Biotar 75mm f/1.5 II 75mm
36 Pontuação geral
vs
Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS
Sigma
44 Pontuação geral
Pontuações
Portrait
Budget
Video Cinema
Street
Professional
Travel
Wildlife Sports
Landscape
Macro
Especificações
| Biotar 75mm f/1.5 II 75mm | Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS | |
|---|---|---|
| Optics | ||
| Focal Length Min | 75 mm | 16 mm |
| Focal Length Max | 75 mm | 300 mm |
| Elements | 6 | — |
| Groups | 4 | — |
| Aperture | ||
| Max Aperture | f/1.5 | f/3.5 |
| Min Aperture | f/16 | — |
| Constant | — | ✓★ |
| Diaphragm Blades | 15★ | — |
| Build | ||
| Mount | Nikon Z | — |
| Format | Full-Frame★ | — |
| Filter Thread | 62 mm | — |
| AF & Stabilization | ||
| Stabilization | ✗ | — |
| Focus | ||
| Min Focus Distance | 750 mm★ | — |
Prós e Contras
Biotar 75mm f/1.5 II 75mm
- Strong bokeh (99th percentile)99th %ile
- Strong user sentiment (98th percentile)98th %ile
- Strong aperture (96th percentile)96th %ile
- Below average optical (1st percentile)1st %ile
- Below average social proof (3rd percentile)3rd %ile
- Below average versatility (33rd percentile)
Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS
- Strong versatility (100th percentile)100th %ile
- Strong aperture (78th percentile)
- Strong bokeh (76th percentile)
- Below average macro (14th percentile)14th %ile
- Below average optical (21st percentile)
- Below average social proof (29th percentile)
- Below average build (34th percentile)
Preços
Veredito
Vencedor: Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS
Scores 44 overall, wins 8 of 9 usage categories and 1 of 13 specs.
