|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Catello Manfredonia www.juzaphoto.com/p/CatelloManfredonia  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Zenit MC Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye Pros: Solid construction, of the past, with exceptional sharpness from f5.6 onwards, but already good since 2.8. Cons: Nothing. Opinion: Bought used for Nikon with maf confirmation chips, in excellent condition, at a great price (Photo Mattioli). Exceptional value for money, with nothing to envy to similar optics with a tenfold cost. You do not feel the lack of autofocus: by shooting in hyperfocal, no image is to be discarded. To be had in the kit, despite the infrequent use. sent on November 07, 2019 |
 | Nikon AF-S 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 G ED Pros: Excellent construction. Sharpness, resistance to making. Fast and accurate AF. Cons: Slight distortion between 18 and 20mm on FF, controllable in PP already with the camera. Opinion: Very good value for money. Ideal for urban photography and landscapes, when you do not want to bear of heavy optics. I find it wrong to list among the cons the low brightness and the lack of stabiizzazione: when you buy it you are already aware of these things. Recommended optics, which can be found at attractive prices on the used market. sent on June 22, 2018 |
 | Nikon AF 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5 D IF ED Pros: Lightness, precise AF and quite fast and noiseless, sharpness, chromatic rendition. Good construction. Cons: Slight distortion at 18mm, easily corrected. Opinion: I use it on Nikon D750, with more than satisfactory results at all focal lengths. The main advantage is without doubt the lightness, but also the overall yield is good. I often prefer it to the excellent Sigma 12-24, which I also own, for the possibility of mounting filters, especially the CPL, on certain occasions indispensable. sent on June 03, 2018 |
 | Sigma 1.4x EX DG Pros: Excellent construction, with a solid feel. Value for money. Cons: Anything. Opinion: It is a good teleconverter, well built and solid. The use often combined with Sigma 105 macro 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 HSM stabilized, with excellent results, with both the Nikon D7100 that with the D750, without detecting the decay of the images. The minimum weight and bulk invite me to always take it with me when hiking in the mountains. sent on April 15, 2017 |
 | Yongnuo YN 35mm f/2 Pros: First of all, the value for money, certainly the best for a focus of this focus. Lightness. Sharpness. Silent, fast and accurate AF. Cons: Very slight edge distortion on FF, correctable already in the camera. Lack of hood (unavailable). Opinion: Buying new online on a German site, with Nikon attack, it was a delightful surprise, perhaps because I had ordered it with a good deal of skepticism. The assembly and materials are of discrete quality, in line with the non-professional optics of Nikon, plus the metal engagement, I believe aluminum. I used it on the D750 with excellent results and rendered to the high ISO (also 12800) that is superimposed to that of Nikkor 50mm AF-S 1.8 and Nikkor AF-S 35mm Dx 1.8. Good sharpness even at maximum aperture, with a gentle blur that makes it suitable even for any portraits that are set. Compared with the Nikkor 35mm Dx 1.8, with shots under the same conditions, using Nikon D750 and D7100 bodies, even in large enlargements, I can not see any noticeable differences with the naked eye, but with the advantage of being able to use, without cropping, also on full size. I signaled the irresponsibility of the dedicated hood; the Nikon HB-47 and compatible mounts with a brush, but with vignetting on FX. Consigliatissimo.rn sent on November 10, 2016 |
 | Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.8 G Pros: Great value for money, sharpness already TA with blurred beautiful, tropicalized, fast and accurate AF. Cons: Nothing. Opinion: well-built, lighter lens with AF fast and sharpness at the top; I think one of the best solutions as a target for portraiture (and beyond). Some complain of "feeling plasticky", having perhaps reminiscences type Moplen and other plastics of the 50 -60; perhaps are the same as that in the case of optical assembled metal, complain of the weight of the same and those who do not know that even flak jackets are constructed with polymers which is Kevlar ... sent on October 13, 2016 |
 | Nikon AF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6D Pros: Focal excursion. AF accurate and fast enough. Satisfactory sharpness. Cons: As much as I paid him, nothing. Opinion: Bought recently, for a few pennies, in perfect condition. I took a few shots with the Nikon D750, with results of a quality that I never expected: even in low light conditions, at 3200 ISO, it behaves very well, with excellent color yield. Keep in mind that I am in possession of a very respectable optical park, so when I say that catastrophic judgments on many economic optics are often dictated mainly by snobbery and the search for minutiae to very high enlargements of prints, that the 99.99% of amateurs will never do, it does not happen because I have no possibility of comparisons... If you find it in good condition at a low price, buy it, if only to use it as a spare target. sent on April 20, 2016 |
 | Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro DG OS HSM Pros: Value for money. Accurate construction with a solid feel. It also sharpens to TA. Color yield. Lightning autofocus. Cons: Nothing. Opinion: Few optics have a satisfactory value-for-money like this. Exceptional in portraiture, with beautiful blurry. In the macro, it does not disappoint expectations with high quality images, even if coupled with a 1.4x Sigma teleconverter, with which there is a complete compatibility of all automations. I would recompile it, even if the economical advantage with respect to the equivalent Nikkor was zeroed.rnhttps: //www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php? T = 1506004 & l = itrn sent on April 01, 2016 |
 | Nikon Coolpix P7100 Pros: Optical zoom range with very respectable, good quality. Handling and satisfactory strength. Good battery life. tilting display. RAW files. Cons: unsatisfactory viewfinder. noticeable noise since the 800 ISO. Lack of hood. Opinion: I use it for about 4 years and I am extremely pleased. If one does not pretend to be a compact absurd things, it can be an excellent companion to take with him, especially (also with flip display) for "street photography", avoiding overloaded with various SLR bodies and lenses, if you do not provide photo "important." sent on March 15, 2016 |
