Reviews from readers Radozhiva

Writing a Sigma 200-500mm f / 2.8 for review is difficult, but making a quality note about the lens is easy

It is difficult to submit a Sigma 200-500mm f / 2.8 for review, but preparing a high-quality note about the lens is not difficult.

Dear readers of the Radozhivs, on my site there are already a lot of reviews of interesting photographic equipment. Basically, all photographic equipment for reviews was provided by Radozhiva's readers, less often - by official representatives of large companies or online stores. Unfortunately, many people cannot send me photographic equipment for review due to shipping problems, or they are simply very worried about the integrity of their equipment in the wrong hands. Therefore, I invite everyone to share information on their unusual / unique / rare lens (or other photographic equipment) with Radozhiva's readers. To do this, you can try to write a short review / note about the lens yourself.

I do not want Radozhiva to turn into a hotbed of micro-comments on photographic equipment, because there will be no forum or registration on the site yet. In order for your review to appear on Radozhiva, you need to prepare at least 5 photos of the appearance of the lens and at least 5 sample photos using it, as well as write any useful text on its features. It is very important that the text has not been published anywhere before. To everyone who is interested and ready to share information, I will help with writing a review / note / article.

Reviews from readers Radozhiva

Canon:

  1. Canon Zoom Lens EF 11-24mm 1: 4 L USM Ultrasonic (review from reader Radozhiva)
  2. Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 10-18mm 1: 4.5-5.6 IS STM. Reader Review
  3. Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70 1: 2.8 L II USM. Review from reader Radozhiva
  4. Canon EF 28-70 f / 3.5-4.5 II, a review from the reader Radozhiva
  5. Canon Lens EF-S 24mm 1: 2.8 STM. Radozhiva Reader Review
  6. Canon EF Lens 50mm 1: 1.0 L Ultrasonic. Review from reader Radozhiva
  7. CANON LENS EF 50mm 1: 1.4 USM. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  8. CANON LENS FL 50mm 1: 1.8. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  9. Canon Lens EF 100mm 1: 2 Ultrasonic. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  10. CANON ZOOM LENS EF 100-300MM 1: 5.6 L. Review by reader Radozhiva
  11. Canon Speedlite 600EX-RT (review by reader Radozhiva)

Nikon:

  1. Nikon 1 AW1 (joint review)
  2. Nikon Df
  3. Nikon F4. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  4. Nikon F50. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  5. Nikon Series E 28mm 1: 2.8 MKII. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  6. Nippon Kogaku Japan Nikkor-P Auto 1: 2.5 f = 105mm. Radozhiva Reader Review
  7. Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8 (AI-S). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  8. Nikon NIkkor 85mm 1: 2 (AI-S). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  9. Comparative review of Nikon AF DC-Nikkor 135mm 1: 2D Defocus Image Control by reader Radozhiva
  10. Nikon AF Nikkor 24-50mm 1: 3.3-4.5. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  11. Nikon AF Nikkor 75-240mm 1: 4.5-5.6. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  12. Nikon AF-P DX 70-300mm 1: 4.5-6.3G ED VR. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  13. Nikon 1 J3. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  14. Nikon Micro-NIKKOR 200mm 1: 4 (AI). Review from the reader Radozhiva

Sony:

  1. Sony 85mm f / 2.8 SAM (SAL85f28) (review of the lens from the reader Radozhiva)
  2. Minolta AF 50mm f / 1.7 (review of a lens from the reader Radozhiva)
  3. MINOLTA MD ROKKOR 50mm 1: 1.2. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  4. Minolta AF ZOOM 70-210mm 1: 4.5 (22) -5.6. Review from the reader Radozhiva

Sigma:

  1. Sigma 85mm 1: 1.4 DG HSM | A (Art)
  2. Sigma EX 150mm 1: 2.8 APO MACRO DG HSM Optical Stabilizer review by reader Radozhiva
  3. Sigma 24-105mm 1: 4 DG HSM | A (Art)
  4. Sigma 10-20mm 1: 4.5-5.6 DC HSM

