Header banner
Revain logoHome Page

Reviews

Global ratings 27
  • 5
    13
  • 4
    9
  • 3
    4
  • 2
    0
  • 1
    1

Type of review

Revainrating 4 out of 5

I like everything, the quality is good and the price is reasonable.

Cheap and angry. Take clearly. For the brand of the second, the stabilizer is not needed. From the hands sets the shutter speed to about 1/300. For shooting on the street during the day - more than. Don't be afraid to break it Its pros: Nice soft artistic vignetting. What I did not expect from him: cool depth of field, especially at the far end. Low price. IMHO its adequate cost (quality / price) is 5-6k. I took it for 3.5. can be taken for 3 in Hong Kong time. I'm glad I didn't take it with

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I am delighted, the product is really worthy.

In general, a good lens, I liked it, I took it from my hands for a fabulously low price. But as much as it costs now new - I would not give it away.

Pros
  • Not heavy, the colors are quite natural, it takes great distances - a thrill
Cons
  • It smears at the end, the tripod will fix it, but there is no way to always shoot with it

Revainrating 5 out of 5

The best product, from those that I have viewed, I advise everyone!

I use this glass all the time in all sorts of shootings, from portrait to landscape. There is no stabilizer, but if you are not a drunkard, not nervous or epileptic, then you can draw perfectly at shutter speeds starting from 1/160. The picture from it turns out to be faded, but in LR or FS everything is fine with handles) My advice is to take it! Got pros: Good range of focal lengths. Nice price. Very light. Reliable, like everything Canon)) Different cons: A bit dark, but for the price you…

Revainrating 3 out of 5

Expectations were not met, average quality.

For the money that is asked for him, you can put up with his shortcomings. It can be used as a portrait if it is not possible to buy fixes. Used on 400d and 60d. At 400 he shows himself better. Multipixel matrices are not for him. The far end will often be useless. If you buy precisely because of 300 mm, then you will be disappointed. If you are looking for a replacement kit, I would advise you to take 28-105mm usm.

Pros
  • Price. Focus and focus again! Lightweight and compact. Not bad assembled, better for example than a regular half-toss 1.8. It works well in general, and auto focus is normal, not as fast as usm, but enough.
Cons
  • Picture. If up to 135 mm it is very good, you can shoot portraits, for example, then now it’s getting worse. Nothing helps with 200mm. Terrible soap, even if you cover the aperture to 16, 22 or even further, it seems like 32 is minimal there, it will not help. But it's not even about soap, but about chromatic aberrations, eerie purples that almost always appear. Even on not the most contrasting lines. Moreover, the size of these aberrations is simply huge. You can only shoot dark things against a dark background.

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Good value for money, I recommend.

I bought it to expand the focal length, planning to use it from time to time. A couple of days of intensive shooting showed a simple fact: this lens is a workhorse that requires skillful handling. If your hands are shaking, if you set long exposures without a tripod and shoot in the sun, you will get blur and chromaticity. If there is a desire to learn how to shoot clearly, if your hands do not tremble and you know how to catch light, the lens will pleasantly surprise you. He is definitely at…

Pros
  • Pretty good picture quality. Tight focus ring, spinning confidently and clearly. Focusing at long distances is stable even without a stabilizer - the right weight helps to keep it sharp. I rarely rub. Large range of focal lengths. HA do not appear often. Iron bayonet. And all this at a great price.
Cons
  • Some play at the front. HA on long-range focal lengths in the sun (visible only with crop). Washes, nevertheless, quite a lot. Weak aperture, but these are the features of this class. At night or in low light, steady hands and high ISO are needed. Still, I would not refuse a stabilizer, but these are the costs of the price category.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I am amazed at how well the product is made, just magically!

I bought it quite by accident - as a cheap toy - as a teaching aid for children, but the pictures, even from the hand, baffled everyone - no one expected such a clear picture! the absence of a flawed stub, which only blurs the picture when using tripods, rather a dignity in the cheap segment. Pros below: 58mm thread is compatible with a staffer - a common and cheap option; the absence of a flawed stub is rather a virtue; I was pleasantly surprised by the picture at 300mm - from the hand, but

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Good product at a good price, I recommend to try it.

It is necessary to bully the ISO. At short shutter speeds it will be sharp and at 300 mm. Slow autofocus partly compensates for maintaining focus when zooming (parfocality). In the list of CANON parfocal lenses, this cheap lens flaunts among the elek, which are an order of magnitude more expensive. If you approach the purchase consciously, you will not be disappointed. Price-quality 5+

Pros
  • Decent construction, much better than 18-55, bayonet mount and outer metal tube, minimum backlash. Sharp picture even when viewed pixel-by-pixel with 50D. Parfocal! Low price
Cons
  • Slow autofocus, strong chrome. aberrations at the long end, no IS