 | Nikon AF-S 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED VR Pros: Good construction, excellent sharpness, good stability, excellent value for money. Cons: Anything that an ordinary mortal like me can feel important ... Opinion: It is the ideal all-rounder for the full format Nikon; before buying it I used the same role, the 24-120 F3.5-5.6 that was more than satisfactory (disagree with many snobs), but often felt the need of longer focal lengths. The 28-300 is almost always one of three optical accompanying me on my excursions; the other two are the Sigma 12-24 and the Sigma 105 Macro OS HSM. If you plan to take pictures "important" I load with 2.8 optical drive, but most of my shots are practiced today be highly recommended to me with this 28-300.rn sent on November 03, 2015 |
 | Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM Pros: Accurate construction, solid feel, field angle, focal length, minimal distortion even at 12mm, excellent sharpness. Cons: Poor brightness. Inability to mount front filters, but I think it's an insurmountable problem, at the time, for all manufacturers, of these focal ... Opinion: I took this view recently, but I've already made numerous shots; I use a Nikon D750 with great satisfaction. It certainly is not easy to use point of view: we must try to keep the camera completely parallel to the horizon line to avoid monstrosity perspective. I reported among against the low light, but with 12-24mm focal even unregulated, there is no problem with long times, regardless of whether the D750 you can get, no unsolvable problems, taking with ISO 12800. In conclusion, the value is outstanding, without considering that, at present, still has the distinction of shooting angle ... Highly recommended. sent on October 28, 2015 |
 | Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro Pros: Unbeatable value for money, with decent build quality. Cons: Slow autofocus. Macro Selector somewhat cumbersome. Opinion: Is to point out, first, an error in the optics is equipped with autofocus motor. I used this light on Nikon D40, D60 and D90; I put it aside after purchasing the D750 with optical top. I read someone complaining about the inability to use the photograph of bird life and I could not help but smile. It can not pretend to be the same performance of a subcompact SUV 4x4 off-road uphill. If the lens is used outdoors, not for shooting fast-moving, you can get good pictures; I have not succeeded. In different conditions the low light lens, autofocus slowness and lack of stabilization are felt. I think before making judgments ungenerous must remember what has been paid ... rn sent on October 17, 2015 |
 | Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Pros: build quality, weather sealing, sharpness, excellent stabilizer. Value for money. Cons: Maybe the weight, but I think it's essential the quality ... Graft paraluce.rn Opinion: Using this perspective on Nikon D750 and D7100, with excellent results on both bodies. If used for portraits, has a sharpness that can be "awkward" at high magnifications, detecting imperfections of the skin invisible to the naked eye ... I have no experience with the Canon optical similar, but I think more than Nikkor 24-70 ( that costs more than twice without stabilizer). A purchase that would do it and I recommend. sent on August 31, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 G IF VR Pros: Excellent handyman, focal excursion, satisfactory VR, excellent value for money. Cons: It does not excel at the maximum openings, otherwise there is no glaring flaws. Opinion: This is a perspective that enjoys undeserved bad fame, which can favour the purchase at low prices on the market of used... Shout also to the scandal, but the use often also on the Nikon D750, with satisfactory results, when I do not foresee photos "important", thus avoiding to shoot with a kit of optics 2.8 fixed, heavy and cumbersome... If I were to give you a vote, I think a 9 is not exaggerated. sent on August 27, 2015 |
 | Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Pros: Price, solid and careful construction, fast focusing, very effective stabilizer, exceptional sharpness, blurred 2.8 and 4 pleasant; to report the excellent yield, with retention of all the automatisms, in conjunction with Tele Sigma 1.4 with which becomes a 280mm f4, with the maintenance of a superlative picture quality. Cons: No tropicalisation, but who buys it knows. slightly noisy stabilizer. Ferrule zooming unusable and that of the focus almost unusable with the hood in its rest position; "Prosthesis" to adapt the hood to the APS-C cameras somewhat cumbersome, which becomes a problem for the transport ... Opinion: I state that I am not a professional photographer. At first it was the classic marriage of convenience, due to the very competitive price (apart from many flattering reviews) ... the love came very early, especially in the use in portraiture. Someone will turn up their noses, someone else will risk a seizure, but I can not seem to highlight important differences with the shots taken with Nikkor equivalent focal length; I can not vouch for the Canon 70-200, which I never used .. I paid 875 € and with the money saved will buy another pair of lenses or a body Nikon D750; there seems reason enough to buy? sent on December 15, 2014 |
 | Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Pros: Excellent construction, accurate, that gives a feeling of solidity. Extreme sharpness already at 2.8. effective stabilizer. Maybe, according to many critics of Sigma lenses, I was lucky: this is my sixth goal Sigma (I also have a 12-24 still I, a 105 2.8 OS HSM Macro and 70-200 2.8 HSM OS) I never had to complain about construction limits or back problems or front focus ... Cons: Wanting to be superpignoli, a critical move goes to the front lens cap and lens hood, made of materials not up lens. The slight distortion to the minimum focal length with maximum aperture can be corrected already with only the camera software, in my case a Nikon D7100. Opinion: It bought about a month ago, after careful and meticulous reading of the various tests on optical focal range and brightness equal or equivalent. I can say that the purchase was perfectly timed; the value for money is great and the goal does not fear the competition of rivals, indeed, in my opinion, is superior to the noble and expensive Nikkor 17-55. sent on December 13, 2014 |
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
