|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Phshoot www.juzaphoto.com/p/Phshoot  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Helios 44M 58mm f/2.0 Pros: All metal and glass; blurred; fluid rings; flares; manual focus; M42 Cons: manual focus; Flare. Opinion: All metal and glass; sharpness; single boned (bokeh) (swirliiiiiii); fluid rings; flares; manual focus. Cons: manual focus; Flare. Opinion: Objective with M42 attachment that with adapter goes on all bodies both analog and digital, obviously also mirrorles and micro 4/3 (in stop down). It works great in manual but only after you have it checked by a photoriparator, at which point you have a lens that is worth at least 7 times. The last of the series, from 44-4 onwards are a little more solving and have a bokeh different from the first, but I am a sick of vintages and especially of these Russians: I love them all ! The blurryness of every lens in the series is truly peculiar. The rings are excellent only after the lens has passed into the hands of a photoriparator who is able to get them back on their feet and better control "mr. lens". Of the 44 series I can't say which one is better, I can only say that the former are a little less sharp at full opening, but it could be an advantage in portraits (or not) and as you go on the others are more respoke and sharper. The former have a single layer treatment and from 4 onwards have the Multi Coated. This also affects the rendering of the photo (flare). therefore... it all depends on how you photograph and what you want to achieve. Don't underestimate it: the only limit is the photographer (but also a lens that doesn't work). sent on April 16, 2021 |
 | Zenit Helios MC 44M-4 58mm f/2.0 Pros: Fantastic lens: metal, soft rings (controlled in the laboratory), optical quality, very particular bokeh, sharpness, M42 attachment. Cons: is not f 1.2; addiction... Opinion: In love lost to vintage optics (even non-vintage). This one from the Helios series (like the others) is very convenient to use because of the very soft rings. The M42 attachment makes it possible to use it ( with adapter ) in manual, on almost all machine bodies both digital and analog. This is often underestimated because of the low-cost specimens that can be found. Only then, always the low-cost specimens, they have hard rings, mushrooms and truffles and sausages inside, reassembled lenses who knows how, poorly controlled diaphragms that in some cases would need to be cleaned and in some cases even oiled. Apart from that, the specimens that work and that have passed for a check in a photoreparation laboratory go great and the derisory cost of the lens is overpaid by the results obtained. I personally can only over-advise him. And anyway, once you use these, you also want to try the others that in succession are: the 85 mm, the 135 mm, the 200 mm and the fantastic 300 mm, but this is another story. sent on February 11, 2021 |
 | Zenit Helios 44M-6 58mm f/2.0 Pros: All metal and glass; sharpness; single boned (bokeh) (swirlii); fluid rings; flares; manual focus. Cons: manual focus; Flare. Opinion: Very sharp lens with M42 attachment that with adapter goes on all bodies both analog and digital, obviously also mirrorles and micro 4/3 (in stop down). It works great in manual but only after you have it checked by a photoriparator, at which point you have a lens that is worth at least 7 times. The last of the series, from 44-4 onwards are a little more solving and have a bokeh different from the first, but I am a sick of vintages and especially of these Russians: I love them all ! The blurryness of every lens in the series is truly peculiar. You can find them gifted in the Easter egg, at 30 euros and butzed by a Canary Dogo, the important thing is that they have good rings and glass and that they are controlled by a technician who is able to put them back on their feet: if they are not destroyed. Of series 44 I can't say which one is better, I can only say that the former are a little less sharp at full opening, but it could be an advantage in portraits (or not) and as you go on the others are more solving. The former have a single layer treatment and from 4 onwards have the Multi Coated. This also affects the rendering of the photo (flare). So... it all depends on how you photograph and what you want to achieve. Don't underestimate it: the only limit is the photographer (but also a lens that doesn't work). sent on December 30, 2020 |
