|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
PuP www.juzaphoto.com/p/PuP  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Nikon Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR Pros: Construction, does not stretch, short rotation zoom ring from 180 to 600, sharpness at TA, quietness, price. Cons: Focus ring too far back, indecent case, obviously brightness. Opinion: I'm excited about what my needs are; I can't comment on bird chase shots, for example, because it's not my field. It seems to me that the AF is very fast, very quiet, sometimes it goes haywire on distant subjects with little contrast or with little light, it will be because of the bone of the Z7 and the limited maximum aperture. As for sharpness it seems very good from edge to edge at 45 MP, which also allows important crops. After 4 years of waiting (and I guess evaluations on the competition) Nikon has churned out a prosumer product with an excellent quality/price ratio, basically a revised and improved upgrade of the best seller 200-500, whose major flaws in my use were the elongation and rotation of the zoom ring, which now in 70 degrees and with a smooth movement goes from 180 to 600mm. It wields well, I carry it around holding it by the tripod mount and it doesn't have the heaviness of 200-500+ FTZ (or the Sigma Sport monster) that I was forced to use while waiting. The blur seems pleasant to me, I don't have that three-dimensional effect that a 300/2.8 or other "exotic" lenses give that not for nothing cost much more. Zero internal reflections even by pointing directly at the sun. For me it's a point of arrival not being able to afford more, I think it's undoubtedly the definitive choice among the "cheap" superzooms for Nikon mirrorless. Price and versatility of this zoom against the "character" and brightness of super fixed telephones... To each his own choice. Ah I said, the only flaw perhaps is the position of the manual focus ring, which makes the grip a bit unbalanced, but I can't complain and I'm not complaining. Finally, VR... I get a bit fluctuating results, in a burst sequence, but it's too early to give an opinion, it's still 600 mm to manage. I posted in my meager gallery some photos at 45 MP, without any sharpening in post, so they can be improved. Greetings to all. sent on September 12, 2023 |
 | Nikon Z TC-2.0x Pros: Sharpness and blur Cons: price Opinion: Tired of carrying around boulders like the Sigma Sport or the 200-500 Nikon, complete with monopod at least, I find myself for the umpteenth time with the unhealthy idea of duplicating a 70-200 / 2.8 Nikon to find a healthy compromise and get to 400 mm with the Z7 (read: either I lose weight or slim the kit, I chose the second). If I had not already had the 70-200 Z the alternative to evaluate would have been the 100-400 Z, the one that stretches, which does not suit me. But I would have had to give up the 70-200/2.8 which is the lens that I love most to use in its different versions since the late 80s. After reading many reviews and views test images, of which the most beautiful and convincing here on Juza, I decided to make the purchase of the Z TC 2x. It is not a painless purchase being the most expensive duplicator ever. (Actually, I think that the new TC 301 at the time cost more, proportionately). I have always been strongly disappointed by the 2x: TC 20E, EII, EIII on the 70-200 VR1 and VR2 I discarded them after the first bad shots (it may have to do with the maf fine, but we are talking about different SLR camera bodies). This time I was very worried and curious because many had rejected this combination. Already from the first test shots of buildings in the distance I appreciated the sharpness up to the edges (I speak of course at 400mm, the purpose was that) at full aperture, with the possibility of further wild crop. I did not find improvements by closing the aperture so I used it a lot at f / 5.6 precisely the maximum aperture: never seen a duplicator so good. I can't talk about the performance of AF for fast-moving subjects, I don't photograph birds, I'm in denial. I only say that the yield is above expectations: finally I have a relatively light and compact combo: logically the zoom ring remains the very familiar one of the 70-200 Z, much more comfortable than the cumbersome ring of the 200-500 or that of the Sigma that turns backwards! The other really positive thing is the yield of the blur that in my opinion remains pleasant as with the smooth 70-200. In short, I am satisfied with the purchase, I am very comfortable as handling, weight etc. When the 180-600 comes out I'll probably take that and the TC 2x I don't think will be usable (1200mm F/12.6???). sent on March 12, 2023 |
