|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Ivan.pirina www.juzaphoto.com/p/Ivan.pirina  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Leica Macro-Elmar-M 90mm f/4 Pros: Size, weight, sharpness, RR (with macro-adapter) Cons: F4, bulky lens hood Opinion: A 90mm as big as a 35 f2 thanks to the retractable capacity, very light and sharp to be scary from corner to corner. It is the ideal travel companion to cover the canvas side when you want to minimize weight and dimensions without sacrificing maximum quality. The construction is on par with the other lenses in the M series, so without any compromise with smooth rings that are pleasant to focus. It's not very bright and at night you may need to raise the ISO quite a bit, especially on demanding sensor bodies like the m10-r or m11. The lens hood is almost as bulky as the lens, but can be attached in reverse to reduce space during transport. There are two types of macro-adapters that allow you to reach the RR of 1:2 reaching a minimum distance of maf of 50cm, one with goggles to also use the rangefinder (I own this) and one without with a slightly smaller footprint, but with the obligation to work in LV. The ratio of 1:2 is certainly not extreme, but it allows you to do macros that are not pushed with the M system. Personally I find this lens one of the most useful in a rangefinder kit, as it can be used for portraits, details and macros, with really low weights and dimensions. sent on September 04, 2024 |
 | Leica Summilux-M 75mm f/1.4 Pros: Chromie, sharpness when apertured, blurred at wide apertures Cons: With the lens hood engaged, it partially obstructs the viewfinder Opinion: CA-PO-LA-VO-RO... The portrait medium canvas par excellence on the M. At full aperture it is a brush that in expert hands paints with unique colors, associating one of the best desirable blurs; Diaphragm is a razor, a feature that allows it to be very valid even in landscaping and street. The build quality is at the highest level, as you might expect from Leica. My version (I) has the lens hood detached from the barrel and shares it with the Noctilux f/1.0 (a positive aspect if you own both lenses, given the not exactly cheap cost of this fundamental accessory). The price is high, but if purchased well it can be resold without too much difficulty without losing us... assuming that you want to get rid of it (which is not a given). sent on August 28, 2024 |
 | Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 Pros: Focal range, size, weight. Cons: Plasticaceous materials, price, absence of tropicalization, delicate. Opinion: I had it for a few years, but I never managed to please me; It looks like a kit lens of the entry level APS-C given the materials with which it is made. The sharpness is excellent in the center, but mediocre at the edges, so either you settle or you crop. It lacks tropicalization and in a lens that uses in landscaping I find it a huge flaw. I do not know if it can depend on this absence, but I read that several specimens (including mine) have presented the problem of the flat cable, making the lens usable only between 9 and 14mm, with the other focal lengths the camera body goes into error and you have to turn off and on again; The repair is not cheap, unless you are able to perform it yourself. I resold it at a price given the problem. sent on May 14, 2023 |
 | Leica APO-Summicron-M 35mm f/2 ASPH Pros: Sharpness, compactness, build quality. Cons: Cost Opinion: Noble cousin of the apo-summicron 50mm is a lens with frightening sharpness from corner to angle, especially when associated with the M10-r or Monochrom. The build quality is at the highest levels, like any M lens for that matter, but this allows the maf even at shorter distances than the canonical 70cm of the rangefinder; clearly it focuses using the LV. It is not an indispensable lens in a photographic kit, far from it, in fact the summicron asph has more sharpness than we can use at a fraction of the cost; Personally I took it used mainly as an investment and given the extreme difficulty to find a specimen I am sure that over time the price will certainly not decrease. sent on April 09, 2023 |
 | Leica Summarit-M 35mm f/2.4 ASPH Pros: Size, weight, construction. Cons: Cost. Opinion: The smallest and lightest M could only be a masterpiece. Despite the wide-angle focal and the non-extreme diaphragm, it gives pleasant blurry at the slightest distance of maf, recalling the summicron asph. Sharpness is already good at TA and becomes maximum at intermediate diaphragms. The price of the new one is quite high, but there are excellent opportunities in the used market that make it easy to resell. For those who do not need a 35 lux, I recommend this little one without the slightest doubt. sent on December 25, 2020 |
