|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Alvise72 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Alvise72  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony RX100 VI Pros: Compactness, lightness, customisation of nuts and buttons, speed of zoom response (using the ring nut), saving raw/JPEG/RAW + JPEG, folding display of 180 ° allows to compose very well the selfie, usable ISO800, gust High, charging via USB allows you not to be obliged to buy a second battery, AF very evolved for a compact and very fast and precise in normal light conditions, relatively bright lens, zoom 24-120, OLED LCD viewfinder simply Superb. Cons: Battery hard to compare with a reflex (it is my first compact, I have no terms of comparison with other), menu a little ' complex but it is normal for a camera evolved, price a little ' high. Opinion: 24-200mm equiv. It's really gorgeous on an almost pocket-sized camera because it covers all the needs of a travel photograph, with a 200mm sharpness above (my) expectations. I can assure you that at 200mm there is no need to close the diaphragm, at f/4.4 the sharpness is at its maximum potential. With regard to the battery you can not complain too much: using LCD and/or EVF with high frame rate you increase the consumption inevitably; Also I use it with pre-AF. Small machine that is in the pocket of the trousers implies small battery. And for lithium the electrical capacity is proportional to the size. Great to be able to load it via USB, even while you use it or while I download: with a USB cable charging sufficiently long you can keep a battery bank from a few euros in your pocket and triple the life of the camera. The sensor is excellent: even at ISO 800 on RAW files you can open shadows with Adobe Camera raw and recover high lights at levels of professional APS-C SLR. If it comes down in price I highly recommend (I took it in Switzerland because now I reside here, reconditioned with a good price and 2 years warranty), the cost reflects the state of the Art of electronics, image sensor and quality of the lens. sent on March 07, 2019 |
 | Nikon D810 Pros: 36 Megapixel without filter AA (razor sharp) with a completely new sensor (compared to D800 / 800E). Various sizes of crop Room. Wind gusts up to 7fps (with battery grip). Robustness, "feeling" really professional (especially when used with BG). AF of high level (same characteristics as the D750) Cons: ISO3200 very noisy, usable only with adequate lighting, but it is the normal price to pay for 36 mpx. Moire on fine details (caused by the absence of the filter AA) ... to be honest I do not even bother to. Opinion: Certainly the full-frame camera sharper (until you pass the ISO 1600-2500) I've ever provato.rnMolte interesting customizations such as: rn- crop in various formats, in the room, which in addition to progressively increase the barrage from 5 to 7fps, reduces the size of NEF crazy if individuals do not cover the entire framern- AF class professional: fast, accurate and highly customizable (like Nikon D750 for those who know) rn- electronic shutter for an absolute reduction of vibrations (LiveView + MirrorUP) rn- mirror extremely quieter than the D800, with softer sound and plasticosorn- The OLED display resolution is beautiful, looks very good in bright light (not at the level of super amoled Samsung ... but cmq is a big step forward) rn- large buffer for rafficarn- really appreciate the dual memory slot SD + CF to recover lost memories from any other body provengarn- say good for video, but I do not do ever so I can not testimoniarernrnTrovo useful recognitionAlkaline or NiMH batteries for BG ... now that I use it in order to have, when needed, 7fps on 1.5x crop, I find this feature useful, given that around with mixed types of pile.rnrnLa machine is very responsive on each operation It is a pleasure usarla.rnrnSe the photo is in sharp focus and if the ISO does not exceed 1,600, you can to crop at will! I say this from personal experience. And up to ISO3200, always with the images perfectly in focus and subjects not too small (that is described by a reasonable number of pixels, such as for example a sparrow that covers 3000x2000 = 6mpx) it is easy to clean up images with the standard software of noise reduction and get a detail with few rivals on mercato.rnrnSicuramente the sensor does not return the same quality of D750 ... but they're still 12mpx more. Nothing is given in the technology. Then a step 750 -> 810 probably makes little sense, but certainly by other bodies, we realize the considerable differenza.rn sent on December 16, 2015 |
 | Nikon D750 Pros: Image quality eccellente.rnDisplay high definition and tilting (great for when shooting low shot) .rnTropicalizzazione of everything (including, especially, the SDCard compartment that is often open and closed) .rnGrip nice rough and handle very "deep". rnVelocità CS remarkable (6.5fps nominal, but are slightly more) for an ISO 24Mpx.rnAlti very good (especially considering that they are 24Mpx, so pixels with very small and therefore less sensitive than those of a D4 for example). rnFilmati LiveView and up to date moderni.rnMessa focus with the new option GroupArea: that works very well with a single intrinsic defect; if you shoot a subject like a bird back fire will almost always be on your back rather than on the nose. This is not an error in the AF; is wanted, and then the GroupArea should be used with the head. Cons: WiFi "pointless" ... I certainly do not put it in the camera RAW download to your smartphone, and if I use a PC without a doubt the SD reader that any computer has. Instead of WiFi could put the GPS, certainly more useful for those who travel a lot with the camera, or they could put a buffer larger; a burst in RAW hard poco.rnJoystick relatively disappointing (small and not very accurate ... at least my) .rnNessuna innovation "shocking" in menù.rnIncredibile that '1/4000. The sea a few days ago (winter sun low but strong, light reflected from the sea as strong) I had forgotten the ISO setting to 400 ... and the portraits at f / 2.8, I often come "burned" by the impossibility of times short 1/4000. That said the NEF are still very recoverable of highlights and shadows. Opinion: Would repeat almost the same things the review of Alemat73, although I have not used just as intensely. The car I like, despite not having spared in "Against" ... and are not updated, but I do not think that there is an object in the competition compared to the same money, the momento.rnrnHo "measured" experimentally, with the exact conditions to outline its 3 stop less noise than the younger sister APS-C, the D7100 that I owned before this. The D7100 had incredible loudness up to ISO400, also due to the absence of the AA filter, but precisely from 800 ISO up the noise began to eat away the fine details. With 750 this obviously does not happen until 3200.rnrnALTAMENTE recommended! sent on January 18, 2015 |
 | Nikon D7100 Pros: Excellent detail (equivalent to over 40Mpx on FF). Autufocus of professional performance. Body robust and ergonomic. 7 fps in DX mode-1.3x (which offers a resolution of 15mpx still respectable). JPEGs are not processed well workable if the frame is well exposed. Of course, the risk of posterization is greater with only 8 bits deep. Cons: High noise and difficult to manage over 800 ISO (preferably in RAW, JPEG worse). Buffer poor in RAW (with SD card 633X, 95MB / s) reduces the duration of the burst. But for those who are satisfied JPEG (which works fine in 70% of cases), the burst becomes unlimited with a very fast SD (actually stops after 100 frames to preserve the system from overheating). Opinion: A great car for me, a modern and semi-professional body that is worth its price. No regrets so far. The noise is a problem when shooting in low light with a short time and you do not use the JPEG format. But if we think that they are less noisy 24mpx of 12mpx a D300s, there is not much to complain about, certainly for those who have an "old" D300 (s) the transition will surely give satisfaction. sent on February 02, 2014 |
 | Nikon AF-S 500mm f/4 D ED II Pros: Sharpness, AF speed and accuracy, cost used; favorably multiplier Cons: weight, lack of availability Opinion: I do not feel absolutely lack of VR (I had before the 300/2.8 vr), and these should always be used with super telephoto tripod or bean bag. It is a superb lens, in my opinion, especially since the loss of sharpness or with the original teleconverter compatible (I use the kenko pro 300 1.4x) is imperceptible. If you find it at a reasonable cost is a lens to have for photo hunting without thinking. sent on June 15, 2012 |
 | Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4x Pros: Price, possibility to put in cascade with other multipliers thanks to the absence of protruding parts (see for example the original nikon), loss of sharpness imperceptible closing soon as the diaphragm, possibility to use it also with old lenses mechanical (ie not AF-S) . Cons: mechanical play present already after a short period of use, but nothing incriminating for the structural integrity of the body + lens + multiplier. Opinion: An excellent compromise for those who do not want to spend much and for those who need to multiply old lenses do not AF-S (such as macro 60 2.8 / D or 80-200 2.8 / D or 300/2.8D AF). Clearly has excellent performance even with modern AF-S and I think the fall of sharpness compared to an original nikon (with which I compared it) is irrelevant. I have not encountered any loss of precision of focus, that was not already due to the loss of brightness by the multiplication factor. Recommended! sent on June 15, 2012 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G ED VR Pros: Speed ??'and quietness' AF, Sharpness already' at f/2.8, lightness, strength, VR effective. Cons: Window focus distance too "bottom" of the lens, lens hood mechanism fastening and 'easily damaged, tripod ring can not be removed completely (you can' just remove the bracket, but not the ring). Log dust over the years. Price of used a bit 'high after the marketing of the VR II version. Opinion: Superb lens, sharp, fast. No optical defect. At f / 4 and 'naturally more' clear that in 2.8, but the portraits to 2.8 are absolutely magnificent and perfect for printing. At photoshow 2011 in Milan I compared with the VR II and honestly I did not find a single reason to do the pass. Perhaps the VR2 and 'more' effective, but optically the VR1 and 'in my opinion indistinguishable. sent on October 10, 2011 |
 | Nikon D3 Pros: Robust, images of high quality, low noise at high ISO, high ergonomics (all control functionality within easy reach), AF professional, AF tracking reliable, long battery life, weight is not large compared to the size (hence a good handling with not heavy lens, photographer often with one hand when I mount lenses as a 24-70 or 50-ino, no problem), LCD "hard" resistant to scratches. Cons: Cost, poor display refresh during live view (not easy to manual focus in this situation). Opinion: The opinion is overwhelmingly positive. Is recommended for landscape / nature for sports and action. In nature an APS-C is preferred by many for most crop, but the quality of the files is noticeably worse (I compared D300s/d3100/d5000 and D3). On the other hand to make naturalistic nonetheless serve canvases long and the possibility of approaching the subject to take pictures "sensible", so at that point the advantage of 1 .5 x decays in front of the cleaning of a photo to ISO1600 which allows very short time for freeze the action. Without detracting from the D300s I've owned and I believe a car almost top of the range. sent on October 07, 2011 |
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
