|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Ltsuper61 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Ltsuper61  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Nikon D800 Pros: Towards the MF Cons: File pesantini not digestible by all the pc / mac Opinion: Excellent machine file super workable with a recovery of the exceptional dynamic range especially in the shadows; in crisis on the highlight recovery next to burning. Here too, the Sony sensor combined with Nikon EXPEED processor provides quality eccelsa.rnSe love SLRs excellent sceltarn "http://www.lucatognelli.it/p61_rc_011.htm" sent on January 24, 2015 |
 | Leica M (Typ 240) Pros: She and her optics. Cons: JPEG on camera (film tenuous and lively), tend to completely demolish the detail and knead the photo. with those in bn clearer the details but the noise reduction is absurd. Slow sw in LV. Opinion: That is, the system M either love or hate. I come from cameras "modern" as D600 / D800 / DF, but the M is unique in its absurdity. detail, the three-dimensional color and timbre of this system are unique. You have to buy it only if you know what you want otherwise they are a waste of money. RNLA 240 in question is an attempt to get closer to the technologies leica competitors while maintaining its stamp inconfondibile.rnRispetto version with CCD sensor, there are several improvements but also a disadvantage; we start from this: rnIl CCD offers unrivaled detail for a CMOS sensor. The leica m is less than the engraved M9 / ME to base sensitivity (ISO 160 CCD - ISO 200 CMOS) rnSul rest instead there storia.rnISO you can push in 3200 without any major dramas of loss if the photo is properly exposed .rnMirino Electronic - this is the real advantage of the machine with the best performance ISO. In fact, in addition to having the advantage of being able to shoot with long system and be sure of the point of MAF, the reduced draftallows if one wants to attack us anything like a normal mirrorless. With the rangefinder shoot with a 50mm f 0.95 or 1.4 is practically impossible, and the percentage of good shots is much reduced. by lengthening the focal things get worse esponenzialmente.rnConservando though the optical rangefinder and working with under 35 mm, the M becomes a machine to battle for the street. You're almost always in hyperfocal and speed focheggio with the rangefinder is istantanea.rnDa try at least volta.rnrnrn sent on January 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon Df Pros: excellent yield high iso, jpeg ready. Cons: successful half. Nikon has yet to study a lot. Af bad. classification in a difficult market. low resolution, the presence of the filter aa Opinion: Past by Leica M to this desperate need for autofocus, unfortunately after a first love came the problems: RNLA file quality baked good like all modern SLRs equipped with sensors FF; autofocus especially in AFC is painful and the percentage of focus working with dynamic players in large openings is very bassa.rnIl biggest problem of this machine that is proposed as a link between the nikon optics of the past and those of this and future, is the lack of a system to aid in manual focus effectively. With the focus peacking was definitely a best seller, but now the market after an initial phase of emphasis, it is slowly putting parte.rnConcludendo: rnNon is a reflex, not a vintage, not a mirrorless.rnè a toy carino.rnNel my case I recovered the leica M.rnpensateci.rn sent on November 27, 2014 |
 | Sony SLT-A77 Pros: body tropicalized / sensor stabilized / folding screen that does not require protection / balancing of the lights in areas of strong contrast / resolution Cons: less effective as a detail of sony nex 7 / want good objective (Zeiss) to make the best Opinion: 2B better metering + improved autofocus (like precision than d7000) + + electronic viewfinder system evolved mf (peacking focus + zoom (x5.9 ex 11!) Both in live view that especially in the OLED viewfinder) + boken and three-dimensional shooting + camera body tropicalized (compared to d7000) + + + resolution for the gas sensor dynamic range comparing the machines both for direct use in a few months for prolonged tests (canon 7d), I can say that the A77 is a great camera and for my type of photography than canon and nikon. the overall yield is very good with some flaws due both to the higher resolution, that the film on the sensor causing a loss of light with consequent increase of noise compared to a classical reflex. The transition from nikon or canon sony, it may appear to many as an absurd choice, but if done with awareness of the strengths and weaknesses you will be surprised and impressed by these machines. the worst problem that I find the systemsony lenses, is the lack of an optical quality that covers the wide-angle focal about 10 mm. the kit lens 16-50 2.8, coupled with the a77 provides good results but it's not a lens G kit, let alone a Zeiss. sent on August 08, 2012 |
 | Sony NEX-7 Pros: control system tri nav. Dynamic range / resolution can mount any lens electronic viewfinder made impressive with leica lenses. system manual focus with a peak detection graphic outlines. Cons: body a little 'delicate especially the flash shoe. sony software is not able to manage files arw (also lightroom in versions prior to 4.0) aims to try to verify the performance of the sensor. stop missing intermediate scale iso. jpeg cost camera body (+ a canon 7d and nikon d7000) - but it's worth it all Opinion: are passed to the system with sony nex 7, after three nikon d7000 with the last one. compared to this even if as body are two different types of machines the jump is impressive. the AA filter reduced the nex 7 provides details on the raw file unthinkable for other aps-c. the control system tri nav is simple and straightforward, with the ability to configure the controls to your liking. the electronic viewfinder offers excellent vision and a series of information unthinkable for other cameras (histogram in the first place). for my use and more specifically below 800 iso, the yield is great; d7000 compared to the grain is harder but it retains the detail and is not mixed as with the nikon. The major problem with this machine are the goals: not all hype with the owner and / or alpha 2 via adapter LEA, they are able to fully exploit the potential of the sensor. in my case the machine was used with optical alpha and the best performance I've found with the sigma 50 1.4 hsm, which offers a detailed unthinkable (as compared to the pair nikon d7000 + 50 afs 1.4) over the entire range of existing frames f 1.6. used instead with wide zoom like the Sigma 10-20 you had a good yield but with strong chromatic aberration. the standard zoom 16-50 8.2 sony behaved very well from f 2.8 to f 5.6. In conclusion, a good machine, but expensive that needs to work to the best of expensive optics. yield jpeg (tried once) is mixed and not the height of the potential, if one wants to shoot jpeg you buy a compact. sent on August 08, 2012 |
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