Tokina:

  1. Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-28 F2.8 (IF) FX Aspherical N / AIS (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  2. Tokina 17 / 3.5 RMC (II). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  3. RMC TOKINA 80-200mm 1: 4. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  4. Angenieux Zoom F.28-70 1: 2.6 AF. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  5. Tokina AF Aspherical 28-105 1: 3.5-4.5 (JAPAN C / EF). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  6. RMC Tokina 100-300mm 1: 5.6. Review from the reader Radozhiva

Tamron:

  1. Tamron 28-75mm F / 2.8 Di III RXD (Model A036). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  2. Tamron Adaptall-2 35-70mm F3.5 CF Macro (17A)
  3. Tamron SP AF Aspherical Di LD [IF] 17-35mm F / 2.8-4 A05. Review from the reader Radozhiva

Pentax:

  1. SMC Pentax-DA 1: 3.5-5.6 18-135mm ED AL [IF] DC WR. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  2. SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1: 4 70-210mm. Review from the reader Radozhiva

Soviet lenses:

Industar:

  1. Industar-29 1: 2,8 F = 8cm P (Arsenal). Review from reader Radozhiva
  2. INDUSTAR-22 1: 3.5 F = 50mm. Moscow (KMZ). Review of the lens from Rodion Eshmakov
  3. Industar-50 3,5 / 50 (LZOS, 1969). A review of the rangefinder lens from Rodion Eshmakov.
  4. Industar-61L 2,8 / 50 (LZOS). Overview from Rodion Eshmakov.
  5. Industar-24M 1: 3,5 F = 10,5 cm P (KMZ). Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  6. I-26m (Industar-26M) 52 / 2.8, redone for EF mount with preservation of infinity (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  7. Industar-26m 1: 2,8 F = 5 cm P (FED). Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  8. Industar-22 1: 3,5 F = 5cm P (KMZ, 1954) (review from a reader of Radozhiva)
  9. INDUSTRAR-61L / D 2,8 / 55 (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  10. Industar-55U 140 / 4.5, adapted for SLR cameras. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  11. Industar-58U photo zoom lens adapted for SLR cameras. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  12. Rangefinder lens Industar-22 1: 3,5 F = 50mm P (KMZ), adapted for the M42. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  13. I-100U. Article from the reader of Radozhiva

Helios:

  1. Helios-44 1: 2 F = 5,8 cm P KMZ (with replaced lenses, a review of a rare lens from a reader Radozhiva)
  2. Helios-65T 1: 2 F = 5cm (KMZ), adapted for the M42. Review from the reader Radozhiva

ERA:

  1. Era-12 125/4 (review from the reader Radozhiva)

Jupiter

  1. Jupiter-21T 200/4, KMZ (1968). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  2. JUPITER-9 1: 2 F = 8.5cm (KMZ). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  3. MC Jupiter-9 2/85 (LZOS). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  4. Jupiter-9 1: 2 F = 8,5cm P (KMZ, 1959) in a frame for Zenit cameras. Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  5. JUPITER-8M 1: 2 F = 5 cm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  6. JUPITER-8 2/50 (KMZ, M39). Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  7. Jupiter-3 1: 1,5 F = 5cm P (ZOMZ, 1963) for Contax RF / Kiev. Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  8. Jupiter-12 2,8 / 35 (LZOS, 1973) for Kiev / Contax cameras. Review from reader Radozhiva
  9. Zorkiy BK 1: 2,8 F = 3.5cm P for Kiev cameras. Review from Rodion Eshmakov

World:

  1. MC MIR-20M 3,5 / 20 (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  2. MIR-1 2,8 / 37A. Review from the reader Radozhiva

Zenitar:

  1. MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s (review from the reader Radozhiva)

Tahir:

  1. TAIR-3 4,5 / 300-A (ZOMZ, 1967)
  2. Tair-62T 95 / 2.5
  3. Tair-41 50/2 (LZOS)

Vega:

  1. Vega-5U 4/105 (MMZ) (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  2. Review of the deeply modified Vega-22UTs F / 5.6 (2.5) 103 mm (MMZ) from a reader Radozhiva
  3. VEGA-3 2,8 / 50 (KMZ). Review from the reader Radozhiva

Others:

  1. MC RUBINAR 300/4.5 Macro
  2. MC Rubinar 8/500 MACRO
  3. TRIPLET Triplet 2.8 / 78 (MMZ) (overview of a slide projection lens from a reader of Radozhiva)
  4. PO 500-1 F9CM. 1: 2 P. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  5. Soft achromat 135 / 2.8. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  6. Triplet-69-3 4/40. Review from the reader Radozhiva.
  7. Triplet 69-3 4/40 from the Silhouette-Electro camera
  8. Overhead lens Triplet 78 / 2.8
  9. KO-120M 1: 1.8 F = 120mm (review of a film projection lens from a reader Radozhiva)
  10. KO-120M 120 / 1.8 with a diaphragm and a helicoid. Review of the adapted cinema projection lens from Rodion Eshmakov
  11. 35KP-1.8 / 120 (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  12. 35KP-1.8 / 100 (MMZ named after Vavilov). Review of a projection lens adapted in a two-aperture version from the reader Radozhiva
  13. Overview of aerial photography lens Uranus-27 (Uranus-27) 2.5 / 100 from a reader Radozhiva
  14. Instrument lens option FS-2 300 / 4.5
  15. Filming lens LOMO OKS1-40-1 40 / 2.5
  16. LENKINAP RO500-1 F = 9cm 1: 2 P. Review from the reader
  17. ZM-5A 8/500. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  18. LOMO T-43 40/4, adapted for cameras with EF mount. Review from Realogiva Reader
  19. A review of a homemade 50 / 3.5 achromat lens from gluing a Zenith-TTL viewfinder from a reader of Radozhiva
  20. F = 137 137 / 5.6 (3.5), KOMZ. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  21. FED-5. Review of the film camera from the reader Radozhiva
  22. FED 5. Thoughts from the reader Radozhiva
  23. LOMO OKS11-35-1 F = 35 1: 2. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  24. LOMO OKS1-22-1 F = 22 1: 2.8. Review of a cinema lens from Rodion Eshmakov
  25. The lens from the MBS-2 microscope, its adaptation for a SLR camera. Note from the reader Radozhiva
  26. Minitar 1 1: 2.8 32mm (LOMO), adapted for Sony mirrorless cameras. Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  27. LOMO Zh-53 F = 75 1: 2. Review of an adapted cinema projection lens from reader Radozhiva

Fujifilm:

  1. Fujifilm X-T1. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  2. Fuji X-T10 or mirrorless in the hands of an amateur (review from a reader Radozhiva)
  3. Fujifilm Finepix X-T10 with Fujinon XF 56mm f / 1.2 R lens, review by reader Radozhiva

Zeiss:

  1. Carl Zeiss Jena Dokumar 8/38
  2. 1Q T 1: 2.8 f = 50 aus Jena (Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 50 / 2.8 DDR). Radozhiva Reader Review
  3. Carl Zeiss Jena 1Q Pancolar 2/50, adapted for Nikon. Radozhiva Reader Review
  4. MC Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Pancolar auto 1.8 / 80. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  5. Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 1: 2,8 f = 8cm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  6. MC CARL ZEISS JENA PRAKTICAR 1: 1.4 f = 50mm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  7. Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  8. Carl Zeiss Sonnar 2,8 / 85 by reader Radozhiva
  9. Carl Zeiss Jena 1Q Sonnar 2,8 / 180 [author Rodion Eshmakov]
  10. Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Sonnar 4/300. Review from Rodion Eshmakov
  11. Carl Zeiss Jena DDR Tevidon 1.8 / 50. Review from reader Radozhiva

Other:

  1. Petzval 180 mm f / 4.5 (A. Darlot, Paris, 1862)
  2. Samsung 1: 2 30mm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  3. HANIMAR LENS 1: 1.7 f = 50mm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  4. ADMIRAL TELEPHOTO LENS 1: 4.5 f = 200mm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  5. KONICA HEXANON 1: 1.8 f = 45mm. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  6. Vivitar 135MM 1: 2.8 MC TELEPHOTO. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  7. Vivitar 28MM 1: 2.0 MC CLOSE FOCUS WIDE ANGLE. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  8. 7artisans 55mm f / 1.4 lens. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  9. VMC Vivitar Series 1 Macro Focusing 28-90 MM1: 2.8-3.5. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  10. AUTO Vivitar TELEPHOTO 200mm 1: 3.5 from the reader Radozhiva
  11. Lensbabies 2.0 (review from Radozhiva reader)
  12. AUTO PROMASTER MC ZOOM 1: 3.8 f = 75-150mm (review from the reader Radozhiva)
  13. FANCIER video tripod. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  14. What to look for when choosing a tripod for a camera or camcorder. Note from partner Radozhiva
  15. Westron 35 / 2.8. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  16. Manfrotto Tripod MT190GOA4TB 190 Go! Review from the reader.
  17. X-1 system and Godox V850II flashes. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  18. Flash Andoer AD-980II. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  19. Meyer-Optik Görlitz Primoplan 1: 1.9 / 58 V. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  20. MC PENTACON PRAKTICAR 1: 2.4 f = 50mm. Review reader Radozhiva.
  21. KONICA HEXANON AR 40mm 40mm F1.8 (40 / 1.8). Review from the reader Radozhiva
  22. Angenieux Zoom F.28-70 1: 2.6 AF. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  23. Implementation of vignetting control “in glass and iron”. Material from the reader Radozhiva
  24. Best practices for using Defocus Image Control. Material from the reader Radozhiva.
  25. Color profiles in the photo. Article from the reader of Radozhiva
  26. Color model and more. Article from the reader of Radozhiva
  27. Schneider Super Cinelux 70/2. Review reader Radozhiva.
  28. Rodenstock Rodagon 1: 2.8 f = 50 mm. Review of the lens for the enlarger from the reader Radozhiva
  29. Fisheye lens projections, or entertaining geometry of wide viewing angles. Article from the reader Radozhiva
  30. Zenit-12SD. Review of a film camera from reader Radozhiva
  31. Pentakta 2.8 (2) / 30 projection lens adapted for Sony mirrorless cameras. Review from the reader Radozhiva.
  32. Konica Minolta Dynax 5D. Review from the reader Radozhiva
  33. The lens of the PUSK-16 (50 / 2.8) precision universal high-speed camera, adapted for SLR cameras. Review from Rodion Eshmakov.

You can contact me on these contacts. Leave all questions, suggestions, etc. under this entry in the comments.

Separate reviews from Rodion Eshmakov here.

Comments here on the site do not require any registration. In the comments, you can ask a question on the topic, or leave your feedback, or describe your experience. For the selection of photographic equipment, I recommend E-Catalog. Many little things for the photo can be found on AliExpress.

The material was prepared by Arkady Shapoval. My Youtube channeland Radozhiva's group on Facebook и VK.

Save

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 59, on the topic: Reviews from readers of Radozhiva

  • Aleks de Kairoy

    hi
    bought Tokin 12-24 4.0 AF
    you had one but AF-S
    I can fit), the glass by the way is pretty good

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Hey. I see, took my advice. There will be time, I'll take a review :)

  • Maugli

    Very cool! Thanks!

  • Kotofalk

    Olimpusi OM-D E-M5, E-M10 Mark II, E-M5 Mark II and M.Zuiko 17mm 2.8?

    • Serge36ru

      Kanesh)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      There are a lot of suggestions for reviews. I have little time. The essence of this post is that you yourself can prepare a review / note about your super-duper technique.

    • alexey_laa

      Tsіkavo chi nabagato krashiy Zuiko 17mm f / 2.8 for Sigma 19mm f / 2.8 while, moreover, more expensive at half the time.