 | Olympus OM-D E-M1 II Pros: Construction, AF, file quality, responsiveness, viewfinder, display. Cons: menu that as for the Mark 1 seems written by a drunk. Opinion: I start to say that those who do not recognize any merit, those who define bad his autofocus or noisy the file produced should learn to photograph or admit to being in bad faith. The perfect camera body doesn't exist, but this Mark II is really amazing and worth all the money spent. It is useless to describe in detail the pros I have listed because they are well known; I only spend two words on the new firmware that has improved the AF-C (combined with lenses like the 100-400 is a real sniper) and on the hires that on static subjects (macros and architecture on all) allows me to have better files than when I used the 5d3 and the 100L. More and more happy to have ditched Canon. sent on June 23, 2018 |
 | Rollei Compact Traveler No. 1 Carbon Pros: Weight, construction, compactness, capacity. Cons: Minimum height. Opinion: With him I found the trip tripod definitive; I use it for about a year and I would not change it with anyone else. In less than 1 kg I have an easel that has problems with my equipment (we charge a maximum of 1.5 kg but bear a lot more). The construction is very good and the carbon does not freeze hands when handled in winter. I really appreciate the leg tightening system I prefer compared to that of clip because I find it much quicker. The head is light but powerful and very stable even for long exposures, at least with my equipment. RnI would have liked to disassemble the central column to reach a minimum height below 34cm and find this to be the only tripod defect. Closed is really compact and comes in the majority of photographic backpacks if you do not want to carry it hooked out.rnVoto 9. sent on October 13, 2017 |
 | Panasonic Leica 100-400mm f/4.0-6.3 ASPH OIS Pros: Sharpness, versatility, construction, weight, autofocus, stabilizer. Cons: Hood. Opinion: Having less than 1kg a 200-800mm equivalent, tropicalized and with a monstrous stabilizer has no price. I do not know if my copy is particularly performing or if I have lower claims than anyone who has reviewed the lens before me, but I did not notice any sharp drops of sharpness even at the maximum focal point. The construction is impeccable and the stabilizer allows unimaginable times even on Olympus bodies (I've been standing at 1/20 "to 400mm without micromax). Colors and blur are very good and also the autofocus module responds perfectly on em1-ii. I have preferred 300 f4 for versatility and I do not regret the choice made after a few months of use. RnPossies a hinged part in the back, which can be attached to another supplied bundle; I find a thread uncomfortable and I think it could Remedy with a different choice. It is not a daily lens and its uses are quite specialized, but if combined with 12-100 it can be covered from 24 to 800mm equivalent with a good quality and about 1.5 kg Of weight.rnrn sent on August 21, 2017 |
 | Olympus PEN-F Pros: Construction, quality of files, viewfinder, Cons: Af, artifacts in hi-res mode of moving subjects, the absence tropicalization. Opinion: The purchase of 929 € in kit with 17mm 1.8 has prevented me to score against in the price, otherwise you may well say that it is not a economico.rnLa body construction is at the top, just like the aesthetics making it the most eye-catching in the world of m4 / 3. Frequently using it on a tripod I preferred to provide it with its original grip (luckily found used saw the crowds of the new price) with the hooking swiss Ark, very comfortable and protective for delicate pad inferiore.rnIl body is very light, compact, and is a pleasure to hold in your hand, especially when combined with optical not too pesanti.rnLa quality of the files is exceptional when compared to the size of the sensor; interesting and useful the Hi-Res function, but works only on still subjects for creating invasive and unpleasant artifacts on anything that moves (including water). The af I seemed less than that of the em1 both in af-s (with bright lenses as the 25 1.2) that af-c, but is not a born body for the Photo-huntingOverall ica.rnVoto 9, hopefully implement a firmware to improve the Hi-Res release, it would be really useful to be able to use without this limitation. sent on March 19, 2017 |
 | Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm f/2.8 Pros: Bokeh, construction. Cons: Price Opinion: Used both on 5d2 with at least an extension tube to avoid the touch of the mirror that, recently, the Olympus E-M1, I consider this a great lens if you love the particular blurry who knows draw out. The construction is typical of vintage metal, although it remains a lightweight lens though not tiny. My specimen is in showcase condition and complete with rigid leather case; I was lucky to get it at a relatively good price, but the prices have now reached important figures. The bokeh is so particular to divide opinions, either you love it or hate it; in any case it allows to realize unique shots both in portraiture that in macro, especially if associated with some extension tube. I can assure you that the 2x sensor keeps the characteristics of the lens wide open, although the "bubble effect" is slightly reduced compared to FF. It remains an objective timeless and its use did not make me regret buying. sent on February 25, 2017 |
 | Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 7-14mm f/2.8 Pro Pros: Sharpness, construction, diaphragm. Cons: Flare, weights and ingobri. Opinion: For me that I came from the Canon 16-35 this lens has been the purchase of natural m4 / 3. It 'a tank, built as best you could and not to tropical conditions that I consider essential for a lens to be used in extreme conditions at times. This of course is reflected in the weight ef the half kilograms, but the e-m1 is well balanced; anyway if you want this focal length with an aperture of 2.8 there are no alternatives. The sharpness is excellent and reduced focus distance combined with the fairly bright aperture allows multiple compositional variables with subjects in the foreground and background blur. The lens hood is fixed and manage filters is not simple; on the market are of the holder for both the plates from 150mm to 100mm; I gave it a self-made with a funnel spending less than 5 euro, to which I attached a filter holder and 3cm thick I have my "tool" that allows you to use the filters, without any vignetting even 7mm with a single plate. The real problem with this objective is the flare, very frequent anddifficult to eliminate in post; you need to verify their presence during shooting for failing surprises successivamente.rnVoto 9. sent on February 22, 2017 |
 | Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 25mm f/1.2 Pro Pros: Construction, sharpness, AF, bokeh in relation to sensor dimensions. Cons: Dimensions, weight, cost. Opinion: I have achieved this goal within a few days and certainly deserve longer use for an accurate review, so I reserve the opportunity to add future impressions to those reported today. It's definitely state of the art 50mm eq. Are m4 / 3. The building is at the top and is enriched by tropicalization that I always consider a plus in a goal; This is reflected in an important weight and little in line with the idea of ??portability of the system, but just look at the optical pattern (19 lenses) to realize that you are in front of a masterpiece. The lens is enriched by a customizable function button and a very fluid ring when set in MF with the usual pump mechanism. Sharpness is uncompromised already at TA, it further improves the edges by closing the diaphragm and the blur is very creamy, considering the obvious differences given mainly by the size of the sensors, it remembers that of the 50A; Personally I would prefer a less "perfect" opt, but for cerThis can not be considered a counter. With fairly close subjects (American plan or half bust), the bokeh is incredible when compared to 2x sensor; On the whole figure shows some limit, though being much more pleasing than the 12-40 pro. The AF is fast and accurate even in low light on em-1.rnIf you love the 50mm focal point and it does not scare you weight and cost, I do not think there's anything comparable to use on a m4 / 3; Otherwise, there are many other valid alternatives with significantly smaller footprints, weights and costs. RnEDIT: After a few months of use I can only confirm how good it has written on this lens, it is worth the price paid. sent on December 09, 2016 |
 | Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO Pros: Sharpness, construction, AF (on em1), reproduction ratio. Cons: Weight, dimensions, lack is Opinion: Purchased as a kit with em1 pleasantly he impressed me with the sharpness at all focal lengths, certainly facilitated by the lack of AA filter on the camera body; the colors are magnificent, perhaps in a bit oversaturated, but absolutely first livello.rnLa construction is worthy of PRO and enriched by tropicalization series that I consider essential in a handyman; surely accuracy of construction coupled with the quality of the materials going to affect the weight and size of the lens, although this is perfectly balanced sull'ammiraglia.rnL'AF is fast, quiet and absolutely precise moment even in low light. rnUna special and useful feature is the high reproduction ratio that allows the execution of close-up tight enough; with close subjects and the most paintings, the bokeh is more than acceptable focal while become nervous with distant subjects, but this is normal and not a defect of lente.rnSe want a handyman tropicalizzator similar focal equivalent to a 24-70 on ff you can not ask for more, sin is not stabilized. 9 vote. sent on November 24, 2016 |
