|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Straitouttahell www.juzaphoto.com/p/Straitouttahell  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Yongnuo EF YN 50mm f/1.8 Pros: All in all a good lens. Small and light. Cons: Optical features not at the pace of the most current lenses. Plasticose Construction (even if the mount is metal). The autofocus is not exactly a splinter. Like a bit all third-party lenses that cannot be calibrated by the user, better to use it on a body equipped with MAF correction, because some specimens may suffer from front/back focus. Opinion: I'll start with the conclusions: a good lens that does not work miracles, suitable for those who want to take the hand with this focal or for those who (like me) do not particularly like this focal but do not want to give up having a fifty in the bag. Rather soft at the more open aperture (which is not necessarily bad, it becomes a good portrait lens on DX, where the softness is partly compensated by the absence of anti-aliasing filter), it becomes acceptably sharp from F4 up. The focus is never particularly quick, but thanks to God is at least reliable, I rarely miss the fire. At the very least, after correcting the focus on the camera body, because my specimen was born with a slight front/back focus (do not remember if front or back). I do not see significant chromatic aberrations, but a bit suffers from backlight (although never at the levels of old AF-D lenses). Acceptable vignetting and distortion almost absent. The construction is economical and does not try to hide it: Plasticaccia. But the mount is in metal, and all in all the economic construction is reflected on the weight, extremely contained. Some might say that it pays to buy a 50 AF-D used. True. For those who have a machine body with built-in motor. This lens, however, has its autofocus motor and works on all camera bodies. sent on February 08, 2019 |
 | Zenit Helios 44M-6 58mm f/2.0 Pros: The beautiful lenses of once. Built like a brick, all heavy metal, MAF ring of the right hardness and beautiful hike, sharpness at closed diaphragms as well as modern lenses, peculiar and interesting bokeh Cons: A bit ' soft at all open (but very useable), the characteristic bokeh can entice you to make photos hackneyed and ritrite Opinion: That nice lens of a time. At the time the manual MAF was not a habit but the daily reality, and the lenses were made accordingly. The MAF ring is a pleasure to use. The rotation is of the right hardness and the excursion is wide (almost 3/4 turn), which guarantees maximum precision. The yield is a bit soft at all open, which is not necessarily bad, and by closing the diaphragm a bit the sharpness is like the modern lenses. The bokeh is perhaps the most characteristic of this lens, but it is also a potential enemy, because you are likely to end up doing the usual macro of flowers of which the web and Mankind Implor "enough". A nice brick made of iron, solid and relatively heavy. A pleasure even to hold in your hand. The use on Sony NEX-C3, the focus peaking with these lenses is almost a necessity. sent on September 22, 2018 |
 | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: When he catches the fire, the sharpness in the center is stellar, already open. Excellent manufacturing. Engine of the silent MAF. Relatively small and light for an F/1.4 lens Cons: The focus is a Russian roulette, are more times that it is wrong that those that it does not. The corners are soft even at "important" diaphragms (f/8.0). The yield varies by varying the distance of the subject. If we put everything on the scale, I find that the price is too expensive for a lens that is not sharp at closed aperture angles and that it is unpredictable at open aperlets. Opinion: I state that I bought this lens used and I do not know if it is a successful specimen or if it has suffered abuse, so my review deserves the benefit of the doubt. I use this lens mainly on D800. Or at least that was the intention. In fact it is an expensive paperweight, although of good workmanship and bellino to behold. The main problems of this lens, for my liking, are two: 1) the focus is unpredictable. The correction of the MAF on the camera body can not tame it, simply there are times that the fire and other times that it lacks coarsely. Which, when using the most open aperture, makes the lens virtually unusable (and I refuse to use a f/1.4 lens at f/2.0, at which point I was buying a Nikon AF-D). 2) Even when the fire is if the subject is medium distance (say between 2 and 5 meters), the yield of the lens is very soft (too soft) unless you close it a couple of stops, while at close range or on infinity The yield is perfect (assuming that You have guessed the fire, see step 1. It may be that using the USB dock the best situation, but I refuse to spend money to make the lens do something it should do with its own. I think the precision of the MAF is the bare minimum for an autofocus lens, especially if we are talking about an already "esoteric" lens. These are mortal sins. The lens however has painful angles, even closing it a lot are never sharp. On my specimen, sometimes the AF crashes and I have to insist a bit ' on the AF-on to get it back to work. It could, I repeat, be a problem due to the misuse of the previous owner, but so much so, I also have this problem. Adding everything, I must admit bitterly that I regretted having bought it, I do not sell it just because I refuse to pass this disgrace to another poor user, I'll keep it resigned to use it only on those rare occasions when I need a sharpness Central to the stars and I do not care about the corners, with little light and where I know I have time to make 10 attempts of the same photo. Until I have set aside the money to buy the Nikon 35 1.8, then it will become the most expensive paperweight I have at home. EDIT: Since I already had two optical ART that give me problems of MAF and that I will probably buy more, I decided to equip the USB dock. After calibring this lens, and using no more AF-S on single point but AF-C with 3d tracking, the focus has become much more predictable. A purchase, that of the dock, which I suggest to do to anyone who has Sigma compatible lenses, you will lose some time but definitely worth it. It remains, however, very soft at the corners, a bit ' at all apermi. I'm going to make a point. sent on September 09, 2018 |
 | Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 EX DG Pros: Relatively small and not too heavy. Good construction. Opening 2.8 on the whole excursion. Good definition at all open, excellent from 5.6 up. Very economical on the used. Cons: Strong vignetting in the range 24-28 fully open on full frame. Very pronounced chromatic aberrations on the widest focals. The ring of the MAF that moves during the autofocus is a bit of a hassle. The zoom closes by just turning it upwards. Strong back focus in my specimen. Autofocus only on bodies that have the built-in engine. Opinion: I use this lens on D7200 and D800 (on which it gives the best, and the worst, of itself). I do not know if I caught a good specimen, if they are good mouth or if anyone claiming sharpness has problems with front/back focus and does not realize it, but my lens, once corrected the MAF, is very good already open to everything. A little soft at 2.8, but Usabilissima, and with strong chromatic aberrations on the wide focals, greatly improves by closing the diaphragm. From 5.6 up It is very sharp even on the highly D7200. The mechanical MAF is reasonably rapid and not too noisy. An old school lens that can still give great satisfaction, as long as you mount it on a high-end body, since autofocus and calibration of the MAF are indispensable to bring out the best. sent on June 16, 2018 |
 | Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM Art Pros: The only normal zoom f / 1.8 constant. Sharpness even at full openness. Very solid construction. Silent autofocus. Sharpness even at full openness. Compatibility with the AF tuning fine dock. Good consistency of image quality across the focal range. Value for money. Ah, I have already said sharpness even at the open? Cons: Some specimens have heavily starved AF. Autofocus sometimes tries to acquire the lock. It may be inaccurate with the external AF points. Focal range may be limiting for some. Excellent construction but not tropicalized. You need to know how to manage the pdc af / 1.8 Opinion: I use this lens on Nikon D7200.rnIn the past I used FX (D700) with Nikkor f / 2.8 zoom and Sony APS-C with prime lenses, so I'm not an easy one to impress.rnrnBeh, after a couple of months of use I have to say, not without some pleasure, that I was impressed.rnrnThis lens is very clear. I do not know how much depends on the lens and how much from the absence of the AA filter on the sensor of the D7200, but the photos that come out of this coupled come to be SURGICAL as detailed. Even when fully open, the corners are softer and there is a fair vignetting, but the center is a razor, and does not lose contrast. If you try to make us portraits "head & shoulder", despite the focal lengths are not really suitable, it easily arrives to solve the pores of the skin and the superficial hair. Also at f / 1.8. Better from a distance than close up, on the close focus it loses a bit of sharpness (in the sense that from scimitar it becomes a razor to a barber). The contrast is good, suffers a little 'ghosting if there are strong hair dryerof light near the edges of the frame, but without exaggeration. I have not had significant experience in flare. The chromatic aberrations are there and they are visible, but I have seen worse from raw lenses of the same opening. As for the bokeh, I think I do not offend anyone if I say that normally you do not choose a lens in this range of focal length to take photos with the background out of focus, but with an aperture of f / 1.8 this lens is able to give a fair separation if there is a good distance between the subject and background, and the bokeh in these cases is quite pleasant, a little 'nervosetto but does not disturb that much.rnrnThe lens is big and heavy, but I think no one expects a lens with these specifications being particularly small or light, right? Let's say it's great and weighs * the right *. The focal range is clearly restricted, this can be a problem. Fortunately, 80% of the photos I make do already naturally in that range of focal lengths, so I never have ifntito confine.rnrnSuch as perfection does not exist, we come to the painful notes: the defects. Well, my model suffered from a "very light" front focus. Of the type that framing a subject three meters away, focava half a meter ahead. I had to enter a correction factor of +10 in the body to compensate. Now it's fine, but for those who think to use this lens on a body without the focus correction, it is better to plan to buy the USB dock. Autofocus itself is good, perhaps the most out of it in this lens. The engine is silent and is fast enough, but sometimes it tempts a bit about the acquisition. Type that catches the fire and then continues to do "tric-trac-tric-trac", micro-adjustments back and forth for a couple of seconds, before giving the lock. Nothing transcendental, but on a lens of this quality (and that does not cost two pounds) out of place. Another problem that I have encountered and that could be a source of anger, on the D7200 autofocus works well only ifyou select the most central maf points. Selecting the more external ones, the focus lens type a meter in front (in my case) to the subject, or unusable, and there is no fine tuning that takes. For me it is not a problem, I have always used the central point and recomposed, but for some it could be. I would have liked that they also put the seal to seal the mount, as on professional lenses, especially since the rest of the construction and the optical performance * are * professional lens.rnrnWhat to say, this lens somehow returns "dignity" to the APS-C format, giving us back that stop of pdc and yield to high ISO that separates us from the full frame, if you want to live with the bursts of autofocus and you can stay within the range of focal lengths, is a quality lens stellar, which does not make us regret not being passed to the full frame. Most good full frame lenses cost a lot more than this, and they do not have the same performance. The same Nikkor 24-70 f / 2.8, the saint grNikon zoom lens, placed next to this lens, would not come out happily. Here, I said it.rnrnrn sent on January 05, 2018 |
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
