|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Run66 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Run66  |
 | Nikon Z 35mm f/1.8 S Pros: Very sufficient sharpness from full aperture, very high sharpness from f/2.8, reduced weight, Min. focus distance, overall product quality. The Bokey is very beautiful in certain situations. The distortion is very well corrected (on Z6 iii). No focus breathing (for videographers). Cons: The price, it is obviously too expensive, that is its REAL flaw. Its light weight can sometimes be seen as a disadvantage*. Vignetting is present as well as moderate chromatic aberrations at full aperture. Opinion: What a lot of reviews I've read (sometimes bad) about this lens! I bought it to go with a Z6 III, especially in video mode, but also for group photos at weddings. First of all, let's get the price out of the way. Yes, it's too expensive, especially since it's only f/1.8. I suppose that's because of its optical formula... There are controversial opinions about its sharpness. It's criticized for being too sharp for portraits, and at the same time for being the least sharp lens in the Z f/1.8 series! For group photos, between f/2.8 and f/4, it's very sharp on a 24MPix camera! For a centered subject, from f/1.8 it's surgical in the center, and frankly not so bad on the edges. Some find its Bokeh insignificant, others find it very beautiful. In reality, as with any lens, you have to be very attentive to the combination of "plane value - subject distance - background distance + spot metering while preserving highlights" to obtain something very pleasant. For video, I consider that it does not present any Focus breathing, which is a great advantage if you frequently switch focal points. Distortion is very well corrected by the Z6iii. At full aperture vignetting is present, as well as chromatic aberrations (not too much). Its light weight will appeal to many people, not me because I like to feel something a little more balanced towards the front of the camera/lens combination. A matter of taste. Faced with the less expensive alternative of the Nikon Z 35mm f/1.4, I arbitrated against the f/1.4, because of the Minimum focus distance, the questionable sharpness of the f/1.4 at full aperture, and also because the f/1.4 does not seem to be a real 35mm (maybe a 37mm?). Maybe one day Nikon will grace us with a sublime 35mm f/1.2, in the meantime, the 35mm f/1.8 S does the job. Rating: 9. sent on August 07, 2024 |
 | Nikon Z6 III Pros: AF speed, stabilization efficiency, ergonomics of buttons AND access to internal functions, wealth of video modes, quality/price ratio, quality and diversity of colorimetry modes (Picture Control), extraordinary viewfinder, etc! Cons: The price could be a deterrent, BUT NOT for the level offered. No video copy to second memory card. Opinion: [Update 11.09.24 : Recent tests of the autofocus in video mode, with face detection and target lock, have given excellent results on a sprinter's training. This in lateral and frontal running. Update 18.09.24 : Feedback on the heating of the device in video mode: yes, just like for the Z8, high resolutions (4K+), especially in Raw mode, cause excessive heating of the device, especially on the memory card. On the other hand, I just finished a 12-hour wedding in 1080p and there, it does not heat much. These devices (Z6III like Z8/Z9), display breathtaking shooting performances, BUT you have to be careful not to record too long and interrupt the shots. For me, on this point, these are not video cameras of the level of a Black Magic for example.] First of all, my testimony must be understood by my specific need: wedding videography. (I work in duo with a photographer). So this device seduced me for its video offer. For the details of the CODECS, I let you look at all the possibilities, it's damn full! I associated it with the 35mm F/1.8 S while possibly waiting for the 1.2, so awaited. I've had it for less than a month, but already tested well, I wanted to give an opinion to help others in the decision. Let's skip the controversy (bashing?) concerning the "disappointing" dynamic range. In the real world, it doesn't weigh much. The increase in ISOs in video is excellent. What is most striking is the efficiency of the autofocus, which shortens the gap with Sony and Canon. Then, there is this extraordinary viewfinder, so good that I film the eye in the viewfinder while leaving the screen closed :) Then, the stabilization is sufficient for me, (still with the aim of the wedding video) to do without a stabilizer. It's great. By holding my elbows glued to my body, I can pan, tilt, without jolts. The ergonomics of the back face are so intuitive, that very quickly, it is possible to change settings, without ever taking your eye off the viewfinder. The adjustment of the options is also intuitive, although familiar to Nikonists. A word about the photography side: there is a price difference between the z6iii and the z6ii. For me the answer is simple: the difference is justified if you need better autofocus, excellent stabilization, or if you dream of being able to recover the second before a bird takes flight. Otherwise, the Z6ii, especially with its lower price, remains an excellent camera. Concerning the hesitation with a Z8 whose price is currently dropping, I would say that it is not my same category of camera, so it is a little unfair to compare them. In photo, the Z8 offers 45Mpix, I would take the Z8. In video needs, I would take the Z6iii... In conclusion: is it the best camera of all brands? Of course not! Sony and Canon have great options to claim. However, the Z6iii has something going for it: for its price, the possibilities offered make it a winner. sent on August 07, 2024 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 G ED Pros: General robustness (except the zoom ring), acceptable sharpness on sensors <= 16Mpix. Used market price. Cons: Heterogeneous quality depending on the focal lengths. Opinion: This is a patriarch that I acquired the year it was released. I worked with this object for years in events. Probably the weakest of the 14-24 / 24-70 / 70-200 triptych. With the progress of optics, our requirements push us to depreciate it in favor of modern lenses... however at the second-hand price <500€, it remains a good deal for the non-professional who needs a large aperture . That said, I ended up selling it. The reason is that as my experience progressed, I criticized it more and more for the distortions on the edges at 24mm (as well as the terrible chromatic aberrations at this focal length), also its lack of sharpness at 70mm. I ended up favoring the much better 35-50mm focal range. Finally, on D750 (24Mpix), I did not consider it to be up to modern competitors. In my opinion, it all depends on the price you get it for on the second-hand market... sent on January 26, 2024 |
 | Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.8 G ED Pros: Moderate distortion, excellent sharpness across the whole lens from f/4, chromatic aberrations contained, light weight. Cons: Price, but it's still €250 less than the Z version when it launched. Opinion: I'm rediscovering this lens that I've had for a while, but I would specifically like to talk about its use on APS-C, to obtain a 35mm equivalent, for which I have carried out numerous tests. To start, I had to compensate the AF at -20 on Nikon D500, but this is probably specific to my body (?). Moreover, once the AF was satisfactory, I tested the rendering of the lens at 1.5m, 2m, 5m, 7m, with a centered subject, then semi-off-center and finally off-center, at apertures f/2, f /2.8, f/4, f/5.6 and f/8 (more closed does not interest me for my use). I must affirm the astonishing similarity of my modest observations, with the results of the professional test of DXOMark on D500!!! On a centered subject, it's excellent from f/2. On the other hand, the result is disappointing (yet APS-C uses the center of the lens and its periphery) on the edges for an off-centre subject. The best rendering is obtained at f/5.6... Of course, on Full Frame (eg D750), the results are better everywhere, even at full aperture. Regarding its ergonomics, everything has been said here, I would simply add that the plastic aspect which is often criticized for the f/1.8 range, seems to me on the contrary a certain advantage for the weight... Finally, everything leads to believe that its Z version is even better, but also significantly more expensive :/ In conclusion, the idea of getting a 35mm mounted on APS-C did not quite convince me. I would rather reserve it for what it is made of: an excellent 24mm;) sent on August 16, 2023 |
 | Nikon AF-S 8-15mm f/3.5-4.5 E ED Fisheye Pros: + Incredible sharpness up to f / 16, still very acceptable up to f/22 or f/29. + Fisheye 8mm for circular, 14mm or 15mm for diagonal in a single lens. + The cap clings to the sun visor, it's practical not to dirty the front glass. Cons: ~ More Bi-focal lens than real zoom, but in my opinion, it does the job! - The lateral light gives flare. - The "Slip-on Front Lens Cap LC-K102" becomes embarrassing when you take it off. You no longer know where to put it. Opinion: This is the kind of preferred goal, beyond reason. As Diego Camorani tells us, we like it or hate it. Personally, this is the lens that inspires me the most ... BUT, very often, the scene that you would like to photograph is not suitable for a FishEye ... it is only specific to this lens, which at on the contrary, allows two solutions: the circular and the diagonal. I would like to say that the rating given by Juza users, for once, does not reflect reality. This lens is worth at least as much as its Canon counterpart ... or more. I recommend this article which, in my opinion, best corresponds to my experience in the field: https://www.lenstip.com/538.1-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_Fisheye_8-15_mm_f_3.5-4.5E_ED_review.html In conclusion, I absolutely do not regret my purchase, and I am not afraid to say that Nikon has put on the market an exceptional lens ... and it is rare enough to say it. sent on February 17, 2020 |
 | Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4 E PF ED VR Pros: Versatile, addictive, weight, sharpness. Cons: Noticeable drop in sharpness, combined with the Nikon TC-14E III in distances greater than 9m. Opinion: This lens is simply my favorite of all those I have used. It's not the best, but it's so convenient to use! I use it relentlessly since its purchase. On FX, it allows portrait and street events for details. On DX, it allows the sport and the animal. On DX + TC-14E III, it covers the birds, although a little short and it loses 1 Diaph. Regarding the sharpness, I would say that it depends on several factors. From 1m40 to 3m, in proxy mode, with or without TC-14E III, on FX or DX, it's "Razor Sharp". And it's amazing to be able to photograph flying insects with such ease. (see my gallery) From 3m to 9m, according to my many tests, it is excellent, but especially without the TC-14E III, because with, the loss of sharpness is in my opinion quite noticeable. From 9m to 25m (but this is only my experience in the field), it becomes more average, because I think the image is significantly degraded by the multiplier. At the infinite, even a castle in clear weather for example, with multiplier, I would be much more critical on the quality of the image rendered. Of course, an AF setting is to consider and can really make the difference. (for me: D500 + 300PF + TC -1.4 = +6 AF). In comparison, I think that the AF adjustment of the Sigma by the dock is much more interesting, because it takes into account at least 4 key distances (16 for a zoom). Regarding the stabilizer, I find it very effective until 1/200. But it depends on each photographer and his ability not to add unnecessary shaking. ;) In conclusion, I would say that I find it EXTRAORDINARY. However, if you want to photograph small birds, make sure you have an approach as discreet as possible, because mounted on DX with multiplier X1.4, it gives 630mm, fully usable freehand ... but it is a bit short :( sent on December 13, 2019 |
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
