|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Maxqarl www.juzaphoto.com/p/Maxqarl  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness and optical quality in general, excellent construction, quiet and precise auto focus, great price for what you get Cons: Weight, but given the quality optics would stop even if it weighed three times Opinion: Optical spectacular, the best drive I've ever had. Sharp even wide open, almost total absence of longitudinal and lateral chromatic aberrations, distortion does not exist, a truly fantastic goal. At the level of sharpness of D800, wide open, equivalent to the Nikon 50 1.4 G (who also own) to about f / 2.5 / 2.8. Compared to the latter, and could not believe my eyes given the reputation of the Sigma lenses, is faster and far more precise and consistent nell'autofocus. Buying it knew that the optical quality was excellent, and I was ready to compromise with the quality of autofocus, which famously gives problems on optical third party - I even its predecessor, the 50 1.4 HSM, Canon and l ' inconsistency was pretty obvious. Instead autofocus does its job perfectly, I have more shots to fire with the Nikon counterpart. I also bought the dock of the Sigma, but I did not need to use it: the aim was suffering from a slight back focus, but with micro-adjustment in the camera body fell into place in all distanza.rnLa quality of the bokeh is very good, although not the softest I've ever seen is not nervous at all and is very godibile.rnIl weight It is perhaps the only downside of this lens, but has an optical diagram so complex and full of items that I doubt you could do much better. On the other hand, the build quality is really good, it's all built with metal and plastic of high quality. Monta filters 77, one of the most common measures for the professional lenses, and to facilitate cleaning and avoid damage I immediately mounted a filter Hoya Protector HD.rnIn conclusion I must say that the Sigma has exceeded my wildest expectations with this lens, and for sure I will consider the purchase of other optical Art in the future. If he came out something longer always the series Art, like a 85 or a 135, I think I would buy it with your eyes closed. sent on December 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.8 G Pros: Exceptional sharpness, perfectly usable even at full aperture, quality focus, excellent contrast, accurate focusing, light, not too expensive Cons: Longitudinal chromatic aberration at wide apertures, poor resistance to flare Opinion: A lens from portrait really fantastic, perfectly holds the sensor resolution of the D800. For best results it is absolutely perfect close to f / 2.2, but already at full aperture is really good. The focus will not miss a beat. It is a lens so good that I do not know what to add. rnGli only flaws are the longitudinal chromatic aberration (which unfortunately is present in almost all fixed very bright) and little resistance to flare, which however is offset easily by using the lens hood. In addition to the lens hood it is included a soft bag for transport. The minimum focusing distance has never been a problem for my use, and in any case is in line with the competition - ALL 85mm Canon or Nikon's recent production have at least 80 cm of minimum distance of focus, the Canon 85 1.2 has even 95 cm and no one complains ... sent on June 03, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G Pros: Sharpness from f / 2 up, good focus, light and compact, great price Cons: Sharpness wide open enough (on D800), longitudinal chromatic aberrations, vignetting pronounced (as almost all fixed light on full-frame), visible distortion in critical situations Opinion: Overall good optics, with a classic design and built without the use of particular technologies, such as aspherical elements or nano-crystal coating.rnA wide open, with the resolution of the D800 and examining the files of 100%, the yield is not exactly the best, but just turn a bit 'and improves. From f / 2.8 up is very sharp, but already at f / 2 it is more than usable. It comes with the lens hood and a bag of tessuto.rnrnVisto I own both the Nikkor lenses can compare with the Sigma 50 1.4 (not art): the sharpness in the center at full aperture is a bit 'better on the Sigma, the corners instead wins the Nikkor. Longitudinal chromatic aberration are both showy but easier to correct the Nikon and the Nikkor autofocus is more reliable. The bokeh of the Sigma I find it more soft and then, to my taste, the better. Resistance to flare in Sigma is best, but if you use the lens hood also Nikkor has no particular problems. Overall I would say that it is uNo tie, but for practical use still I prefer the Nikkor, because of the greater consistency of yield due to autofocus a bit 'more precisely. sent on June 03, 2015 |
 | Samsung NX500 Pros: Good quality sensor, good ergonomics, optics (at least some) with an excellent value for money, 4k video, pretty responsive autofocus Cons: Croppati 4k video (see below), no microphone, no possibility of connecting external microphone, optical park limited Opinion: I took it because I needed to shoot some video in 4k ... The picture quality is definitely very good, the (unfortunately few) optics are very good and some very cheap in relation to yield (I took the 30 f / 2 200 euro and I'm very satisfied). rnIl 16-50 in the kit is stabilized and works well, to be a view kit has the advantage of being quite wide (16mm - 25mm equivalent of about FF) rnIl sensor is performing, apparently has no anti-aliasing filter and the recovery of lights and shadows in effect is good. rnDetto this, the noise in general (not counting the recovery) is not anything fancy, personally I would have preferred some megapixel less and less noise, but the market trend is unfortunately rnrnL'ergonomia ... this is good and the display touch- screen is responsive and bright, unfortunately it lacks the ability to connect an electronic viewfinder esterno.rnrnL'autofocus is responsive enough for a compact, usually functionalna well but has problems in situations with more contrast (eg. portrait with a window behind) .rnrnLe video functions are few but more than sufficient, unfortunately lacks the audio input for a microphone esterno.rnOcchio that, unlike the NX1, turns 4k video mapping the central portion of the sensor 1: 1: then the multiplication ratio of the focal must be increased by 1.7x over all'1.6x sensor APS-C. In practice, a 30mm angle of view similar to a 80mm on full frame. The codec used is H.265, you need to download it to view video.rn sent on May 26, 2015 |
