|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.user30919   | sent on February 19, 2019 Pros: Used Price, sharpness, f/2.8 fixed on all focal lengths Cons: Slow AF, weight Opinion: Amazing performance Lens like optical quality, maybe a little less like AF which is a bit slow and inaccurate in low light conditions. Taken used including lens hood for €420, I mainly use it for portraits paired with the Tamron 45mm f/1.8. Crisp and wide open and blurred by scream. From the best of se between F/4 and F/8. I recommend it to those who like me is fond of portraits and extreme blurred, for those who take care of sports photos do not recommend it when the AF is not the fastest and should adequately to the G2 version more updated. |
 | sent on October 14, 2018 Pros: Sharpness Cons: Heaviness Opinion: It is not a monster of lightness but compared to the Pentax 70-200 it is more manageable. With this lens I immediately found the Feeling. Sharp and precise is not lightning but in my opinion for what it costs them all worth. I have used it with Pentax K-1 with which it behaves very well, it also works perfectly well with the multiplier ring 1, 4x. I also love the colors and the blur of this lens. |
 | sent on September 20, 2018 Pros: Good brightness and image quality Cons: Slow AF, weight Opinion: I've been testing this lens for several months in sports photography, I'm talking about running, and today I'm ready to make a judgement. Nothing to say about the quality of the photos, in the colors and details, once hooked the subject hardly loses it. The problem lies in the slow AF. I found myself repeatedly to discard photos that came moved. It is a flaw that you can deal with but when the scene gets crowded it becomes a problem. I got to try it out even during some summer Night Football tournament. The situation gets tough because of the poor lighting of the fields and the speed of the game. Raising the ISO, allowing camera body, to the limit of accepting some noise you get with a pinch of luck some decent shot, availing of a monopod. Nothing remotely comparable to daylight but if the destination of the photos are the social networks are more than good. I conclude by saying, as always, that I am a fledgling amateur photographer for which I still use for most of the automatisms of camera body and lens but if you find this lens at a good price (I paid it around €400) is an expense of which you will not regret m A attention because if your purpose is sports photography you will be bisticking. Better to exploit it in less hasty areas, where the AF can take the time it needs to focus the subject. |
  | sent on February 23, 2018 Pros: Construction, well-balanced weight, optical yield, details, very natural colors, minimum focus distance, cost, precision and autofocus speed. Cons: I don't know.... for the cost it has and for the seniority of the project I would say none. Opinion: I use it on Pentax K7 or K3, this premise is dutiful to consider the focus system that is with grip. Its speed is not as low as many declare when used with some shrewdness. Of course it is not a lens devoted to sports photography, for which ultrasonic focus engines are of great help but, when used with criterion this lens is a great piece of optics. For fast focus, it is necessary not to force the lens to burst first a metre away and then to 60 meters... otherwise the sealing race slows down the focus and, you need to point the subject with the precision of a sniper, if you accidentally go into the background to focus, the problem described above presents. This aspect limits its use a bit but it is not something that I would include in the counters... once you understand how you behave you can do a little something you want. Otherwise it is a really fantastic lens, very natural as rendered on the images with contrasts never too strong nor too weak. The colors are fabulous and not ringing, with pastel colors I would say. The blurring is very, very pleasant and the detachment of the planes quite progressive. A soft hair at full opening, which for portrait does not disturb and, very defined by f4 or f5.6 onwards. Weight is a plus.... 1310 gr with tripod ring and lampshade mounted excellently balanced with the machine body. it wields and is more stable than a 24-70 f2.8, you want for the greater weight, or for larger sizes that make it more easily handleable. The dials are fluid and with the right resistance. Perhaps just a little short the stroke of the focus ring to work in manual, a rotation of a few degrees corresponds to a large shift of the focus point.... therefore, you should be very careful when disabling autofocus. Using it for macro photography, which is not my preferred field anyway, you need considerations. It is not a pure Macro, so the definition of the finer details perhaps suffers a little compared to specialized optics. However, this lens also has a point in my opinion, namely the minimum focus distance which is just over 90 cm. This feature, combined with the 200 mm focal point, allows you to have a good magnification of the subject even at distances that do not put too much alert insects such as butterflies or dragonflies, while still needing a little delicacy when approaching subject. For this kind of photography gives the best of itself with opening around f8, returning notable images for an uns specialized optics. If you work with machine bodies equipped with high-resolution sensors, such as 24 megapixels or more, you can also make rather pushed crops thus enhancing the subject or some details of the shot. Also manageable is the focus where, the biggest problem in photographing close-up objects, is the lack of stability in keeping the machine and slow or the movements of the subject in case of wind... The poor depth of field at 200 mm and close range can put a bit to the test in focus but, once you have taken your hand it becomes very fun and fulfilling. Ultimately a very reliable and successful lens, built with durable materials and with little plastic. For the price it costs, even buying it new, I think you can expect little more than what it offers. |
