|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Maurizio Angelin www.juzaphoto.com/p/MaurizioAngelin  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM Pros: Focal range, construction, optical qualities, Sony Italia warranty with extension also for lenses import Europe Cons: Missing diaphragm ring Opinion: What can I say? Today it is the only 12-24 f2.8 on the market and therefore represents THE state of the art of ultra wide-angle zooms. To consider in my evaluation two important factors: the first that reaches 12 mm (and we all know the design difficulty of "going down" from 14 mm to 12 mm) and the second that was put to the whip combining it with the A7r4 first and then the A7r5 (only ML FF with 61 Mpx sensor). With these bodies we are very close to the yield of "medium format" sensors and the combination, for a landscaper, is the best that can be obtained without switching to higher formats. The overall optical yield is simply spectacular, the center/edge rendering is unique, the distortion is negligible and becomes even more so considering its minimum focal length. https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=4242942 The AF, thanks also to the linear motors (another uniqueness in this range of focal lengths), is very fast (obviously there are differences depending on the body on which it is mounted). Those who preceded me have already said everything authoritatively about coma and flare, and in particular Matteo Bertetto. Price, size, weight and price I think are in line with the focal lengths covered and the construction level (you buy it import Europe for less than 2300 sesterces). For those who have Sony definitely a "must have". On the price I invite you to make this simple consideration to those who love ultra wide-angle focal lengths: cost of a 14-24 + cost of a 12 mm (which however does not reach f2.8) Vs cost of Sony 12-24 f2.8. I did not put among the "cons" the impossibility of mounting circular filters and stabilization because I think that demanding them from a 12 mm f2.8 is excessive. Finally, I find it relevant and appreciable that Sony Italia recognizes the warranty (and also its extension) to European import lenses. sent on May 28, 2023 |
 | Gitzo Mountaineer GT 3541 Pros: Very stable, lightweight, indisputable quality materials, five-year warranty, availability of spare parts if it is necessary to replace some component. Cons: Price. But it is a "con" to be "read" carefully because we are talking about products at the top of the category. Opinion: I landed in Gitzo (now I have three) after countless tripods that, despite being valid, always had "something that ....". Initially I thought their cost only partially justified but after trying one I bought two more. The construction is impeccable, the materials are of the highest quality, they are light but solid as rocks in short, they have all the characteristics that a professional tripod must have. This GT 3541 was the first and I can only recommend it "without ifs and buts". I used it first with a Benro GH-2 Gimball head and with my Nikon 500 mm and 200-400 superteles and then, after switching to Sony, with a carbon head and different bodies and different optics. It has always been up to the situation and, although today it is also superabundant (given the reduced weights of ml), I do not think I will part with it. I recently joined him for travel the Gitzo GK 1545T-RT Travel Legend. Another superlative product. sent on January 31, 2022 |
 | Nikon AF-S 200-400mm f/4 G ED VR Pros: Impeccable construction, brightness (and therefore multipliability), focus breathing among the best in the "supertele" zoom landscape. Cons: Yield over long distances Opinion: I have had almost all those that are called "supertele" (from 300mm on) but this is an optic from which it is difficult to separate due to its extreme versatility (today "lives" in my kit with the Nikon 500 f4 VR and with the 500 f5,6 PF). I have often used it also as a "macro-like" obtaining more than some satisfaction: https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=2222572 and https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=2222574&l=it. Its weaknesses are the yield to medium-long distances and the quality of its blurred which, by virtue of the number of lenses, is not comparable, especially in certain conditions, to that of a fixed of even focal but versatility involves the acceptance of some compromise. I often read that it is compared with various other optics such as The Sigma zoom, Tamron and often also with the Nikon 200-500. The latter I assure you that they play in another league. On yield with multipliers you should always consider that we are talking about a 24 elements (in 17 groups) and therefore I would not recommend to go beyond the TC17 even if my most popular shot in this forum was made with the TC20 https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=1055549. But in that case it was about virtue necessity. To those who complain about weight, I would point out that "weight" and "quality" go hand in hand. Anyone who would like to have further details about my experience with this view can contact me in private. As far as I can I'm at Vs. disposition sent on January 13, 2020 |
 | Nikon AF-S 200-400mm f/4 G ED VR II Pros: Construction, versatility, brightness (to be a zoom), minimum focusing distance Cons: Optical performance at medium and long distances, blurred Opinion: I joined the 500 F4 VR this zoom after selling the 300 F 2.8 Mk1 and I use it for a few years. The optical yield to medium and long distances leaves to be desired as well as the blurred but, given the focal length and the number of lenses, I would say that the thing is acceptable. It holds well the TC 14 and discretely the TC17. The TC20 would recommend it just "when you must" as a last resort. Its real strength is the versatility combined with a really good construction. I used it improperly also as "macro-like" and I was not sorry even in this capacity. If I had to choose between this and the 300 F 2.8 vrii I would be in strong doubt between the surrender of 300 (also with TC) and the versatility of the 200-400. sent on August 14, 2018 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR Pros: Speed ??and precision of autofocus (variable, of course, depending on coupled body), sharpness, VR, minimum focusing distance, focus lock buttons Cons: Legs stubbornly and inexplicably Nikon continues to disagree with the Arca Swiss attack Opinion: I claim that I come from 70-200 VR I (since the VR II version has never been interested in the "focus breathing"). As a result I found that optics have been improved for sharpness and microcontrol. It has a smaller CLB for the most open diaphragms and a more uniform yield between the center edges. Rn Reversing the ring (zoom and MAF) I do not think it can be a problem after a physiological "adaptation" period. Rn VR has been improved and provides performance Really remarkable (I also took 1/30 to 200mm with a subject of 1.5 m). It was the introduction of both the VR sport and the double option A / M and M / A of the AF.rnPerfetto the "restoration" of the Blockers of the MAF that inexplicably were suppressed in the VR II version as the containment of "focus breathing", which in the previous version was really exaggerated. The hood has been improved both in its shape and its engagement (even in reverse) ......One "Made in Japan" .rnThe price (I bought it at 2244 Euros not NITAL) seems all right. Rnrn At the moment I feel I do only a critique and concerns the tripod anchor leg: I do not really understand why Nikon is Obstinate not to provide legs with Arca Swiss.rn attack sent on June 21, 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
