sample. The autofocus seems quite fast and accurate, stabilization seems intervene half seconds after pressing the shutter button halfway. I can not estimate how many stops you can earn, but I took 1/8 second to 50mm focal smoothly. I tried a little 'at all focal lengths, from 16 to 300 mm. The overall impression is that I expected. great versatility, paid for with a compromise on the average quality of the result. Ovviamentand those who buy a lens like this do not plan to use it to take a picture of life, but for some light and walk with the ability to cover a bit 'all needs without having to carry all the equipment. Clearly if I go in the shed or call me for a series of shots in the theater, or a sporting event seriously, I do not go with this lens and even with the 100D. But if I go out with the family and I want to have the possibility of some photos with the possibilities offered by a camera instead of a compact camera, the binomial Tamron 16-300 + Canon 100D is ideal. rnIl most important flaw is the low light, especially considering that it should be mounted on a aps-c, and therefore the use of high ISO becomes more problematic and sometimes requires some "planing" pp. This table is the focal / maximum aperture for this purpose: RNF / 3.5 16mm to 24mm ..... f / 4.0 24mm to 30mm ...... f / 4.5 30mm to 40mm ...... f / 5.0 40mm to 70mm ...... f / 5.6 70mm to 135mm ...... f / 6.3 at 135mm 300mm.rnGli other "defects"are less important, because the softness at the edges is most evident at the 300mm focal next, and usually if it is pushed so "close" the subject is fairly central, and softness afflicts less important parts of the frame. At the center instead, is surprisingly crisp always (always thinking of course that it is a zoom 18,8x). Chromatic aberrations, if any, are corrected well enough in pp.rnUn very positive aspect is the reduced minimum focusing even at 300mm, which allows close up of really interesting and decent quality. rnConclusione: a desirable lens (apart from the price a bit 'higher end) for outputs in freedom, with no claim to perfection, with great versatility, and an acceptable quality in all situations. If used for more specific purposes, it is obviously not the lens adatto.rnrnQui rnhttp: //www.juzaphoto.com/topic2.php? L = en & show = 1 & t = 872 610 # 3680088rnc'è a discussion that provides quauks other information on the lens in questione.rnrnrn |
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