 | sent on June 26, 2017 Pros: Fantastic light, high quality, materials Cons: Focusing a little slow, it is not stabilized Opinion: Purchased the Nikon version, it is an exceptional lens, it has a beautiful color and light output. Very light, comfortable and not overly heavy. Excellent quality of materials, you understand immediately as soon as you take it in hand. With this lens you can create a blur really sweet and tender, great for the portraits. I took pictures of portraits of employees, and the result was excellent. The advice, especially for those who look for a handyman, with a good excursion but above all a good light |
 | sent on June 11, 2017 Pros: Construction, maneuverability, value for money, interior zooming Cons: Speed ??maf, unstabilized, no limiter Opinion: Great lens, found at a great price here on the market. The use with the 6D, with which despite everything they can achieve good results also in sports photography, especially in outdoor sports. Some more difficulties in low basketball gyms, but considering that it is not the 72-200 L 2.8 IS II canon, it brings home something anyway. Lenses that I feel advisable if you do not have big pretensions or a limited budget |
 | sent on January 28, 2017 Pros: Color rendering and sharpness, weight Cons: autofocus Opinion: For the uses that are made of a 70-200mm, I find it especially suitable for portrait where he made a definitely a good level. Personally I've used a lot of tripod for photography landscape, where long lenses were necessary even though I was on APS-C format. In the specific cases for which I'd gotten, however, that photograph of concerts and sports, has been a subject rarely suitable for both problems in fuocheggiare in low light conditions, both for the incredible slowness of the internal autofocus (equivalent the Nikon AF-D for instance). |
 | sent on August 20, 2016 Pros: Value for money in its meaning. Cons: It is not a fully all-around zoom. Opinion: It is an atypical 70-200 in the sense that it lends itself more to portraiture than to action pictures. Its main limit, in fact, is the non-ultrasonic AF engine, and the absence of a gyro makes it difficult to control, since it is beautiful big and beautiful heavy (as is normal, zoom in this focal range). His delightful blur, along with these two functional limits, transforms him into a 70-200 predominantly portrait, hence an atypical 70-200 but surely useful and precious. "His incisiveness to TA is not miraculous, but certainly good . Let's say that diaphragming a pelina (f3.2) fades sufficiently. Since the lens is focussed and is large and heavy, it is necessary to observe the minimum shelf life (safety), in order to avoid micromouse and overflowing. A monopod helps a lot, in this case. Regarding its use in action photography: as long as it is about to capture moving subjects that perform predictable trajectories and at roughly constant speed (eg cars) Can be done with some commitment. But on sudden and unpredictable movements (eg dancers) it is definitely unsuitable. For street and photoreportage, it is fair enough, keeping in mind its limits. Valid at 70mm as well as at 200, without falling quality. He works very well with the 24-70 couple in the same house, the photos taken with both of them keep some continuity between them. It has an unbeatable price: 600euri, with 5 year warranty Polyphoto. |
 | sent on May 26, 2016 Pros: Construction, optical quality, general feel to the touch Cons: Lack of at least a minimum tropicalization, precise AF, but not very fast Opinion: This is a Mr. canvases, with excellent optical quality. Always crisp, also it offers a low distortion and chromatic aberrations can be managed. But lacking the stabilizer is not a fault because if ever a choice, at a price that is proposed can not really ask for more. The AF is precise but not fast, it still lives together just fine. solid construction but lacks the tropicalization. For what it's worth ... I find it aesthetically beautiful. Large lens, must-have. |
 | sent on October 30, 2015 Pros: great image quality, super price-competitive, quality construction Cons: lack of stabilizer, not to tropical AF lightning. weight, for the country category, for me there is no problem at all, even if it is a twig! Opinion: bell'obiettivo large, from quality / price ratio deadly! optical quality excellent, even at TA is really sharp and rich in detail, fully usable in almost any lighting condition. The yield is uniform at all focal lengths, the bokeh is incredibly creamy and wonderful to see, he gives his best in the second half of static subjects, is not purely voted (by auto-not just lightning and because tropical conditions) to photos action or sports; I consider it an excellent glass portrait and shooting in the theater. Solid and well made but large, heavy (as it is obvious for a tele-zoom with 2.8 excursion inside) and not stabilized: for long-term use needs at least a monopod, with which you can shoot even (slightly) below safety times without too many worries. Under good light AF is responsive and precise, in poor light hesitates a little, but nothing that made me cry foul. rnle aberrations cromabout potential are truly contained and are found only in the lower aperture of f / 4, in particular cases of strong contrasts of light or backlight, so you almost never need correction in PP.rnAl cost which is new (bought 490 Euro + Shipping, Nikon mount, European warranty), almost not worth it look used, as the price difference is too often laughable! I recommend it without reservation to anyone who needs large openings and the highest optical quality, without sacrificing the versatility of a zoom. |