 | Jupiter 9 - 85mm f/2 MC Pros: Open yield; image quality for portraits; mr Bokeh; smooth diaphragm ring; 15 slats; M42 screw attack; it is a pleasure to use them; solid construction; light enough. Cons: it does not have automatic focus; is not 1.5; does not have a bayonet attack; doesn't have jerky iris. Opinion: Very good lens to use per portrait. The M42 attachment makes it suitable to be used on all machine bodies with adapter. The only flaw is that you have to work in the manual, as for many other goals (leica, samyang and all vintage). So it's suitable for a slow and thought-out way of photographing, but it depends on how you're used to it. Not having the jerky diaphragm is very suitable for shooting videos, also and above all for the unmatched yield at the price you find. I have tried various models, with oil on the slats and not. They're fine. As usual if they have hard rings it is because they are vintage lenses and then: take them from a photoriparer that fixes them. sent on December 26, 2020 |
 | Jupiter 9 - 85mm f/2 Pros: Open yield; image quality for portraits; mr Bokeh; smooth diaphragm ring; 15 slats; M42 screw attack; it is a pleasure to use them; solid construction; light enough. Cons: it does not have automatic focus; is not 1.5; does not have a bayonet attack; doesn't have jerky iris. Opinion: Very good lens to use per portrait. The M42 attachment makes it suitable to be used on all machine bodies with adapter. The only flaw is that you have to work in the manual, as for many other goals (leica, samyang and all vintage). So it's suitable for a slow and thought-out way of photographing, but it depends on how you're used to it. Not having the jerky diaphragm is very suitable for shooting videos, also and above all for the unmatched yield at the price you find. I have tried various models, with oil on the slats and not. They're fine. As usual if they have hard rings it is because they are vintage lenses and then: take them from a photoriparer that fixes them. sent on December 26, 2020 |
 | Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC LD Pros: Light that does not come the rocky, stabilizer, excursion, general yield, blurry good, cost, practicality, for FF and Apsc Cons: Autofocus which is not like the Canon L series, does not weigh a ton. Opinion: I got to use this little Tamron gem on Canon 6D and on 40D. I must say that it was a pleasure given the excursion that allows you to capture an overwhelming amount of scenes. For street or for travel in my opinion give the maximum. It weighs less than a third of Canon's 28-300 L, the stabilizer is very good and then does not make the cliffhane bring it around for 4 or 5 hours. They did a nice job in tamron house ! According to what I could try, I consider it even better than the last version. On Apsc Canon, it becomes a 45-480. But it's also very good on full frame. In short: 550 grams compared to one kilo and six hundred of Canon all at hand and with a yield more than decent ! We just can't complain! I was very pleased ! Given its usability, its practicality and its general yield I can give it a near 9. sent on June 12, 2020 |
 | Canon 20D Pros: Robust, reliable, simple to use, rendered with good lenses and vintage lenses, lightweight raw files, colors, CCD sensor. Cons: A few mega pixels, it doesn't have all the commands of the latest, screen not usable to review photos. Few isos, so he doesn't take pictures in the dark. Opinion: Take it for fun. I started photographing with manual goalses and adapters. The yield with a few fifty 1.4 was more than satisfactory. Using manual targets and without af it forced me to take a different way of photographing than usual. It's a very robust machine. The lack of resolution obliges you to be very careful about what you frame and I have to say that it is a good exercise. I always shoot in raw and notice that good files come out (but not always), certainly nothing to do with the super heavy ones of the last releases but if you have a good eye and be careful there are some nice photos. I got very fond of it for various reasons: the first is that you don't have to be careful what you carry with you and then because it produces images that you didn't really expect. The fact that I have isos up to 3200 in H mode (and no more) I also find it a good exercise to photograph. I really like the grain it produces at high iso on black and white. Great for manual use with vintage lenses, great if you don't want to fill your hard drive, great if you know post produce. In a nutshell: I found it very funny. Be clear: photographed during the day and outdoors, or use very bright objects. One last thing: Having a small screen that doesn't allow you to review photos as accurately as on the latest machines forces you to worry more about the shot than the result on the screen. It takes you back a little bit to the old way of photographing and I think this is a good school. sent on February 16, 2020 |
