1- It is a good goal. 2- Focus well, what it doesn't have is a focus stabilizer. What's up with it? That said, unless you're very stable or using a tripod, in a professional session like mine where people are, it's very difficult not to get the photo shaky. To do this you need to focus and be very focused and hopefully by the time you get home you will be a little focused. Of course, when it's focused it does it very well and you don't realize it's not an original brand. 3- My mother, who doesn't understand Reflex, took a picture (the one with the china basket) and it came out very focused and stabilized (which isn't the same). 4- The photos of the cat are indoors (clearly) at 800 ISO, with barbaric noise (typical of artificial light) and the only thing I did editing the .NEF (Raw-Nikon) was noise reduction with Photoshop Camera Raw what I say: if the photo is sharp, if you force a slight blur to reduce grain, if it's still sharp, if it's still sharp despite the low quality, the photo is fine, but on the other hand if a photo is already bad, reducing it is useless. 5- The photos of the pot are (obviously) outdoors at ISO 100 (the usual one) and have not been edited. Maybe they were just saved via PS to save like the others in JPG format (which isn't PNG, which even degrades the save quality). 6- In the last photo I leave you the proof of what it looks like and what it looks like on a Nikon D7100. In my opinion and summary: It's a good target but you have to set the TU stability as it doesn't have VR like the original Nikon models. That being said, if you get used to it, using the original (in my case I have the Nikon 50mm) the photos will be fantastic as you've sort of gone from the worst to the best. Arguments against this situation: You have to focus a lot and take a lot of photos, not in a series, but focus and be very aware of each shot as it approaches, so that when you get home and process it, you get a useful one. So far it has arrived today so I couldn't test it anymore but I had decided that I would return it if the comments complaining about the approaches, the noise (something that has nothing more than others), etc have, would apply. I plan to take some outdoor photos with people (who also breathe and have a pulse, who also move like you) to finish my tests and make a decision, but at the moment I don't see it bad enough, to return them. I'll update this review if I see anything different, but for now this is my humble opinion and I hope it will help many of you! [REVIEW UPDATE]: After a year of doing sporadic sessions and learning to use it, I've been able to clarify a few things: The lens, as I said at the time, once you get used to it, can do well focus, but the best focus is undoubtedly on stills and even burst shots. Another thing is that when you enlarge the photo to the maximum, the quality is low. It's like the camera had a slight shutter error but it's clearly in the lens range but so you have a reference. Back then I bought it for 97€, although I just saw that it went up and... Would you recommend it? Well, if your budget is low and you don't have another one like it happened to me, yes, but it clearly doesn't measure up to an original.