 | Canon 450D Pros: Sharpness excellent, well-arranged controls, weight, good battery life Cons: Sound a bit 'high especially in the shadows, the limit of ISO 1600, but large display resolution is too low, not excellent quality Jpeg Opinion: It was my first SLR, new intake several years ago. I've always found it very well, and I still use now as a tourist machine, although he also holds a D800 and a 5D Mark II, because coupled to optical ef-s is very leggera.rnrnDi followed a series of considerations derived from several years of Use: rnrn-The sharpness is very good (the antialiasing filter I think is particularly light) rn-The controls are well laid out, personally I find it very well organized and easy to use, but maybe it's just because I own for so many years. rn-The main problem in terms of picture quality is the sound of shadows, tall enough, but frankly it is a common fault for sensors Canon. rn-not being able to go beyond ISO 1600 is sometimes frustrating, the 3200 would graditi.rn-Battery life is very good, and years later still lasts about the same as when I bought it. rn-The display resolution is quite low, it is hard to see thesharpness of images magnified 100% rn-Sometimes the machine tends to underexpose, I keep calibrated default to +2/3 stop of exposure, so even if I overexpose slightly more margin to recover ombrern-The quality of jpeg is quite poor, I suggest taking in rawrn-At high ISO the machine is quite noisy, but the quality of the grain (shooting in Raw) is very good and not annoying, always if you do not pretend to retrieve too many details in ombrern-Balance White is not always accurate, especially in internirn-The highlight recovery in raw, unlike the shadows, is very buonornrnTutto all I am still satisfied with this Reflex, so much so that I have not yet replaced with an APS-C latest . The real added value is the quality of Canon lenses, especially the f-s that are usually sharp and light to carry. Especially considering the very low price at which it is now, I can only recommend their purchase, especially to usersthe beginners who want to test the functionality of an SLR "true". sent on February 14, 2015 |
 | Nikon D800 Pros: Image quality, noise content than the resolution, excellent possibility of recouping the shadows from RAW, excellent management automatic ISO, good quality of the camera body, good autofocus system with integrated illuminator Cons: Improved ergonomics, the presets are not "be frozen" and do not include autofocus settings, improved battery autonomy Opinion: A fantastic car, shame about the layout of the controls in my opinion a bit 'less intuitive than Canon and for the management of the presets, which are not "be frozen" - if you make some changes to the parameters during shooting, the next use or recall of presets are changed. Otherwise it's really hard to ask for better, the image quality autofocus is perfect. Excellent chance to management of automatic ISO and shutter speeds, for example, you can tell the machine to keep a minimum shutter speed twice the inverse of the focal length that you are using. Also good management of the flash, the iTTL system is very effective in balancing the exposure of the subject from the background, and the automatic management of the ISO works fine even with the flash attached. Very handy illuminator integrated in the camera body, allowing you to focus even in total darkness. Ultimately a car highly recommended, but ifyou want to quickly change the shooting settings and prefer the "total recall" for presets I recommend you find your way on other bodies macchina.rnEdit: after many thousands of shots I would add that it is very difficult to exploit the resolution of the sensor with optical light if diaframmando not a bit '. 85 1.8 G Nikkor center makes good from f / 2.5 up, 50 G 1.4 to f / 2.8 up ... well, if you want to take a very open diaphragms hardly sfrutterete fully effective resolution of the sensor. I would also add that, in the studio shooting apertures (usually around f / 8), the image quality is very high and I never had problems with moiré (and this is why I took the D800 and the D810 or D800E that does not have the anti-aliasing filter). sent on December 29, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro Pros: Price, micro-great, low weight, no distortion, a few aberrations, blurred good wide open Cons: Autofocus noisy, difficulty focusing in low light and high contrast, lack of full time manual focus, lack of focus limiter, quite visible vignetting on full frame Opinion: Although the long list of counter viewpoint may seem flawed is my favorite lens, I keep it installed by default on 5D2. Compared to the 100 Macro optical quality and autofocus are slightly lower, but compared to other economic house 50 Canon (50 1.8 and 50 1.4) looks good at all, and I find the quality of blurred wide open better. The real benefit of this perspective is the ability to get close to the very subject, with the other 50 I find it really annoying the "block" to 45 centimeters, I find it limiting the possibility of framing. I hope the Canon update this model (the project in 1987), he did a USM version with the same optical quality would purchase the doubt. sent on April 02, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: Effective stabilization, range of focal lengths, excellent build quality Cons: Resistance to flare, autofocus sometimes inaccurate, 24mm distortion, lateral chromatic aberration at the extremes of the focal Opinion: The contrast is lowered substantially by using the lens in the studio with the compacts, even quite poor resistance to flare outdoors. The autofocus is fast and quiet but inaccurate when lighting conditions are not optimal, indoors very often wrong focus (on 5D Mark II): things improve in external and generally in a good light. When focusing, however, the sharpness is good. The lateral chromatic aberration can be seen at the extremes of the zoom range, 24mm is significant distortion, vignetting at full aperture is visible (on FF). However, the optical quality is not perfect in my opinion is understandable if we consider the price of the lens in relation to the range of focal lengths, the build quality really excellent, the stabilization system and ring-type USM autofocus, all of which individually affect certainly significantly on the final cost of optics. sent on July 03, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Pros: Sharpness, autofocus ring-type USM, no distortion, quality / price ratio Cons: Visible vignetting wide open on FF, not rounded diaphragm blades, bokeh neutral but not fantastic Opinion: Excellent optics, excellent for portraits at room temperature and for product photography in the studio. Construction very good for the price range. For a longer focal length macro advice, especially on FF. Excellent precision AF system. If you want a very versatile lens is the right choice, but if you want a specific lens for portraits in the same price range I would recommend the Canon EF 100mm f / 2 sent on July 03, 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