 | Leica M9 / M9-P Pros: Construction, image quality, size, held in the second-price, CCD sensor. Cons: Display, high iso, possible delamination of the sensor. Opinion: The first Leica digital ff could only be a masterpiece, even considering the "gym" made by the Royal House with the M8. The building is at the top, either as material or as aesthetics and the image quality is not compromised, as long as you shots at low ISO (say no more than 320). The details returned by the CCD sensor is impressive, although I noticed that the M9 has more saturated colors than the M8; I honestly prefer those of sister, as long as you mount the IR filter on obiettivi.rnPer remain on the sensor can be said of the delamination problem is solved by Leica warranty; the service is slow (6-8 weeks) but the body returns to it in his hand almost like new, with an internal cleaning and calibration of the rangefinder always welcome and to date the repair is definitiva.rnIl purchase price is slightly higher than that a recent Japanese ff, but the MMT estate is much higher. rnChe say, if you like and know how to use the rangefinder, if you're tiredAF, stabilizers, gusts, guns and photographic genres practiced by you dont allow the M9 is the best there is in circulation with investments all things considered moderate. Coupled with extraordinary Leitz optics of the past (iv Summicron 35mm, NOCTILUX f1, Summilux 75mm) is capable, in expert hands, to turn a click into poetry. sent on May 11, 2016 |
 | Leica Super-Elmar-M 18mm f/3.8 ASPH Pros: Compactness, weight, construction, sharpness, color, distortion contained, kept used price. Cons: Filter Manager, price, brightness, light protection cap. Opinion: And 'the most wide fixed lens Leica and, like all the lenses of the Royal House, reflects this. Built masterfully and with a weight of only 300g has the incredibly small; hold it and focuse with its extremely fluid ring is an enjoyment state puro.rnLa sharpness and three-dimensionality it is unsurpassed (the use of M8 so I do not comment on the performance at the edges), for f / 4 seems to be at f / 8 with any other wide-angle 24mm equivalent. The colors are simply moving and, on the M8 and has pretty pastel shades, with colors never "screaming". Has a slight distortion, but frankly negligible, which makes it very suitable to architectural photography, although in this area would be much more usable on a FF on a APS-H.rnNon the offer, but if you have the patience to look for used and lucky enough to find in good condition, its purchase is a "cashier's check" that certainly does not depreciate over time. It is not a lens lightsnosissima, but this has allowed us to maintain given the size and peso.rnLa filter management is not easy, in fact you have to buy separately a holder that allows you to mount the filter screw of 77mm diameter (not sure if this holder he can enter another that also allows the use of filters to the plate, but perhaps on a sensor croppato without risk of vignetting) .rnIl lens hood cap has a plug not very strong and could be lost easily, need attention because would not buy it again economico.rnLe performance of this ultrawide home Leica are generally exceptional, although the management of similar focal range finder on a free electronic viewfinder and live view is far from simple. sent on October 28, 2015 |
 | Leica M8 / M8.2 Pros: Construction, cost of the used, quality of the files (especially in the B / N) Cons: Irriparabilità display, crop factor, weight, high ISO, approximation of the Frames, color rendering without filters. Opinion: The first digital Leica M camera is not free from defects, but if you know them in advance and they will accept, is able to give great satisfaction, if only for the chance to enter the world of Leica cost accessible to all ( It is around 1000-1300 EUR and can be used with optical economic as Voigtlander). RNLA construction is more solid than you can imagine and this is reflected on a substantial weight when compared to body size. RNI DNG files (raw) are something wonderful and if converted into b / n give details impressive, with a readability it surpassed only by those of