 | Nikon AF-S 58mm f/1.4 G Pros: It's a unique lens, a 105 in the body of a 58. It makes the photos magical. To try to believe. Cons: Difficult to calibrate it to TA; several aberrations in TA; field curvature; exosive price of the new; I ruined the inner edge by sticking the cap without looking (50 euros the spare). Plasticky. Opinion: I've had two years later and I've never been able to calibrate them well, using them on different machine bodies. It's my fault. I'd love to try them now on Z to see if front-back focus issues stop but I don't have them anymore. However, the photos I took with this lens are different from all the others, parameters that cannot be quantified with cold data come into play... You enter a new dimension. It is worth buying a used one, within 1000 euros, to try it taking into account the considerations of the users read so far, without going in search of what it is not, but on the contrary to enhance its peculiarities, and then possibly resell it at the same amount. The low light colors in the interior are incredible but it is obviously the yield of the blurry and the soft separation between focus and blurry areas that are its prerogative. I think only 200/2 is more satisfying but I wasn't lucky enough to prove it. I also had 85/1.4 and 105/1.4 much more precise and sharper at TA but this has from its greater angle of field that allows very particular set portraits. Special also the yield of the light points, in the evening, it is possible to distinguish the bulb in the lamppost, without halos. However, I do not like that towards the edges the out-of-focus lights become "cat's eyes". Very sharp from f/2 for those who also look for sharpness but at TA it is not a Sigma Art (which as far as I am concerned returns a very different bokeh). But the worst flaw I found was the heightened curvature of the field, so when I photographed a painting, for example, it didn't all come into focus, say, center and edges in focus and half-blurry, to "sombrero." I don't give a damn about photographing a painting with this lens, but if I had tot subjects lined up on the same floor they didn't all come into focus on me especially a short distance away, let's put a row of bottles. So I freaked out. For portraits with only one subject no problem. They freaked me out, but I read about this intrinsic feature of it. With distant and diaphragm subjects, the problem arises less. Every time I sold them to invest in optics more suited to my photographic genres, but every now and then, if I have to make a portrait, I feel orphaned by their magic. (1000 euros to use it every now and then I can not afford it). sent on November 03, 2020 |
 | Samyang MF 14mm f/2.8 RF/Z Pros: Born with Z graft Cons: Unjustified weight, distortion, no chip, price. Opinion: Personal opinion. In practice it is the classic Samyang 14/2.8 with all its known merits (sharpness and resistance to the flare) and defects (hallucinatory distortion), but without CPU, more cumbersome and much heavier: the weight is higher than the weight of the old FTZ. As you can see by looking closely at the presentation photos has no electrical contact. You work in stop-down, at the actual opening of the diaphragm that must be adjusted with its dial, without any information in the crosshairs on the value of diaphragm set. Nothing in the Exif. If the viewfinder were not electronic and did not compensate, closing the diaphragm would be increasingly dark and anyway in the evening it is very difficult to frame, you have to do it at 2.8 and then close to shoot (obviously looking at the numbers on the dial with a stack). It's not even cheap... Better to buy the old used at 200 euros, has the same optical scheme, weighs little and at least has the chip! This Samyang is not the best fallback solution to have a 14 mm on Nikon Z. And not even so cheap for what it (doesn't) give. Update: I sent it to a Finn and took that little gem of the 14-30 S in small installments. A whole other life! With a machine body of 3000 euros you can not skip on the optics... Now I can use both focus-stacking and 82mm filters and it's compact and light as a feather... sent on September 05, 2019 |
 | Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S Pros: Lightness, compactness, sharpness, silence and speed AF, price in kit Cons: Remember to extend it to use it, lampshade a little hard to insert/remove, eye to the outer diameter of the filters Opinion: I am very happy with the qualities already expressed in the other reviews. Switching from D850 with 24-70/2.8 VR to Z7 with 24-70/4 changes life without sacrificing image quality, indeed has an extraordinary sharpness. Over half a kilo less and compactness to be able to go around all day in fluency and giving less in the eye. Very quiet, even for videos. Customizable dier, very interesting. The blurry species at maximum extension in TA is nice soft, pleasant (not by sacred monsters like 58/1,4 and 85/1.4 to stay in similar focals but you can not ask for it) even the blurred light points are beautiful round up to the image edge. Of course getting to 105 would be better, but so much can be cropped to the far-fetched. I have problems with a circular polarizer that is slightly "chubby" and doesn't allow me to stick the lampshade in. If I try to apply the filter after putting the lampshade I have no room for my fingers to screw the filter. So be careful of the outer diameter of the filter, try it out first. As negative notes, the construction looks plastic, I think at the slightest blow the helicoid is dislocated. It's compact when at rest, but having to extend it to make it operational is a nuisance both because there's always a message in the crosshairs to remind you that you're distracted or because at rest it doesn't allow you to set anything up. sent on May 08, 2019 |
 | Nikon Z7 Pros: Functions and image quality of the D850; MAF points almost to the edges; directly in the scene magnification viewfinder, full menus, review shots with data and histograms, video shooting, level, shooting in full-viewfinder DX format; enviable lightness; possibility of totally silent shooting; 9 fps; end front-back focus issues; infinite customizations for those who have the time and disposition to deepen them. Full compatibility with SU-800 and old-fashioned flashes. Native stellar optics. U1 U2 U3 ways to customize. Adjustable touch display. Cons: It requires a long apprenticeship and unprecedented precautions for those who were used to SLRs. Poor battery life. Buttons not found without detaching the eye from the viewfinder. AF ways a lot to study. Sensor more exposed to dust. One memory slot. Expensive native optics, seriously delayed, lack super canvases. Ais optical compatibility and limited AF compared to the same range SLRs. Battery grip without vertical shutter button. Electronic viewfinder with an unnatural vision and that darkens on the most beautiful. Opinion: UPDATED November 2020 - Switching from one DSLR to another is a manageable thing, switching from reflex to this mirrorless turns out to be more complicated, you have to arm yourself with a lot of patience. The image quality is the same as the D850, never seen the infamous banding. FANTASTIC for thoughtful photos, portraits, landscapes, now with the new firmware I found improvements in the AF for pursuit that was my crutch. We have to take our hand! Three merits in addition to the known ones: 1) the level in the crosshairs, I who always take crooked photos. Nothing to do with the invisible darts of the SLRs. But it is all too cumbersome 2) When I decide to shoot in DX (19.5 MP) or other reduced formats I have the image in full viewfinder, infinitely better than the square in the viewfinder of the SLRs. I kind of have two cars in one. But it's easy to forget to go back to FX... 3) In the crosshairs I have the focus peaking and I can zoom in a lot to check the focus: obviously with long canvases it takes a support or it vibrates everything and it is useless. The sensitivity of focus peaking must be adjusted from time to time, otherwise working with a wide angle with large PDC you find the entire colored scene. Some negative things: 1) think about reviving ai and ais manual optics, maybe super canvases, adding the stabilization of the machine body seems very tempting, but there is one aspect that spoils everything: with the FTZ adapter and ais manual optics not equipped with CPU (in practice all but 500/4 P and 45 P) you work in stop-down as if it were a Russian REFLEX 70s! The viewfinder is brilliant with the sun but in the evening you have to frame ta and close the diaphragm at the time of shooting without seeing the value in the viewfinder. Exifs record only the maximum opening of the goal. Compatibility with old optics is therefore more limited than with dSLRs of the same range. With AF and AFD you also lose autofocus, as on entry level SLRs. Avoid Samyang S, they don't have the chip and weigh more than the reflex versions with the chip! 2) If you forget the photo/movie selector on movies and start taking photos again, even from the viewfinder, you take the video resolution without noticing it. Remember to move the selector, which on the SLRs did not prevent you from taking full-resolution photos from the viewfinder even on the video position. 3) The battery lasts really little even with the use of the viewfinder only. Good thing I have 3 batteries. 