|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Gmf1 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Gmf1  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sigma 12-24mm f/4 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness, almost non-existent distortions, natural colours, precise fast and silent AF, build quality, splash and dust protection. Cons: Loss of sharpness at the edges between 12-16 (almost absent between 20-24) small ghost Images Opinion: Just given the first pictures taken to test I'm desperate, the sharpness on FF sensor from 36 Mp looked pretty disappointing, actually with high density sensors the amount of detail makes the frame seemingly confusing, if viewed in the collection the image looks Knebeen but you just enlarge it and you realize that the micro contrast is impressive and the improvements that you can make in the camera raw are incredibly wide. From the point of view of distortions, I cannot understand how they managed to contain them in such an effective way in an extreme objective like this. The only thing that got me a bit really disappointed and some loss of detail at the edges but contrary to what was said, on some "professional" reviews, the problem exists between the 12/15 mm decreases progressively to disappear between i20 mm and, not vice versa. If hit by the Sun produces 2 small ghost images that I can easily eliminate with Photoschop and also a bit of flare. It is not classified as weather sealed but in fact it is splash-proof and dust, other brands boast a dummy that does not protect from anything. I would like to know the opinion of other owners of the goal, you have also been experiencing sharpness problems at the edges? Could mine benefit from a calibration with THE Doc? sent on May 28, 2019 |
 | Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD Pros: Nobody Cons: Too many Opinion: I tried this lens for some time before giving a judgment and in conclusion I can only say that it is really poor, between 80mm and 200mm, at any aperture, the sharpness is really poor, as well as get a shot to punishment to decent and impossible penalty therefore, you will have in hand a lens only in theory 70-300 not being able to fully exploit it in all its excursione.rnIl VR and 'AF work quite well but it is a meager consolazione.rnNon therefore trust the flattering reviews on the various forums with little money in addition you can buy the original Nikon counterpart. If you want a lens just to play, save money and buy a non-VR sent on March 12, 2018 |
 | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical Pros: Nobody Cons: Sharpness. Quality, distortion, vignetting, poor materials, etc etc etc. Opinion: In light of the new experience I want to update my previous review is the second I buy because, according to the reviews on the various forums and even on Amazon I was convinced that the first was a defective copy, so I decided to buy it back from Amazon for Have the opportunity to return it, in fact it was so, the second copy to a first impact was definitely better but still far from the comments excited by other users, however, remains a loss of sharpness at the edges increasingly marked on the left side ( Defect common to both specimens) the perspective distortions are embarrassing, an object of circular shape even if framed in the center of the image is returned ovoid, even framing with all the precautions, the left side of the frame is Be more and more distorted than the right side, so if you are interested in photos of interiors and not only of effect, you will encounter insurmountable problems. As already mentioned by some, few, users believe it broke out the fashion Samyang, I understand that spending about €330 you can not expect much but do not forget that we are talking about a lens without autofocus and stabilization made with materials Questionable (see Hood and its cap made of very fragile plastic) so at this point it seems to me that the value for money is so favorable. I Believe that fame is mainly due to the comments made by the photographers of panoramas and astrology that, rightly, are satisfied with the impact that can be achieved with this type of optics, but if you move just a little ' from that terrain you will have as happened to Me of the scording disappointment, I had chosen this lens to photograph for professional reasons (I deal with restoration of works of art) in cramped interiors: painted images, statues, architectural elements etc. But many particulars were returned with forms Completely distorted and impossible to correct in PP. Use for over 35 years optics Nikon, Hasselblad, Zeis, Pentax, Zenza Bronica, and even some Sigma and I have never had problems with defective specimens, so if on 2 specimens one is definitely defective, the other and so-so, it means that the quality control Samyang It's really poor. However, if you settle for a glass just to have fun without many claims despite the difficulties in usability at a price "fairly" affordable choose it as well, but if you are interested in having photos of decent quality with full frame cameras and with sensors Demanding and you do not care to immortate exclusively, for the billionth time, the Milky Way or the sunset on the shoreline, and I say without wanting to denigrate those who do this kind of photos indeed I saw many shots where there were obtained valuable results Stylistically that technically but this is due to the talent of photographers and not to the medium that has allowed to reach them, I advise you to stay away. For Now I can only reiterate my scorpable disappointment, mainly due to the comments of all those who helped to create this false myth of quality, without a more thorough analysis. If you still are interested in the purchase I suggest you turn to services like Amazon that will allow you to evaluate your real needs, if you'll be satisfied you will keep, otherwise you can return as I did. sent on March 12, 2018 |
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
