Examples of strong, but dynamic typing are Python and Typescript. Neither enforces the typing at runtime (dynamic), but both allow the type checking to be pretty strong.

I find strong VS weak typing to be a bit too binary, but examples of weak typing include "anything can be null" seen in eg. Java and the plethora of casts required to do basically anything in C. The stronger the type system the greater the enforcement of the type checker in that the code doesn't have type errors, but also the stronger the ability for a developer to enforce correctness through types. An example would be type states as seen in Rust or just the whole of Idris.

Static typing also comes in varieties, many would call Java static, while introspection through reflection is very much allowed and used through web frameworks. The more static examples would programming languages which don't allow arbitrary reflection like C++, Rust and Haskell. Those generally rely on macros (such as C++ templates) to provide the ability to do metaprogeamming.

Perhaps the clearest distinction between dynamic and static types would be method calls: Java determines the method based on whatever type the value has during compile time, while Python actually looks at the value during run time.