4) Factory is set to go on standby shooting after 30 seconds, after which the camera to wake up takes an abundant second! Better to increase time, however, it consumes more battery: targets continue to seal in AFC. And anyway the viewfinder darkens in half, before going off, always at the moment you need! 5) In my inability, most of the buttons are untraceable without taking your eye off the viewfinder and going in search. That's a lot. They are configurable, but you have to be polyps and have good memory! Tutorial by the legendary Morten Hilmer from the minute 6.00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-3Vopb_sAU Otherwise you have to press "i" and move in the menu without taking your eye off the viewfinder. The viewfinder: (given that I hate electronic vision, it does not reflect the scene in front of me) by default when you move the eye away from the viewfinder the display takes over and vice versa, so if with the display facing up a finger approaches the viewfinder the display turns off; resolves this by changing mode with the button to the left of the viewfinder. The modes can be limited by menu, if there are too many. On U1 U2 and U3 I saved three complex settings for action, landscapes, portraits... Too bad that the single or burst shooting mode is not memorized but always remains the last set. Instead you have to save each time on U1, U2, U3 the name you give to the files. Now I have 14-30/4, 24-70/4, 70-200/2.8 and I'm waiting for a super canvas. sent on May 02, 2019 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 E ED VR Pros: Construction, speed and accuracy AF, versatility as focal, VR that was missing. Cons: Weight, weight, weight, dimensions, filter diameter, price of the new. Opinion: I've landed for a year at this mammoth goal. Mastodontic as 24-70, relative to my practical use, as I consider the standard optics handyman, priceless, that you take away and do almost everything, helping you with the crop of D850. It is true that it replaces several fixed optics, which also were those read from F/1.8 more would weigh as total sum, in the backpack. But when you graft it on a body that is already heavy, maybe with the grip, it seems to go around with a stone in the neck, or on the shoulder. It is longer, wider and heavier than the previous. The filter diameter is no longer 77 as the 16-35, the previous 24-70, the 70-200, the various 300/4, 85/1.4 etc. becomes 82, like the Magnificent 105/1.4 (here's a childish excuse to buy that as well, which I did). The hood remains attached to the outside of the barrel, while the lenses advance and retract: at 24 mm the lens hood protrudes the minimum, only a few cm... Beyond the complaints, I consider the optical handyman definitive, because it has features from "Pro" obvious: first of all a lightning fast that makes pale many fixed. Then obviously the solid construction, the helicoid of the zoom without uncertainties, the lens hood hooked around that will break down in case of impact saving the optics (it happened to me, 50 euro new), even if it is a bit ' cumbersome. As an optical rendering it seems homogeneous. I got it used because the previous 24-70 after 10 years was giving signs of mechanical failure, otherwise at full price I would not buy it certainly, since the old is at 900 (being very careful of the zoom ring that does not imdot). To consider in this new version the advantage of the VR, especially with many megapixels, when the risk of the blur is great, both in the photograph taken on the fly on some moving medium, in situations of low light or deliberately slow times. It is not a review by technician, which are not, simply my practical impression in the use. I forgot: good bokeh conforming to the background, not comparable to fixed by portrait I had and not even at 70-200 at 70mm. But you can't ask him. Anyway, it's got a circular diaphragm. Ah already, a lot of sticker at 2.8 but it corrects with a click, if not like. sent on September 07, 2018 |
 | Nikon AF-S Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 E ED VR Pros: Price, construction, sharpness, VR, versatility, Nikon brand Cons: AF, weight, detachable bracket but remain protruding screws, rotation of the zoom ring, elongation Opinion: I had this lens on D800, D810 and on D850. I Can tell from old Nikonista that it is a dream that is realized, at least on paper: Finally an affordable super tele, at maximum fixed opening, with a stunning VR, from home Nikon so perfectly compatible with its SLR cameras. The Optical Quality Considering the price is more than satisfactory, just a little of sharpening species at 500 mm at TA. Even with the TC14 you bring home the photo at the level of sharpness, with some problems for the AF that is even more DMVs. With the TC20 better leave it alone. I do Not do avifauna however the slowness of the AF compared