 | sent on April 29, 2015 Pros: building excursion internal Cons: weight Opinion: Past the 70,300 VC for the weight I have to say that this is the only fault I have. Used for two years you can make really everything. It does not lose sharpness with the focus or rather not I have never noticed. It is located in 400eu if you look good in used at the same price bianchino, indeed I have always preferred to the quest for the last opening. My question is: better tamron 70,200 to 2.8 400eu or Tamron VC + 70 300 50 1.4 canon at the same price? I opted for the latter and have not regretted. |
 | sent on April 16, 2015 Pros: bright, excellent construction, clear Cons: not fast autofocus Opinion: I bought this lens second hand, in excellent condition, I'm very impressed. Apart from situations where the light is low and the af fatigue a little, for the rest never disappoints, the blur is really nice. Great for portraits, sports photography. You miss the stabilizer but then the price at which you can find it very interesting |
 | sent on March 29, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, optical quality, low price Cons: ultrasonic autofocus not / not stabilized if need these features is not the lens for you Opinion: And 'the 70-200 2.8 is perfect for those who have no need for speed Focus "sports". Its fields of application of excellence, at least for me, are the portrait, landscape and the video (in addition to all the situations that you can study a minimum, or where the subject does not move quickly and unpredictably) . Not that the autofocus is slow, but besides not being Ultrasonic is also quite rumoroso.rnPrima buying it, I tried it side by side with the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS the first series, and since they were equivalent in the results, I have chosen the Tamron because, in fact I had no need for ultrasound and stabilizer. A lens of commercial success, much appreciated by anyone who has owned ... so that Tamron continues to sell it again despite the introduction of the excellent evolved version with USD and VC, much costosa.rnQualità without compromise and without options. Highly recommended. |
 | sent on August 29, 2014 Pros: Quality focus, brightness lenses, ability to take great close up to a meter away, lightness and price. Cons: It is not weather sealed and does not have the image stabilizer. Opinion: A great zoom lens for use with a 5D mark 3 and with autofocus automatic selection in 61-point not miss a shot, rather with the autofocus mode selective sometimes you lose. The nine-blade diaphragm allows you to make beautiful bokeh, light and well built it is also useful to realize the close-up distance. Unfortunately missing stabilizer and for a car that has a speed of synchronization with the flash to 1 / 200sec if you shoot with the flash becomes very useful to carry around a tripod or switch to the stable version. The fluid movement of the zoom goes the opposite compared to the Canon lenses, but you do get used to it and also the manual focus is easy and precise. |
 | sent on February 13, 2014 Pros: QUESTION ABOUT PRO Cons: ON DEMAND AGAINST Opinion: Hello, I have a Nikon D7000, after the sale of 55/200 vr would like to purchase in the optic questione.Vorrei know if this step would mean a small step avanti.Vorrei also ask a question: the objective in question whether or not the engine internal, should report the words after the word SP AF, is not it? rnSalutirnattendo your answers |
 | sent on February 08, 2014 Pros: Price and excellent build quality of the lens. Cons: Annoying auto focus on a few occasions! RnMolti fit the weight but it is known that a telephoto lens at f2.8 is bulky and weighs so for me it is not a counter but it is a characteristic of these objectives, it is the price you pay! Opinion: After some testing, specifically as an amateur and not a professional, I think it is an excellent lens. Perfect for anyone who makes photos of the day, in the light of the sun, because you are always in the 1/350 even more without any problem by not opening up to f 2.8. The evening encounters some difficulties in the streets of the city but if you are on f2, 8 or f3, 5 or f4, 5, and looking for the right lamp you can take a good picture in that post then complete. The only drawback is the autofocus, annoying in some cases. Not engages species from 150mm up. It goes back and forth but can not lock to the point. I would say annoying! Sure you can live with ... rnih ultimately consider it a lens transaction before coming to the stabilized, you buy it for lack of money or because you do not often use a telephoto lens and therefore do not want to spend a fortune for a lens that you will use just in case, and only in certain situations where there is little one stabilized. I think I'll just resell the chance to take whatstabilized but only for auto-focus because a friend, the same one that sold me the objective in question to take the stabilized version, has confirmed to me not to notice a huge difference between the lenses from the qualitative point of view. The difference is only in the AF. |
