|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Alessandro Pollastrini www.juzaphoto.com/p/AlessandroPollastrini  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Nikon Z 14-30mm f/4 S Pros: Very useful focal range, good sharpness on the whole frame at all apertures and all focal lengths, compactness and lightness, possibility of mounting normal 82 filters, high resistance to flare and parasitic reflections. Cons: Extrudes by changing the focal length and therefore is at greater risk of damage from impact and decay of sharpness due to the onset of mechanical games, non-robust construction, plastic. Opinion: Lent by a friend on Z6II, I took 80 shots in different light conditions and with different apertures and focal lengths and has always provided a very good sharpness, like that of the Nikkor 14 - 24 F 2.8 for SLR. Holds the backlight well. It is an attractive amateur optics for performance, size, weight and price, it is very good for non-demanding uses such as environmental conditions or for travel uses. sent on June 25, 2023 |
 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness to all diaphragms, robustness and mechanical construction, blurry, chromatic rendering, reliability and constancy of focus, held to parasitic reflections and flares. Cons: Weight and size, AF calibration need with USB Dock Opinion: Used on Nikon D4 and two Nikon D 810s. Crisp always in the center, even at full opening, with very good edges, which become very sharp beyond F 2.8, it has gradual transition from fire to blurry, which is soft, chromaticly neutral, the AF is very precise and reliable, but I had to calibrate it with the USB Dock for a slight frontal fire error, but it is a simple, easy and short job. It holds direct strong light well, does not have serious problems of parasitic reflections or flares. I compared it with my Zeiss Milvus 50 mm F2 Macro Planar and chromaticly they are very similar, sharpness better sigma to large openings, especially at the edges. The lens is very heavy and cumbersome, but it makes you forgive gigantism with an excellent image always. sent on February 14, 2021 |
 | Nikon D850 Pros: Solid and well built, Focus Peacking in Live View, AF always valid, tiltable door monitor, high image quality to all ISOs Cons: Resolution a little too high and useless for normal uses of the 35 mm format. Opinion: Used for two days, kindly lent me from the LTR to which I had given my two D 810s under review before a trip, and I took about 700 shots. In practice, they optimized the D 810 functionally and ergonomically, and made a well-made camera. For my uses it has too much resolution, it provides a larger native image than the 300 PPI A2 format. The RAW file is practically identical to that of the D 810 in all lighting conditions at iso bass, and a louder hair at high ISO. The AF works a little hair better than that of the D 810 at low lights, but nothing important. It gives the feeling and is definitely more robust than the D 810, but even there, nothing important, my D 810s endured deserts and cold climates and never cheated. All my optics are "good" and they would have no problem with the D 850 as a resolution, but I keep my D 810 because as an image it is identical, the ergonomic and AF gains are not important, and all that resolution, while printing even large, I do not need, only brings unnecessary complications, and the transition to D 850, economically , would be unjustified by the best technical returns. sent on February 13, 2021 |
 | Sigma 28mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Solid mechanical construction, fluid rings, lampshed with release button. Excellent sharpness all over the frame at all diaphragms, practically neutral chromatism, very low geometric deformation, extremely precise and reliable AF. Cons: Significant footprint and weight, full-opening vignetting. Opinion: Used on the D4 and D 810, AF did not need calibrations, precise and reliable all the time. Vignette quite open, but it resolves with a click in photo editing, and it is always sharp, at full opening in the center it is a less sharp hair than the Sigma 35 mm F 1.4 Art, but it is a sharper hair at the edges, in practice they are the same. I've been shaving it on the anti-glare treatment seal, as I do with all the optics, and that's pretty good, it does a little bit more reflections than the 35mm F 1.4 Art, but very little. It's a bulky, weighty lens, but it works very well. sent on February 01, 2021 |