to 70-200/2.8 is evident as well as the difficulty in low light being an F/5.6. It is beautiful, apart from the hood so plasticky and cumbersome, but also has the function of protection: In case of fall would disintegrate the lens hood, coaxial, without transmitting the impact to the barrel. Some replace it with a metal lens hood screwed to the filter ring: If it bangs, the big damage is safe. The things I didn't like, apart from the weight, are the obscene elongation which reaches 500 mm, the slow zooming, in the sense that you have to turn both the ring to go from 200 to 500: On a foreign forum I read the idea of using the zoom as it was to pump , you take it to the front lens and you pull it back and forth. Maybe it's the best way to break it down so I wouldn't trust it! Then I do not like that removing the large bracket to save on weight remain horrendous protruding screws exposed. Of the bag I don't care about anything so I keep it in my backpack. In case of photographic exits a short distance from the car is ideal, but for long trekking, in the backpack together with some other boulder of the Triad 2.8, becomes challenging, at least for me. You Have to leave something at home (which of course will prove the wrong choice). You Will get sharp photos freehand even with times unthinkable thanks to a very effective VR. Definitely has great value for money, not typical of Nikon, it is very versatile as focal, although the maximum aperture restricts it. sent on January 24, 2018 |
 | Nikon F3 Pros: Robustness, well-arranged controls, pentaprism and interchangeable MF slides, ease of use. Cons: One mechanical emergency time, display system, diaphragm number lighting. It induces you to collect your splendid goals. Opinion: Used continuously from 1993 to 2006, now kept fondly in the closet, but I count on going back to being black and white when I have time. Slides is enough. Aesthetically beautiful machine, sturdy, all metal like its eternal optics, I have the HP version with MD-4 engine that weighs it down a little bit. Paid in his second-hand time two and a half million with the engine. What to say, I used it more exposing with experience than using its spartan expometer, but it was nice to work like that, it was nice also to focus calmly, make reasoned photos, adjust times and diaphragms with the guineas. He accompanied me around Europe, often loaded in black and white at all sensitivities up to 3200 ASA pulled up to 12800... His flaws reside in the display meter, with those references - poor enough: other reflexes had a list of times in the crosshairs and you could see how many stops you were out in the manual exposure, but as I said I exposed with the rule of F16 in manual and few sometimes I was wrong. Another flaw is the ridiculous button to illuminate with a dim light the number of the diaphragm on the lens, which was then bounced in the crosshairs. Then, in case of a spent stack (which caused scandalization of users in the 80s, accustomed to mechanical reflexes, while now without electricity would no longer work) the shutter snaps with an auxiliary button only at 1/90th of a second. The FM2, for example, was completely mechanical, the stack was only used for the display meter. It was said that the LCD with the " - would run out with the years. Mine still goes. Of course, you had to remember to turn the engine on and off, which gave an ergonomic grip with another more advanced shutter button. There was no vertical shutter button. Curious that by detaching the pentaprism you could, holding the reflex upside down above the head, frame directly on the screen of fiuoco, on inverted sides, and anyway there were very particular pentaprisms similar to a modern display... Who knows how many photojournalists in the crowd will have used this pioneering method. You could buy focus slides of all kinds, with rings of microprisms and broken image that worked with bright optics, otherwise different slides "smooth" for canvases. Regarding the flash, due to the interchangeable pentaprism, to attach it on the reflex it takes a small coasic adapter to the rewind stick on the right. The engine allowed sequential shots at about 4 fps, conforming to the charge of the 8 stylus stacks, which lasted several rolls. The engine quickly rewinded the film, which could save tens of seconds. I've been writing from memory, I haven't used it for 11 years, I could do something wrong. Of course, when the Df came out, I had some temptation to go back to the essence... It means choice of times, diaphragms, manual focus, fixed ISOs and nothing else to set. If I think that every time I turn on the Z7 I find something out of place I cry. sent on June 01, 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
