Blank tabelj ucheta rabochego vremeni uchitelej. Colorado Land Survey Monument Records. Google Earth; Search by Point; Search by Radius; Project Support; Donate; Contact.

I wonder how this new Opera 16-28 differs in function or optical formula from Tokina's current AT-X PRO 16-28 f/2.8 lens, which has been available for several years? (Which you can buy right now at major retailers for only $499? At B&H: ) The AT-X PRO variant has an identical size-shape, identical lens element / group count, identically-described AF mechanics.. Is this 'Opera' somehow more than just a cosmetic re-skin (and $200 price hike atop) of the existing AT-X Pro? When people ask DPReview to be 'industry journalism' rather than a native-advertising infomercial for 'next-generation lenses,' this is the sort of question / information / interrogation that would make the difference: the reporter being aware of a prior generation model that looks / sounds / functions *suspiciously* similar to the 'next-generation' model, and digging into that question rather than simply repeating the marketing language in a context of vaguely favorable impressions.

The good thing today is that ED glass and cheap molded aspherical elements along with in-camera corrections have made it possible to get good performance out of relatively cheap lenses. Mentioning the cost of the this lens when mated with a Nikon Z7 reminds me of when people in the film days would buy a Nikon FE./FM body then only have enough extra money to buy an off-brand prime lens for under $100.00. Difference is, those lenses were pure crap for the most part and really did the good Nikon body a disservice.