 | Zeiss Milvus 50mm f/2M Pros: Very high sharpness, high brightness, typical Zeiss image, neutral, alive and with very clean colors, excellent anti-reflective treatment, very pleasant blurring, low geometric deformation, not high vignette and only to large openings, MaF of extreme precision, R.R. engraved on the barrel that extrudes, mechanical construction of excellence, tropicalization. Cons: Front cap that closes badly, tends to come off, high price. Opinion: Global judgment: very good optics. The Milvus 50 F2 is a patterned optics dated compared to the most modern Zeiss optics, has few lenses and no aspheric, and this gives it advantages and disadvantages: compact size and weight, clean and natural colors, readable shadows, very pleasant blurring, medium vignette, and very high sharpness always in the center, at the edges only from F 4.5 onwards. The mechanics are excellent, very fluid dials, you can operate the diaphragm continuously to make movies (my version, Nikon), perfect lampshade, with velvet carry inside like all optics made properly. The MaF ring stops at the sign of infinity but still allows the MaF indefinitely on my three cameras, and is extremely precise thanks to the very long ride. On the barrel, are e recorded the various R.R.s that you have focusing closely. sent on June 30, 2020 |
 | Zeiss Milvus 35mm f/2 Pros: Small and compact, sharpness, neutral image, very clean colors, excellent anti-glare treatment, very pleasant blurry, low geometric deformation, very low vignetting, very low field curvature, mechanical construction of excellence, tropicalization. Cons: Tracks of ac at full opening, front cap that tends to come off, high price. Opinion: Global judgment: very good optics. The Milvus 35 F2 is a dated pattern optics compared to the most modern Zeiss optics, has few lenses and no aspheric, and this gives it advantages and disadvantages: compact size and weight, clean and natural colors, readable shadows, very pleasant blurry, but traces of AC at full opening, as well as medium vignetting, both solvable with one click, and very high sharpness all over the frame from F 4 onwards , the field curvature is very low. Excellent anti-glare treatment. The mechanics are excellent, very fluid rings, you can operate the diaphragm continuously to make movies, perfect lampshed, with velvet carry-over inside. MaF's ring stops at infinity but still allows the MaF endlessly on my three cameras. sent on June 19, 2020 |
 | Nikon D810 Pros: Ergonomics, high image quality even at high ISO, reliable AF, battery autonomy. Cons: Lack Focus pecking in Live View. Opinion: Multi-purpose camera that borders on perfection, with very high image quality at low and high ISO, reliable AF, high battery autonomy, ergonomics and professional camera controls. If it had had 24-28 MPX instead of 36 mpx it would have been better, but even 36 are fine for general use. I also have Zeiss optics on manual focus, and if there had been the focus peacking in Live View it would focus better, but even so it looks great in manual. I mold in A3 and A2 format and until now I have not found any technical limit worthy of this name, you make excellent prints in A2 even with a little ' crop. I am very satisfied and after the first, tested in depth, I bought a second, today I have two. sent on December 20, 2018 |
 | Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.8 G Pros: Very good sharpness already at full aperture, sagittal coma and reduced AC, lightness, very high price/optical quality ratio. Cons: Mechanical construction Vilissima. Opinion: Typically amateur optics, it is built very badly, of vile plastic, but optically it is valid, already at full aperture it is very usable for A3 prints, it is extremely compact and light, it has AF without praise but above all without infamy, the price is modest, and mirrors the Vile quality of construction, but optically it is very valid, extremely sharp closed a bit. The blur is not the best, but passable. Optics to buy for light outputs, to stick and to keep in the bag, it honestly, and always, its work, with a weight and a very reduced footprint. I had the Nikkor 50 F 1.4 AFS G, given away because it is a bottle bottom for sagittal coma and for the Moscia image at full aperture, and I also have the Sigma 50 F 1.4 Art, optics from excellent yield, but it is a bin weighing about 1 Kg , while this 50 F 1.8 is very light. sent on November 20, 2018 |
 | Nikon AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED VR Pros: Focal hike, still good sharpness for prints also A2 on camera at 36 mpx, at closed diaphragms, is sharp enough for A3 prints even at open diaphragms, has efficient stabilization and AF fast enough. Cons: Nothing, given the focal hike Opinion: Optics Handyman par excellence, obviously unpretentious, I bought it to replace the 18-200 since I no longer use the Dx format. It is very sharp diaphragmed a bit, the stabilization works well, the AF is valid, all without excelling in anything but Especially without serious deficiencies. The use for light and non-demanding outputs, not to carry too much weight: does not betray, does its job reliably. The optics was taken new, was slightly disaxed, blurted a little ' on the right, I sent it to ltr for recalibration in the warranty, and came back calibrated very well, very good sharpness, have done a nice job. It deforms geometrically less than the Nikkor 24-70 f 2.8, and at closed diaphragms, towards F 6.3-F 8, in practice it has the same sharpness. sent on November 09, 2018 |