Monochrome, but has many other figures in the used market and does not allow the color production. The color rendering the M8 should be associated with UV / IR filters to be mounted on each goal, penalty effect of the now famous "black eggplant". rnEssendo an APS-H is a crop factor of 1.33 which, while it eliminates the edges (the softerin a picture), determines a "castraure" of the fantastic lenses M. The yield at high ISO is not that great, but we're talking about a body of 2006 and I do not think that other brands did much better in those years. The calibration of the Frames rangefinder was made at the minimum distance of focus of 0.7 meters (choice least questionable); This causes a portion of the screen only when you focheggia wider radius (must make us the eye) .rnAlcuni M8 defects have been corrected in the M8.2 which presents Frames calibrated to 2m, one click quieter and a glass display significantly more resistente.rnrnHo left for last the real sword of Damocles of the M8 / 8.2 ie NOT repairability 'display; in Leica they have no more spare parts, and therefore, in case of failure, the machine can only be used as a partial compensation for the purchase of a new Leica M. sent on August 28, 2015 |
 | Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH Pros: Sharpness in TA, building, colors, three-dimensional, dimensions, price of used seal. Cons: Nobody. Opinion: 2C hardly depreciate over the anni.rnPer the moment the use of Sony A7 ... I dare not imagine what would make associated with a Leica M9 or Monochrome. sent on August 16, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Pros: Blurred, building, light, three-dimensional, color schemes. Cons: Imprecision AF TA on the outer side (especially in low light), not excellent sharpness in TA. Opinion: And 'the most controversial of the list Canon lens, surely because of his "character" that allows only two states of mind as a result of its use: either you love it or you hate it; there is in fact who hosannas considering a fetish and who slaughters on the altar of sharpness. I belong to the first group of users, and I can only settle the amazing quality of this 50mm.rnCostruzione classic L series, a chance to play with the pdc thanks to f / 1.2, three-dimensional frightening and fabulous colors are just a few of the infinite merits of 50one Canon's mother, but I think more importantly the quality and type of blur that this perspective can give and I'm not afraid to define ONIRICO, MAGICO.rnSe the price to pay for it is a modest amount of shots and trashed at TA a sharpness not from macro to the widest apertures are happy to have to endure these venial sins and, if you know how to use well (is not easy), allows scattthe unique, imbued with the "Leica mode" that makes cry to the "magic". RNA my opinion to the best of the environmental portrait but, for those who like this focus for the report, there will be lavish ricompense.rnCanon will build the 50mm 1.2L II-III-IV-V-etc, but if you do not have this I will not yield any return. sent on March 06, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Pros: Construction, distortion, sharpness, colors, stabilizers. Cons: F / 4, only 16-35mm. Opinion: I believe it is my final optics for landscapes and reportage. The building is typical of the L series and presents the weather sealing (essential, in my opinion, in this type of lenses); the lens is well balanced and lightweight, the lens hood is also very little ingombrante.rnQuel that struck me most is the very minimal distortion to 16mm combined with a sharp edge to the already good at room temperature becomes high diaframmando 1 stop. If not serve more openings this zoom widely replaces all fixed between its focal, except for the 17mm TSE but has a very different price. The stabilizer allowed me to shoot handheld with time up to 0.3 "shake-out and this, coupled with the fact of being already sharp at f / 4, can not raise the ISO or shooting in low light really unthinkable with any other zoom.rnSe was 2.8 or greater had covered a range of focal lengths would be unbeatable (like 16-50), but it would definitely cost a lot more and weighed; 10- vote. sent on October 28, 2014 |
 | Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Pros: Quality construction, optical quality, reproduction ratio achieved. Cons: No one. Opinion: 6ugrave; I consider it essential to the high magnification focus stacking, of course, can only be done on a tripod, and preferably with the aid of a slide micrometer; also increases the difficulty of use in relation to the inability to close the iris over F4-5.6 in rr between 4-5: 1 due to diffraction, this turns into pdc really tiny and needs of an impressive number of shots with plans different fire for images that are easy and dettagliate.rnNon is definitely the lens for those who decide to get closer to the macro, but it represents the best way for those who want to try their hand at it, going in search of the wonderful details that only a microworld can donare.rnrn sent on September 15, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Pros: Building, colors, Af, bokeh, weight, price. Cons: No weather sealing and stabilization. Opinion: And 'the elder brother, at least as focal length, although the 135L is slightly less sharp at full aperture with respect to the brother. The building is a classic from the L series and, although it lacks the weather sealing, combining lightness with strength and reliability. The colors that transmits the sensor are very nice and I find them perfect in portraiture. L 'autofocus is responsive, especially with the limiter on, and does not regret modules much more recent. The blur is absolutely comparable to that of 135L and I challenge anyone to find differences in the same image taken with these two objectives. Considering the price if, like me, you usually use the zoom almost always at the two extreme focal lengths, can be a viable alternative to the 70-200 II (maybe associating a 85mm 1.8), spending about the metà.rnNon will be the maximum ductility but , for those who like landlines, it is a lens to be supplied. sent on August 14, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM Pros: Sharpness, weight, dimensions, diaphragm. Cons: Do not duplicable (Canon), lack ring tripod, IS not quite silent. Opinion: I come from the Canon 180mm sold only to have a more versatile and less bulky lens. The optics are uncompromising with frightening clarity, in my opinion superior to that of big brother. rnHo wanted to try it on 5D3 with Kenko 2x and I was impressed with the quality of the files, even excellent sharpness, absolutely usable RR to reach close to 2: 1. What little problem I had with the AF (with 2x included) who do not always hooked the subject, but it seems understandable. Do not think I need to add anything about other pros I mentioned, as have already been widely discussed in previous recensioni.rnE 'curious how the optic is not duplicable by Canon and I find it strange that a macro is not sold with the ring tripod, by the way, cost the earth if it is original. The only real drawback that I would report the SI is the noise that I consider excessive for an L-series lens so recent and I do not exclude, as it is in warranty,give him a ride in CS at the end blurred dell'estate.rnLo is great for the focal length but, of course, need a more distant background or a larger aperture for a bokeh comparable to 180mm.rnIn conclusion are more than satisfied with the changes (I am traveling I have both a lens for a portrait unpretentious, a medium telephoto macro and an all in one). sent on June 25, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 135mm f/2.0 L USM Pros: Sharpness at RT, blurred, building, AF, sizes, colors. Cons: lack IS Opinion: Lens designed for portraits where, thanks to the generous openness and responsiveness and precision AF, allows for shooting moving subjects with a sharpness and bokeh without compromise. At f / 2 you already have a sharpness close to the maximum, the subject seems to come out of the photo and the background is blurred almost canceled in a creamy, pictorial. The AF is very accurate but TA need some practice, especially at the minimum distance of maf, to avoid errors. The colors that returns, mounted on the 5D mark III, I was impressed by the saturation and this, combined with the bokeh, this lens makes it a must for portraiture. The building is at the highest level and its light weight allows prolonged use without feeling the slightest fatica.rnL 'only improvement would be possible to equip it with this gem stabilizer that in certain circumstances it may be of help and allow you to keep the ISO low. rnih conclusion if the 135mm focal length are your favorite, you will not find anything better out there. Vote 10 - the lack of IS. sent on June 16, 2014 |