      • Kotofalk

        Without twisting it, ale optically not gripping for 17mm 1.8, about how much to say not to be brought up, it’s very sharp, the difference is a program in shvidkosti af (in the older version of vin mittuviy), more msc-drive. I sell it to you, I know the reportages, and such a focal point is no more handy for me, just more fics.

  • Peter Sh.

    I can try to write about Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f / 2.8 Pro FX.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Try it, do it.

    • Jury

      I have been looking at this glass for a long time. A review would be welcome.

  • Novel

    Are you interested in flash reviews, or just optics? If yes - I can write about Canon EX600-RT (2 years of use)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Of course, interesting!

      • Novel

        OK. At the weekend I will send to the chief editor)

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Super

  • anonym

    I will try to roll the review on the Elka 70-200 f4 without a stub.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Will be great

  • Tigran

    Good afternoon. Please tell me what to buy sony a77 or sony a77.ll.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Offtopic.

  • Vyacheslav

    Ready to write a review about Sigma AF 30 1.4 ART with docking station

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Super. Try to approach this carefully, because the lens is interesting :)

  • anonym

    Thanks for the opportunity! I'll try to write a review: Nikkor 85 / 1.8G Vs. Helios 40-2 85 / 1.5 N. And then I took pictures a long time ago, but I was too lazy to write ...

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, write, of course :)

  • Markush Yuriy

    If it’s tsikavo, then I’ll try to look around the manual ob'єktiv Vega-30U with an accent vikorystannya yogo for macro-zyomka.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, it will be interesting.

  • Alexey

    I can make a review on Canon 20mm 2.8 (I did not find this glass on the site.)

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Of course do

  • Vyacheslav

    I can write about the Nikon wu-1a wireless transmitter, although I've seen reviews about it) A funny little thing.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Write, it will be interesting.

  • Andrei

    There is a Carl Zeiss Pancolar 80 1.8 electric - you can get confused with the review if it is interesting.

  • orenkomp.ru

    And I don’t argue that my reviews are more evaluative than analytical. True, when it comes to lenses that were not described on the network, I try to adhere to the traditional format and analyze them in more detail

  • Max

    Oh, I can write a review about TOKINA AF 10-17 mm f / 3.5-4.5 which you fisheye

  • Irina

    And I don’t argue that my reviews are more evaluative than analytical. True, when it comes to lenses that were not described on the network, I try to adhere to the traditional format and analyze them in more detail

  • Michael

    Arkady, in what format should I send you reviews? I mean the format of the document. I can do a review on the Canon 28-70 f / 3.5-4.5 and on the Tokina 10-17, if interested.

  • Dron

    I can offer information and photo material on the Cyclops 1.5 85mm if necessary.

  • Bogdan

    Aloha!
    I got myself a few days ago Tamron Adaptall-2 35-70mm F3.5 CF Macro (17A).
    I took a photo of the lens itself, collect some information, test shots and try to make a review.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Great!

  • Igor

    And why not in the list of optics review Canon ef 200mm f / 1.8L

  • Igor

    Good day. Tamron. 18.250. IF / Zmotorom. I will put. On Nikon. D. 5000. Yak will be malyuvati. Zpovagoyu.Igor

  • Fanil

    Arkady which Chinese lens fifty dollars can you advise the budget is limited for earlier thanks to Nikon 3200

    • Denis

      if you are with autofocus, then the model is only one. if manual, then there is a choice

  • Oleg

    Will anyone be interested in the Pentax MX-1?

    • Oleg

      In any case, it will be interesting

  • Eugene

    I see a link to a review of Nikon Df, but it leads to a review of the lens from Sigma 24-105 Art. Can I fix it, or is there no review on Df in nature?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Fixed

  • Vladimir

    Good afternoon, Arkady. I have a rather rare lens Nikon IX-Nikkor 60-180mm f / 4-5.6 with a maximum aperture of 45)) I want to write a review, what can you advise?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I advise you to make a lot of sample photos

      • Vladimir

        Well, I’ll try how the weather will improve a bit))

Add a comment

christening photographer price Photography for lovers

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2021

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2015/12/end-of-line/comment-page-1/