  | sent on November 06, 2013 Pros: risuluzione excellent even at full aperture. only 2.8 to 200mm and loses something. still recoverable in pp.rnla construction is not bad. despite the plastic appears solido.rnrn Cons: AF works fairly well, as long as there is enough light. then it may happen that often go to "hunt" in limiter would giovato.rnnonostante the AF is pretty accurate lacks an ultrasonic motor. rnMa must think that costs a third of the competitors! Opinion: Perfect for handyman portrait lens. high definition, good for the blurry zoom. AF precise, even on points laterali.rnin extreme conditions I also found some nice flare, which are associated with well-ritratti.rnl 'only real lack of this lens is the AF with ultrasonic motor, widely distributed on competition. rnma fact. for figures three times more often and optical results below ... rnrnconsigliatissima! |
 | sent on November 05, 2013 Pros: Price, quality, out of focus to scream, construction (as costs), distance to focus Cons: Maybe a little slow to focus in low light conditions Opinion: It 'a tele nothing short of fantastic, majestic, bought a few days but already put a strain prova.bello.nitido and preciso.prezzo very competitive and nothing to envy to others that are just as ottimi.lo cm ² cm ² advice to people like me portrait ago, perhaps less suitable for sports photos .... then it depends on the counter is to focus in low light conditions, but also other glia do not see them like lightning ..... |
user26730 | sent on June 06, 2013 Pros: lens bellissima.rnSfuocato to scream! Cons: AF terrible! Opinion: I bought this lens 4 years ago and I was appalled by two contrasting reasons, one pro and one with a wonderful contro.rnFoto focus with a unique flavor. Portraits really artistic and usabilissimo always f2, but there 8.rnDi against 'the fact that the AF motor and' etrribile. Rumororsissimo, very slow, and very often much effort to find the "fire". RnSe you do not go "in a hurry" and 'a valuable tool and worth its money and' very beneficial. If you are going to do reportage (very often you have less than a second to capture the fleeting moment) or aviofauna then curses abound!)))))) RnSembra that with use, by Tamron, Motor USD things have radically changed. It's about time! |
 | sent on May 25, 2013 Pros: Price, f2.8, lens significant, macro, solid. Cons: autofocul slow in the absence of light. Opinion: I bought this to replace the zoom Canon f4 L and I'm soddisfatissimo. The autofocus is slow only in conditions of low light shooting in broad daylight but there is no problem. the sharpness is very good already at f2.8 and closing a pair of stop becomes excellent. short .... I can only feel it at this price with a view spectacular! |
 | sent on April 24, 2013 Pros: Low price, high sharpness even at TA Cons: Autofocus is not very fast, not weather sealed Opinion: I use this lens on D700 for action shots and I have to say that apart from some sporadic cases the autofocus locks onto the subject and keeps it, just take confidence and do not ask too extreme excursions of fire in low light conditions. Obviously it can not be compared to the model with regard to Nikon autofocus, materials and tropicalizzazione.rnOtticamente but I was always satisfied, at full aperture gives very sharp images, I can say also superior to nikon, of course stopping down the gap if azzera.rnConsigliatissimo used as a portrait lens or general, for sports photos to be taken into consideration the component autofocus. |
 | sent on March 03, 2013 Pros: Quality / price ratio very good, clarity and optical performance of the highest quality, good construction Cons: MAF Slow Opinion: Who wants a 70-200 "class" without fainting, the Tamron is amazing for yield, its scope is ideal portraits and ceremonies, not for sport. If we speak only of the quality of the lens when the play (and leads too well) with the canon 70-200 2.8 L of the house with some embarrassment for the latter. Obviously the Tamron does not have the build quality and AF strongly in favor of Canon.rnSto glass costs around 600/650 euro new, even better if you can find used on the 450, you will make a Values! |
 | sent on April 25, 2012 Pros: Sharpness great, the lightest in the category Cons: Lack AF motor and stabilizer Opinion: Used before on a a55 a77 and then on, clarity and incisiveness to scream at room temperature up to 120 mm, then close up to 200 preferred one stop! Has neither internal motor stabilizer so it relies on the machine, with the a77 however was a splinter! However hesitates with the AF in low light conditions. As far as the coast is highly recommended, great portrait lens! |
 | sent on March 17, 2012 Pros: Excellent value for money, fantastic lenses, well built .. Cons: diaphragm rupture common focus slow and inaccurate, without stabilizer. Opinion: I'm fond of this goal, the picture quality is superb, the minimum focusing distance of 95 cm is a big plus, I use it for portraits in which he expresses all his qualities, on my 50D performs well, thanks to a low distortion and minimal vignetting, which exceeds that of the Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS to any lengths, even on the 5D maintains excellent performance with excellent image clarity, keeping within acceptable limits aberrations and distortions. |
 | sent on October 02, 2011 Pros: Economic distance focus very rafficinata, excellent lens quality Cons: focusing slow and often impprecisa Opinion: I have this cloth about a year, I almost always use on Canon 5D with excellent results. The images are sublime, I dare to say that they have nothing to envy to those of the canon 70-200 2.8. Of course you pay for the focus that is slow, noisy and often inaccurate ... so I would say unsuitable for sports photos. For those who like me is especially portraiture however, is a great lens at a very low cost for this range of focal |
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