 | Canon 5D Mark III Pros: Construction, AF, high ISO estate, versatility, ergonomics, quality and workability of RAW Cons: Exposure meter Opinion: Built entirely of magnesium alloy 5D Mark III has a really strong body, worthy of the best professional cameras. Ergonomics is at the highest level and further improves after adding the battery grip. It 'really an SLR-rounder, ideal for all kinds of photography, from portraits to sports photography and birdlife. The files that churns out are simply wonderful and allow a post-production incredibly accurate. If necessary, you can also crop bodied, maintaining excellent product definition finito.rnIl sensor of the 5D III is really generous and up to 12,800 digital noise is negligible, even without heavy discounts with special programs. The AF is worthy of a sniper and if properly set hardly wrong, even in low light conditions (of course with professional goals). One flaw, in my opinion, is the only selectable spot on the middle and a light meter is not improved compared to the mark II. Not being an expert on movies, not the potentially Commentity video of this amazing reflex. 9.5 rating. sent on March 08, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS USM Pros: Weight, Price, Sharpness, Bokeh, Minimum distance maf construction. Cons: Stabilizer, use multipliers. Opinion: I bought this lens used in conditions indistinguishable from new and I have to say that is worth more than it costs. It weighs just over a kilogram is well balanced when mounted on the camera body (at least on the 5D mark III) and closed 1-stop has a very impressive sharpness, but it can also be used at room temperature, especially in tight portraits. The blur is simply wonderful, smooth and not nervous despite not being a lens extremely bright and the reproduction ratio of 0.24x it can be used also for macro subjects are not too small (especially in combination with the 1 .4 x or with extension tubes). The stabilizer is definitely loud, but allows you to recover up to 2 and a half stop without risk of blur. He can not stand very well even if the multiplier is used with the 1 .4 x, keeping in mind a slight drop in sharpness if not prepunched and a slowdown autofocus. rnih conclusion, I consider this point more versatile than a 300mm might look (photo hunt, Macro, ritrattistica) and also does not possess the unmatched quality of the greater brother, we can provide an incredible lens to one quarter of its prezzo.rnrn sent on January 04, 2014 |
 | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical Pros: Cost, sharpness, aperture, construction Cons: Distortion, the distance scale totally inaccurate, not recording data exif Opinion: It 'an exceptional lens that if he had a more limited distortion and a ring of precise distances could be sold at three times the current cost. The construction is solid although far from the standards of Zeiss and well-balanced weight, despite the huge front lens. It has autofocus but I consider it superfluous on a 14mm, while I would have liked a more precise distance scale. RNLA sharpness, when the fire is set up correctly, it is impressive, although my copy loses something in the corners estremi.rnLa distortion is really heavy and in need of programs to correct it in almost all the photos; obviously not the ideal lens for photography architecture. Sticker on TA but I do not think a big problema.rnScordatevi the viewfinder with this lens, in my opinion should be used exclusively in live view to avoid exposure errors. Great for landscapes and night. sent on October 22, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 180mm f/3.5 L Macro USM Pros: Construction, sharpness, blur. Cons: Absence of tropicalization. Opinion: Construction as the other fixed "L-series", and truly at the top, with the classic aesthetically pleasing finish. The absence of tropicalization in my opinion is the only flaw of this view because it is not a lens to use in the studio but in nature. I do not consider defects in the absence of the stabilizer (useless in macro photography), the fact that it is f/3.5 (I challenge anyone to do macro with openness) and the sharpness is peso.rnLa, like the bokeh, unmatched (I had the Tamron 180 macro, but there is no comparison). In my view, the non plus ultra for macro with RR up to 1: 1 even if the quality of the files out of the oven is good even with extension tubes (for these purposes the best canon mp-e 65mm). Rnih conclusion, if used for the macro has no rivals, but of course has a number of "defects" when it wants to use for different purposes (eg. portraiture). sent on October 05, 2013 |
 | Kenko Pro 300 DGX 2.0x Pros: Price, sharpness at TA. Cons: No tropicalization, maf in low light. Opinion: This opinion is made combining the Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM and the 5D mark III.rnSono was absolutely impressed by the value for money of this Teleconverter (I purchased it in the UK for 150 euro new). The sharpness is excellent at room temperature and baked files are free from vignetting or aberrations. My example requires a 1-stop underexposure to get the best results, but I consider it a virtue and not a defect, since the gain obtained. The maf in low light conditions can be inaccurate, while it is fast and reliable with normal light, on all cross-type points of my reflex.rnIn conclusion that TC does very well the work for which it is purchased and even if it is not the Canon III, to which only the envy tropicalisation, represents the best possible compromise to 1/3 of the costo.rn sent on June 14, 2013 |
 | Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Pros: Sharpness, Construction, stabilizer, Motor USD, Price. Cons: Hood, Vignette. Opinion: 29, has a slight vignetting at 24mm at TA FF, but corrects itself with two clicks of the mouse. rnIl general opinion is great, will not have the exceptional performance of the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II but costs less than half and has an incredible stabilizer, in my opinion very useful in this range of focal lengths, recommend it to all those who looking for a 24-70mm bright, sharp and important to assess the presence of the stabilizer. sent on May 04, 2013 |
 | Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX DG Diagonal Fisheye Pros: Sharpness, weight, construction Cons: AF is not lightning, lack of full time MF. Opinion: It 'a cheaper alternative to the Canon without sacrificing a lot of quality, both optical and constructive. I use it with a 5D III and gives me really razor-sharp images already in the TA, even if I use it almost always more diaframmato.rnSulle APS-C may be an alternative for macro acclimatized with the ability to focus on a few cm from the lens front. The construction is very high quality and also is aesthetically very bello.rnL 'autofocus is not just a thunderbolt of war, but we are talking about a 15mm, then you can do it again in less than an ultrasonic motor; I consider most annoying lack of full time MF (for how I use it). sent on January 08, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Pros: Everything that does not affect the lens hood. Cons: The lens hood. Opinion: It 'an extraordinary lens that can safely be considered a full-aperture L-series mancata.rnNitido becomes a blade from f/2.5 on, the AF is very fast and always accurate. Also good color rendering and fuzzy that make it exceptional for ritrattistica.rnE 'light and handy, with the EOS 5D Mark III produces files really amazing and if you consider the cost I think it is between the lenses in Canon home the best value / prezzo.rnTrovo rather absurd that each lens is not available in the original hood and a case (style Sigma), which would cost Canon nonsense and give more luster glass also the price is not exorbitant, but undisputed quality optics. sent on December 25, 2012 |
 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Pros: Price, build quality, sharpness and colors. Cons: Softness at f/1.4, made the edges of FF. Opinion: I bought this lens used, but in conditions indistinguishable from the new 300 euro and I love it. I have a copy that does not have problems with AF, in my opinion, might be the only real problem with this obiettivo.rnNon say that it is comparable to the same focal length of Canon L as quality, but I find it more considering the quality / cost ratio. Obviously it is soft wide open but close enough to 1 stop to get good results and from 2.8 up is really a razor. The yield on the edge of FF is not great, but often set in portraiture is not so important, but it could become one if you decide to use it for landscaping, in any case, is worth more than it costs. sent on November 26, 2012 |
 | Tamron SP 180mm f/3.5 Di LD Macro Pros: Value for money, sharpness, bokeh. Cons: Absence of stabilizer, AF. Opinion: Surely the lens of "long" for macro with the best value for money. The images are superb, both at the center than at the edges and at all apertures, even if TA is in a soft hair. Excellent contrast and, with the lens hood attached, you can work without any problem even in backlight. Low vignetting at RT and non-existent at f / 5.6 and excellent quality of the bokeh. Being made of polycarbonate and metal may be less resistant, but certainly will not have the problem of scratches due to possible use in environments "challenging". Ring focus wide and very precise and possibility of using a polarizer also with the lens hood mounted, thanks to a second rotatable ring, are other strengths of this lens. The only flaws are given by the absence of the stabilizer (only useful for shooting handheld) and dall'AF (almost useless these goals) ... so in my opinion, relatively minor flaws. In conclusion, I would recommend everyone to purchase this perspective, as long as it is to be used only for macro-photography. sent on August 25, 2012 |
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
