answers: 15

  1. Vgtq
    16.05.2013

    Oh forget about old legends

    Reply

  2. Ivan
    16.05.2013

    If I just shot the sky with an aperture of 14 on my D600, then there would be a bunch of reviews)))

    Reply

    • Egor
      17.05.2013

      What do you mean?

      Reply

      • anonym
        01.06.2014

        Trash on the matrix, apparently.

        Reply

  3. Marina
    17.05.2013

    Arkady, thanks for the review. It is always interesting to read :)
    I’ll ask a question that has long tormented me:
    How do you reduce the size of a photo for publication on the Internet? They shot here with Nikon D700, which means that the original is impressive in size, while it was possible to preserve the details. I reduce the in-camera JPEG 7360x4912 in FS through the "image size", if done in one step at once by 5 times - the details are not saved - they get lost in a "mess". To preserve details, I reduce it in a few steps, reducing it by no more than 10%. Maybe there is an easier and more efficient way?

    Reply

    • Egor
      17.05.2013

      Very strange, resizing in FS perfectly suits me. I always do it, the sharpness on the contrary only increases. And what version of FS?

      Reply

      • Marina
        17.05.2013

        CS5, CS6. I was also happy when I was shooting on crop and the file was 4256x2848 in size.

        Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      17.05.2013

      I reduced the size of the photos to 2048px by 1363px (approximately 3MP) using the free software FastStone Photo Resizer 3.0, while the data from the EXIF ​​module of JPEG files was imprinted at the bottom of the photos. When reducing the size of photos, I use quality equal to 80% of the original, usually in the EXIF ​​band in photos I write this as Q = 80% (Quality = 80% of the maximum). This percentage of quality is more than enough to transfer all the details in the photo without overweight JPG file. With 3 MP, you can easily print A4 photos. The light weight of the photos allows you to quickly view examples of photos for a general familiarization with the capabilities of the lens and allows you to save time downloading photos and disk space of my site.

      Reply

  4. Vgtq
    17.05.2013

    I will add that this is a really good staffer!

    Reply

  5. Vladimir
    09.10.2013

    Yesterday I bought Tokinu RMC 35-105 3.5-4.3 iron and old (japan). Reading your review I caught myself thinking that these lenses are "twins" only macro 1: 4. They do not look alike. It's cloudy now, and I don't like the picture-soap.

    Reply

  6. Stanislas
    21.12.2013

    Please tell me which of the three versions of the lens the above photos were taken.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      21.12.2013

      It is logical that MK1

      Reply

  7. anonym
    22.12.2013

    I realized thank you, I want to buy one, tell me which of these 3 versions of the picture is the best.

    Reply

  8. Alexander
    21.08.2018

    Hello! There is a Nikkor 35-105 AF 3.5-4.5 type of trombone. Will there be autofocus on the nikon d80.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      21.08.2018

      Yes, it will, is it with you either MKII or MKIII.

      Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer