|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Mdl5 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Mdl5  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Viltrox AF 33mm f/1.4 Pros: Construction and price. Cons: Chromatic aberration and full aperture rendering. Opinion: I have the Tokina version that seems to be optically and mechanically the same (see review) and that should be different only for the software (for example it works with XT4's IBIS). I do not agree with the expressions of enthusiasm about the optical rendering. I compared the lens with the Fuji XF 16-80, which is certainly not a lens optimized for sharpness. There is no history, the Tokina loses on all fronts even closed to F/4. At F/2 and F/1.4 there are obvious aberrations (see comparison image in the review). Large aperture may be acceptable for making portraits with subject in the center and background at the blurred edge. On the other hand if I have to close the aperture then the zoom is better. Update. After some other tests I decided to return it. Update 2. I was in a physical store to try the Fuji XF 35 F2 which I eventually got (see other comparison photo). Compared to the Tokina I gained tropicalization, lightness and compactness and a lot of image quality (see comparison). You lose a bit of Bokeh (*) but F2 is fully exploitable. (*) Note I also tried the XF 35 F1.4 to see the difference in the Bokeh which is not dramatic. Incidentally, it is true that the Fuji F1.4 has a noisy autofocus motor. But it is also true that the Tokina has the diaphragm just as noisy and moves it continuously (sorry to note that many reviews insist on engine noise but do not say about the noise of the diaphragm). sent on January 12, 2022 |
 | Tokina ATX-M 33mm f/1.4 Plus Pros: Price. F1.4. Cons: Chromatic aberration. Contrast lowering at full aperture. Opinion: sent on January 09, 2022 |
 | Samyang 12mm f/2.0 NCS CS Pros: F/2 aperture. Good quality Low price. Cons: It is not Autofocus. Opinion: When I chose this 12 mm the alternative was the Laowa 9 mm F/2.8. In the use I immediately realized a positive aspect that I had not grasped: the F/2 aperture. Yes, of course, it allows night photos of the Milky Way but, and here is the surprise, it allows you to make beautiful portraits set with the right degree of Bokeh in the background. Post a photo from behind for privacy, but you can understand what I mean. I have read about criticisms related to distortion. To me it does not appear (placed two photos, one of which with optics inclined at the top and straightened in post). Flare... in my opinion acceptable (see other photo). Sharpness? It seems excellent to me. Too bad it's not autofocus. P.S. The photos mentioned are in the album "Samyang 12". P.P.S. The scale of the distances from me is right: the photo of the Milky Way was made by setting the optics at the end of the stroke sound infinite. sent on September 30, 2021 |
 | Canon 2000D Pros: I was wrong and do not know how to delete the post (it was intended for the 1000D) Cons: It's a reflex with the mirror (more cumbersome than it could be). APS-C canon is smaller (an 18 is 29 mm FF instead of 27). Opinion: I had a 1000D. I switched to Fujifilm (XT-100 and then XT-30) and wouldn't go back. Less cumbersome. Lighter. Solid metal. Not having the mirror is just to be gained. 18-55 Canon corresponds to a 29-85 FF. With the XT-100 the 15-45 corresponds to 22.5-70 FF. For some types of photography (travel and landscape) it makes a big difference. If you want to do portraits 55 F5.6 you don't have Bokeh... might as well add a purposegoal later. sent on February 01, 2020 |
 | Fujifilm XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR Pros: Great construction. Versatility. Wr. Focal excursion. Cons: A little heavy. 16 mm is not wide enough. Opinion: sent on November 13, 2019 |
 | Fujifilm XC 15-45mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS PZ Pros: Ideal for travel photography. Cons: I would have preferred a construction of the XF class even paying a little more but not giving up the 15 mm. Opinion: The strong point is definitely the range of focal lengths that starts at 15 mm, which correspond to about 22.8 mm on the full frame. Those three millimeters that separate it from the more classic 18-XX makes a difference abysmal, especially on the road and in all those situations that do not leave so much time to think and less than to change the lens (typically on the road, which represents, however, for many Most of the occasions to photograph). If you then have time and you want to do portraits then you would buy a fixed focal as the 50 to complement. This is to say that the 18-55, although in some respects higher (under construction) is not an alternative. On the long side, i.e. the 45 mm, these are more than adequate in travel and also for portrait. By opening everything you also have a bit of bokeh. The alternative would be the 16-55 2.8 but on the one hand loses 1mm wide side and on the other is much heavier. The latter factor not to be overlooked. I took a plane with only hand baggage (it happens going on vacation to take cheap flights). The XT-100 with this lens I put it in my vest's pocket (despite limits on hand baggage). I couldn't have done it with a bigger lens. The optical quality is very good (also thanks to the distortion software correction). The motorized zoom, for my liking would have been better was manual. In conclusion Fuji should consider the possibility of making a 15-45 version with XF-type construction even at a larger price. The rest is perfect. sent on January 27, 2019 |
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
