|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Gian1940 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Gian1940  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Viltrox AF 85mm f/1.8 II Pros: I confirm all the positive things that others have already said. Cons: Light vignetting easily eliminated. Hood: in an inverted position it is not possible to block, while in operation it does not create problems. Opinion: Combined with Z6 and taken from Foto Colombo at a very advantageous price with an official 2-year warranty. Feeling of solidity and well finished; to be confirmed over time. Compared with Nikon 85mm f/1.8G, even at T.A., I did not perceive any differences visible to the eye, except for the aforementioned modest vignetting. It costs about 1/3 of the original Z series, but it is to be purchased first of all for the excellent overall performance. Obviously the classic quality/price ratio is unbeatable. Without a doubt vote 10. sent on April 08, 2022 |
 | Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR Pros: Focal range - compactness - weight - sharpness - no distortion at 24 mm. Cons: Low brightness is known, but it is good to know that it is already at 50mm (f/5.6). Opinion: Higher than expected, and to think that I was very doubtful for an "all-rounder" with a similar range of focal points. From a comparison (coarse) with Nikon 70-200 f/4 at 200mm and f/11 I did not detect appreciable differences. These emerge - measuredly - always at 200mm and f/6.3, after cutting out a lot and zooming in significantly. Before we unbalance the high price - however not cheap - it is essential to prove it. The only possible drawback is..... not to take it off almost ever, at the expense of more suitable optics in certain circumstances. Always keep in your bag. Grade 9.7 (rounded to 10). sent on February 17, 2021 |
 | Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD Pros: I add myself to the majority: valid incisiveness - weight contained (without ring) - sense of solidity - unreachable value for money - guarantee. Cons: Reduced brightness and ring not included: see "opinion". Opinion: As for the reduced brightness, compared to the original optics the difference is modest: 6.3 vs. 5.6 to 400mm. As for the ring, I took an alternative cost of 40 euros, so less than 1/3 of the original, from which it has just nothing to send. Add that it is easily removable. My rating (9) rises to 9.5 if you take into account the excellent value for money. sent on August 29, 2020 |
 | Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 II DG HSM Pros: Focal range-weight-accurate construction-excellent value for money Cons: Flare. Opinion: Also advised to those who do not have problems with wallets, but can not afford to put in the bag a tool (even focal but brighter) that weighs almost double. The sharpness is pretty good. The reduced brightness is not a problem if you use it for the landscape, where-usually-you diaphragm looking for greater depth of field. Bought online at €450.00, but with no doubt value guarantee. Rated 9 (8 to glass and 10 at price/weight/focal range). P.S. the inability to use screw filters covers all wide angles for F.F. less than 15 mm and should be long-time, so it is a defect that is superfluous to report. sent on August 30, 2018 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR Pros: In agreement with the opinions expressed by those who preceded me. Cons: Focus breathing (see below) - price. Opinion: In confirming everything positive has already been said, I must note that the focus breathing was (perhaps) reduced but not eliminated compared to the previous version. I was able to detect it - in an empirical way - from a comparison made at the minimum and maximum focal distance with the "little brother" 70-200 f / 4, that the problem does not have it or is modest. I can not quantify it, but the difference is obvious. As for the comparison (quality / price) with the competition, everyone draws his conclusions. sent on November 29, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-P DX 10-20mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Pros: 72 mm filters. - Minimum weight - great value for money - range of focals. Cons: VR can be turned on and off not on all models (on D500 it is ok). Opinion: Vignette and distortion (sea horizon) irrelevant. Satisfactory sharpness. Thanks to VR made perfect shots with 1/3 sec. Structure (including the attack) in polycarbonate, so it will horrinate lovers of "metal". THE comparison with Nikon 10-24 mm. DX is inevitable. In favor of the optics under consideration: price less than half - weight halved - VR. Cons: reduced focal range - less brightness - construction. The valuation (9.6) obviously also takes into account the price. sent on September 20, 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