 | Zeiss Milvus 25mm f/1.4 Pros: Exceptional sharpness practically all over the frame already at full opening, neutral as chromaticism, bright and clean colors, medium contrast with very readable shadows, held to the flare and excellent reflections, mechanics of excellence, tropicalization. Cons: Size, weight and price Opinion: It is mammoth, a monster on the 35 mm format but provides sharpness and microcontract very uniform and very high, the image is beautiful alive and sharp already at full opening. Mechanics of excellence. The minimum distance of MaF is only 25 cm, the MaF ring covers practically the whole lens and when you mount and remove from the camera, you have to slide at the end of the run to pair and rotate the optics in the attack bottle: this is an idiotic solution of MaF's ring! MaF's dial to seal from the minimum distance to well beyond the infinity (good!) rotates for about 270 degrees: the MaF is extremely precise, it is really excellent, very reliable with the green point of the Nikon, the MaF is not wrong. They made a piedy ring as a dimension, while it's phenomenal as accuracy. Mine, ZF 2, for Nikon, also has the button to delete the shots of the diaphragm ring, for the use of cinema, and has the electronic diaphragm. Great lampshade, metallic and covered in velvet internally, old-fashioned, perfect. Advanced styling makes it look less big, less monster, but always monster remains. The optical performance is truly excellent and makes a bit of a forgive for the monstrosity and price. sent on April 23, 2018 |
 | Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 Distagon T* 25mm f/2 Pros: Small and compact, mechanical construction excellent, optically very sharp, excellent color rendering and excellent performance reflections Cons: Center soft wide open, with morbidini edges up to F 4 Opinion: I went into the store to buy the Milvus 25 F 1.4, but after taking it in hand I didn't get it because they really too large and too heavy, is a mammoth for 35 mm. I purchased used this Zeiss Distagon 25 F 2, in excellent condition, and I am very pleased: it is a scheme for older than optical soft Centre F2, valid on D 810 F 2.8, and borders moscini until F4, but stopping down to F/5.6 and beyond is extremely sharp on tutt or the frame. Great color rendition, blurred very progressive and sweet. Build quality Zeiss, of excellence. Do not build more, they replaced it with a monster, for sure sharpest already wide open, like the Milvus 18 F 2.8 I have, but take a crack that thing there is a nightmare, while this Distagon here is small, weighs less than half and it works fine. sent on April 17, 2018 |
 | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Optical yield, construction, price Cons: Closing cap. Need AF calibration with USB Dock. Opinion: I use it on D4 and two D 810: calibrated with the USB Dock on a D 810, correct the MaF on the other two bodies with the fine tuning of AF, the lens focuses on the 3 bodies even in low light and provides very good images. Vignette a little 'full aperture but it is normal on a F 1.4, is sharp at the center much to F 1.4, less at the edges, and is very clear on the entire frame closing a bit' the diaphragm. The color rendering is as neutral as the Zeiss, the anti-reflective treatment is good. Passable lens hood, ridiculous front cap, I substituted it with a Nikon cap. It is solid and built well, very good price / quality ratio. It took the USB Dock to do it focaccia well, it was calibrated, but once calibrated, it works well.rn sent on December 28, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED VR II Pros: Lightweight, small, very large zoom range, precise AF, efficient stabilization, sharp F 8 from 18 to 170 mm, is solid even though it does not look like it. Cons: Price, vignette, soft at full opening, a bit of AC at full aperture, cutting the maximum focal length at short distances of MaF, ridges ridiculous. Opinion: Travel optics, lightweight, a handyman par excellence, I also use it on the D 810, where it is sharper than on the D 7000. If one uses it for what it is intended to do, it's a great optic, you are almost photographed everything is fine. On a pixellated camera, it's also a great back up optic, it puts a very decent piece on good optics in case of a breakdown, especially when traveling, and is small and light. Ever since I started photographing in digital in 2009 and never bothered, the shot I always do, I'm very happy. sent on November 28, 2017 |