 | Jupiter-37A 135mm f/3.5 Pros: Light, manageable, sharpness, blurred quality, colors, love at first sight, manual focus. Cons: Manual focus, it does not cost so much, it is not 1.2, it does not weigh much, it does not have the built-in lampshade, it does not make coffee. Opinion: Light lens, with great value for money. Although it is a 3.5 it very detaches the subject and makes a very good blur. He never let me down. If he has hard dials, bring him into assistance, but it's usually fine. The quality of the colors, the blurred and the sharpness in my opinion are great. It's a lens to have or to try, very fun even for the results. It can be adapted on all machine bodies given the M42 screw attack. sent on November 27, 2019 |
 | Jupiter 21M - 200mm f/4 Pros: Photo quality, sharpness, blurry. Low price compared to other very expensive lenses. Photo results. M42 attack that mounts with adapters on almost everything. Built-in lampshade. Filter diameter 58 mm . Cons: Absence of tripod attack and maybe only manual focus and weight, but to have excellent results, a little you have to suffer and it's worth it. Opinion: I own this wonderful lens that I used first with adapter on a fuji xm-1, then on canon and then on sony-minolta. The results, from my point of view, are excellent. It detaches the subject very much from the background and has a very pleasant bokeh. in a manual is really fun and if you don't have to do photo shoots or special things, it leaves you time to take more thoughtful and different photos from the ones everyone does. Of course, the lens and the photographer are two different things, but this also matters a lot ! The weight may be the only one against, but if you take another 200 mm of excellent workmanship, they will certainly not be feathers. The pleasure of shooting with a lens like this, with a unique character, is an experience to try ! sent on October 24, 2019 |
 | Tamron 80-210mm f/3.8-4 Pros: Sharpness, colors, bokeh, usability, it is said that it is also a bit macro. Manual focus. Adaptall 2 Cons: Maybe the weight is lower than the norm and so I don't find it against. Manual focus . Opinion: Goal taken for fun. Tried on Digital Fuji: first on xm1 and then on xt1 and that's really good. It has a sharpness and colors that I like a lot, even compared to more embediant and expensive optics. Also on Canon is a blast and on Sony Minolta as well. It was really a pleasant surprise. Considering that it is also an adaptall 2 and you can mount it wherever you want with the appropriate adapters, it allows you to use it on as many machine bodies as you want: analog and digital. sent on February 25, 2019 |
 | Zenit Helios MC 44M-7 58mm f/2.0 Pros: Sharpness, blurry, usability, soft dials Cons: it's not AF' is not 1.2' is not a zoom - hard dials (bring it from a repairing photo ) Opinion: I use it with manual M42 adapters. It has a frightening sharpness and multicoating treatment on the lenses. I really like it. Metal body. It's a fantastic lens for portraits if you use it on apsc and for street on full format. What about... if he has any flaws I bought him for those ! I think it's a very good lens and addictive like all Helios. ........... about the dials, which some complain about the hardness: the specimens must be checked by a photoreparator, or buy those that have already been checked, including dials. And then consider that they are slow of at least 50 years ago, but they are worth it ! sent on May 16, 2018 |
 | Fujifilm X-M1 Pros: Light, image quality, fast burst, iso hold, tilting display, focus points, beautiful aesthetically. Cons: It is small (often not a disadvantage) but can transform with hand grip, it does not have the viewfinder. Opinion: It has all the necessary requirements to be able to call it "camera" although at first glance, perhaps, it may not incite fear. The quality of the images with the right goals I prefer it also to those baked by my former canon 7d. "#ISO 100 to 25600." Black and white is very pleasant, already set quite well, does not need too many "post productions". It has many filters for images. On the high iso holds well, especially if you shoot in raw. For use with optics from 600 grams and up, I bought a fabulous metal hand grip, which allows you to transform the little one from Bruce Banner to the incredible Hulk ! I call it fabulous, because compared to the original (which I sold) it allows agile access to the battery and memory card, without having to disassemble it. Vote 9 sent on February 08, 2017 |
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