 | Nikon D4 Pros: Reliability, ergonomics, image quality. Cons: Nothing Opinion: I do not just take a shot almost anywhere, even under difficult conditions and have a balanced sensor, with excellent image quality, low ISO and ISO high, and in my opinion provides better picture of the two D 810 I have, simply because it has the most natural colors. I tried the D5 and I did not take it because the ISO lows the image visibly worse than this. It does not create any optical problems even with the zoom and the prints are always sharp. It's the perfect handy camera, all kinds of photos, including landscapes for prints up to the A3 +, are already made. sent on November 13, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF 180mm f/2.8 D ED IF Pros: Construction, lightness, optical quality. Cons: Side AC Opinion: Wanting an alternative to the heavy 70 - 200 F 2.8 VRII, I used it very well, the optics I've used will be over 20 years and paid only 300 euros. The optic still has the tag with the inscription " Passed "of the quality control that the houses once did on some optics of the lot, and today they no longer do: that old trabiccolo there is a selected optic and in fact it is beautiful sharp even at full openness, and in my opinion gives it to 70 - 200 to 180 mm at full aperture.rnrn F 5.6 to go for a better hair than 70 - 200 F 2.8 VR II (which is perfectly calibrated) closed at F 5.6 and is better than another 180 F 2.8 I've tried. The AF is NOT slow, though mys makes a nice casino when it focuses. RnrnIt has a transient AC, very pronounced, but I get it handy in photo retouch. RnrnE 'an old look like a pattern and glasses, and you see well, but if one finds the good copy, it is optically valid, & egrAve; light and tiny, and ...... it costs nothing! sent on September 10, 2017 |
 | Zeiss Milvus 18mm f/2.8 Pros: Optical quality, mechanical construction, compact size, low weight, eye-catching styling, tropicalization. Cons: Nothing Opinion: It is very sharp throughout the frame even at full opening, even on the extreme edges, extremely sharp closing a single diaphragm, then remains practically the same, sharp always. Beautiful full colors, bright on the frame, living image, medium contrast, open shadows, and even in the viewfinder the image is bright, more than with the 14 - 24 F 2.8 that I hold the sun front and on the edges of the field of view excellently. Solid and fluid fire, silent diaphragm, metal lampshade with velvet carry as it used to be, there is no game on anything, MaF scale and PdC, point for MaF in IR. An 18 mm focuses well even without AF and without stigmometer, therefore, no difficulty of MaF, I go with the green dot and do not use the Live View. Used on 2 X D 810 and D4: excellent optics. It mounts very normal filters from 77 m. I took the Milvius 18 mm F 2.8, never tried before, and not the Milvius 21 mm F 2.8 that I tried well, simply because the 18 mm F 2.8 is a very recent design optical, while the 21 mm F 2.8 is 20-year design and because the Zeiss does not combine jokes with quality: in my opinion it is better the 18 mm than the 21 mm, as optical yield. It costs a bit but gives a lot in terms of optical and mechanical quality, the price/quality ratio is very good, it does not cost expensive for what it gives. sent on May 05, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G ED VR II Pros: constructive, fast and accurate AF quality, very efficient VR, sharpness to the extreme focal lengths, color fidelity, blurred. Cons: Price ratio / low-performance, cutting significantly the focal maximum at short distances Focusing, drop in sharpness at the intermediate focal 90-120 mm, antirflessi treatment not very efficient Opinion: The lens is very well built, with AF and VR very efficient, and it is very clear is that to 70 to 200 mm, at full aperture is always acceptable, but shows a bit 'of clarity decline to intermediate focal also apertures. greatly in size and gradually, maximum focal length by reducing the distance Focusing, even with the zoom ring that marks 200 mm, the minimum focusing distance of the lens, the focal maximum of only 130mm: this does not allow to do many photographs, especially tight portraits, etc: the plate details are not respected, and this view is a scam. The anti-reflection treatment is not very efficient for today's technology, but the 70-200 F 2.8 Nikon at home there is only this and so I adapted. strongly advise against buying this perspective, it costs too much and gives little, a 135 F 2.8 costs a third of a 200 F 2.8 and this light at short distances Focusing is a 135 mm F 2.8, nothing more . sent on March 09, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.4 G Pros: Defocused, sharpness closed a little, held to flare and reflections. Cons: Soft at full aperture, plastic, price Opinion: I still use it on D 4 and D 810: AF in the standard, without praise and without infamy, excellent sharpness to diaphragms a little closed, a little 'too soft at full aperture to be a modern optics, has blurry excellent and holds well the flare and the reflections parasites.rnrnThe construction is very lacking, it is all plastic and vile plastic, with a ridiculous lens hood: very high price. sent on February 25, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 G ED Pros: Sharpness at all focal even at maximum aperture, construction, reduced distortion, price Cons: Kept low to flare and reflections. Range of short focal lengths. Opinion: Very sharp forever, even at full aperture, gives his best to F 4 to 5.6, and D 810 have edges with a soft little. It built very well. It has a large front lens and extruding: holds hurt the direct side light, with flare and stray reflections. The price is low for the services it provides and the optical construction of excellence. sent on February 25, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4 G ED VR Pros: Very versatile range of focal points, sharpness to intermediate focals, excellent flare sealing and parasitic reflexes Cons: Marked distortion at focal courts, mocious edges at focal courts, general low sharpness at 35 mm, plastic construction, ridiculous lampshade, VR useless to focal ones, price too high Opinion: I used it on D4 and D 810, it's one of the optics I used the most, and it's pretty sharp in the middle and median 18 to 28 mm: very snooty edges even at F8 to 16-20 mm, moves on 24 - 28 mm, and general lack of sharpness at 35 mm, the image is slightly veiled. I had two, the first one destroyed in an accident, and the surrender was the same. Built all of plastic and with a lampshade that could possibly cost even half a euro, it's ridiculous, and the optics cost 1200 euros. VR to focal points is useless. Barrel distortion too pronounced at 16 mm, to correct it you have to cut the image too much. Reliable AF, but focal ones and an F 4 matter little. Excellent hold to flare and parasitic reflexes. Bad value for money. In the end I sold it for low optical quality, today there is much, but really better at equal or lower price. sent on February 25, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24mm f/1.4 G ED Pros: Pleasantness of focus and sharpness Cons: Image soft diaphragm fully open price. Opinion: I used it on D4 and D 810 and that's fine by F 2 onwards, while at full aperture gives images a bit 'too soft for modern perspective, but closed a little' is crystal clear, it is no ottimo.rnrnL'AF praise without shame, in media.rnrnE 'fairly light, but the plasticky build, and the hood is simply ridiculous for a view of that prezzo.rnrnOttica valid, but the price is high. sent on February 25, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 60mm f/2.8 G ED Micro Pros: Excellent sharpness always, MAF minimum very short, blurry excellent, excellent resistance to flare and reflections, also very crisp with infinity focus, AF good and reliable, made of plastic but is made good, solid Cons: Nothing Opinion: I always had the micro in the kit, I love the sharpness, and this lives up to expectations and is excellent for both macro optical use that for general use, we do everything, including ritratti.E 'one of the few Nikon lenses still made in Japan, and you see, it is built very well. It 'very clear throughout the frame already wide open, and stopping down improves a bit and becomes crystal clear, has good anti-glare treatment, the AF is not instantaneous, it never is on micro, but it is very reliable, and MAF minimum is very short. Not extrudes focusing closely, it is internal focus, and I consider it an advantage. rnAd today, I did not find any weaknesses. Excellent price / performance. sent on December 23, 2016 |
 | Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G Pros: Size and lightweight. Cons: very mediocre optical qualities, AF slow and spreciso in vile plastic construction Opinion: Taken in Kit with D 700.rnE 'built in vile quality plastic, which will wear with facilità.rnOtticamente has very poor performance: full aperture image is too "soft", but above all with a resolution too low contrast, and borders almost unmade, and this is due to the presence of sagittal coma in imposing form, such that the large openings with point lights in the field towards the edges of the images are not utilizzabili.rnHa slow AF and not so much preciso.rnIl glareproofed seems old-fashioned and definitely is not made well, it suffers a lot of flare and stray reflections at high lights in campo.rnrnQui there are RAW images shot with my D 700 showing the optical full aperture with sagittal coma that makes unusable rnhttps images: // www.mediafire.com/#tbewsvcbt8zacrnrnrnA my opinion, is absolutely not to be comperare.rnrnIo I sold quickly: better to buy 50 F 1.8 which costs halves and has better performance, or turn to third homes for f 1,4.rn sent on December 23, 2016 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 G ED Pros: protection against dust and water, fast and accurate AF, versatility and high quality optical medium and long focal Cons: mechanically less robust, optical quality poor on the periphery and especially at the edges at short focal lengths, geometric distortion at short focal high, high AC at short focal lengths, field curvature pronounced at short focal lengths. Opinion: C while it is not technically usable for photo quality of high-resolution cameras sent on March 13, 2013 |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
