|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Dadoleo www.juzaphoto.com/p/Dadoleo  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EOS R8 Pros: Compact and lightweight, accurate, fast and programmable AF, great sensor, electronic shooting, USB charging Cons: viewfinder not of great quality, lack of IBIS, it is not possible to assign all menu functions to buttons, continuous shooting speed adjustment Opinion: I've been using it for over 6 months, after years with the M5. In terms of weight we are there, the dimensions slightly increase but it is definitely more ergonomic in use, especially if coupled with lenses of not exactly compact dimensions. The jump was remarkable especially on the AF side. Now I can really use the servo AF combined with face/eye recognition, which for my use seems perfect (I can't really imagine what more the higher models can do). I'm mainly using it paired with EF lenses with adapter, such as the 100 2.0 and the Sigma 150 2.8 macro. Contrary to my past experiences, I am finding myself photographing mainly sports (youth football). The camera surprised me with its ability to lock on to the subject, making even the sigma macro a sports lens! Almost always set with an electronic shutter, I had no particular problems with rolling shutter, I had to trash only a couple of shots out of a few thousand because the balloon was obviously oval. I'll be lucky that the kids aren't very fast, but for now it's great and I'll continue to use it like this. Even the deterioration on the quality side of the file in this mode I did not encounter, on the contrary, the quality of the images seems excellent, both on the noise side at high iso and for malleability in post production. Direct charging via USB is very convenient, which is working with all the chargers I already used for smartphones and notebooks. Looking for some flaw... the viewfinder looks the same as the M5. I'm used to it, it works, but if it were a little bigger and more resolute it would be a great achievement. And its dynamic range isn't great either. The IBIS is missing, which other brands now put on the entire range. You can live without it, but many of the lenses I have are not stabilized, so the IBIS would have been handy in some situations. Of course, the battery is small, but you get used to having a spare. And after all, I prefer the compactness and lightness of the body. The only critical situation is if you use the stand a lot, in which case changing the battery becomes inconvenient. I find the layout of buttons and dials comfortable. I spent days trying to customize them and then go back to the standard, using the FV function with the two wheels and the mfn button I don't need anything else. Here the mfn key could be a little bigger. While what I would have liked to include in the buttons (e.g. electronic/mechanical shutter release, or the activation of lens corrections) it is not possible to do so and it remains necessary to go to the menu (fortunately there is a customizable page). Finally, the last thing I don't like is the inability to set the continuous shooting speed. Only the standard, H and H+ are available; with speeds of 5, 20 and 40 fps. In my case 5 is a bit little, but 20 is excessive, 40 we don't talk about. Somewhere in between, around 10fps would have been perfect for me. In conclusion, I'm really enjoying it. it's very comfortable and I was able to do things that I couldn't do with the M5 (just as easily at least). So a good purchase for me, having broadened my photographic horizons. Of course it is the result of many compromises, but for my way of using it, the qualities far outweigh the defects. sent on March 11, 2025 |
 | Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro Pros: Sharpness, AF, multiplied usage, canon mirrorless compatible Cons: heavy Opinion: Taken a few months ago for the need for a bright telephoto and used on Canon Eos R8. I was inclined towards a 70-200 but also needing a macro I opted for this 150 that I had been dreaming of for a long time. The weight is important, and even if well balanced, in the end it tires the hands and makes complicated photos from positions a little out of balance (e.g. low to the ground or cmq distant from the body). The sharpness of course is at the highest levels, already from 2.8, as well as the contrast. I was favorably impressed by the goodness of the AF which proved to be perfectly compatible with canon mirrorless and very fast. Actually in this period I am using it mainly for sports photos (youth football) with excellent results. The lens can easily track the subject at up to 20fps. This is despite my lack of experience both in the discipline and in the use of luminous canvases. My judgment takes into account the other lenses used in this context: the EF 100 f2.0 USM and the Tamron 70-300 VS. The Sigma 150 proved to be slightly superior to the 100 f2 (the canon gets a little worse in tracking distant subjects) and much better than the tamron (which struggles to follow the subject even at 5 fps) sent on January 28, 2025 |
 | Canon EOS M5 Pros: Compact and lightweight, solid Cons: Not too effective servo AF Opinion: Used from 2018 to 2024 first by adapting EF lenses (also with speedbooster) then by creating an entire EF-M kit. The quality of the body is very good, despite the minimal size and lightness it is solid and well balanced in the hand (with EF-M lenses, with adapted lenses instead it tends to be unbalanced forward). Decidedly good sensor quality, much better than the 18mpx of the 60D, especially for dynamic range. The isos are also acceptable, especially when working raw with the new AI noise reduction tools. The AF is two-sided, good in single shot a little less in servo, where it still manages to track horizontal but not longitudinal movements with the approaching subject. The locking speed is also not at the highest levels, even less so if you use face recognition. There is also a slight operating delay, noticeable when trying to "freeze the moment", which can be solved by using the burst (a good 7fps) and anticipating the shot. After a bit of getting used to it, the viewfinder also becomes acceptable. So overall a mirrorless of good quality but which suffers a bit from the passage of time, but capable of surprising if it is not required to be too dynamic in terms of capabilities. Now replaced with an R8 (to look for the thrill of FF), but I regret a bit the size of the M kit (especially thinking of the beloved Sigma 56), and if Canon had continued the development I would own an M5 Mark II. sent on November 13, 2024 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Pros: Compact and light for the focal length, sharp and correct enough Cons: somewhat plasticky construction Opinion: Used first on 60D, then M5 (both smooth and with speedbooster) and finally on R8. It has always proven to be a valid lens for both portraiture, landscape use and lately also for action. Sufficiently sharp and contrasted (even if more modern lenses do better in this sense), with few aberrations and good resistance to flare (but not flawless). The AF is fast enough even for action photos. Mainly used on the M5 with speedbooster for portraits, then with the arrival of the Sigma 56 I started using it mainly for action photos such as liuminous telephoto, since it also manages the crop factor of aps-c well. Compared to its brother Ef 50 1.4 it is much better in every aspect, even if they share the aesthetics and construction, which is now a bit plastic. Lately on R8 it has become the main lens and it is still giving me satisfaction after years. sent on November 09, 2024 |
 | Canon EF-M 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Pros: Lightweight and compact, good construction, quiet AF Cons: sharpness Opinion: First ef-m lens taken to pair it with the M5 is the one I actually used the least. It was supposed to replace the 15-85, but in addition to the shorter focal range it is inferior in every aspect. The sharpness is never very high. So the photos are fine if they are not enlarged to 100% where they turn out to be quite soft. The construction is excellent, the AF fast and quiet and it is stabilized, and like all ef-m lenses, it is compact and light. So a kit lens not to ask for miracles, and used to the performance of fixed lenses, I ended up using it only in contexts where I was not looking for particular quality or for video (in which, however, the noise due to the AF is present). sent on November 08, 2024 |
 | Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Pros: Compact and lightweight for focal length; Cons: not particularly sharp Opinion: Used for years with the M5, it is very comfortable to wear due to its compactness and lightness. A little incisiveness is lacking in the images produced. It works best closed at f8 but is never a definition champion. Even if at close range it is better than at infinity. Surprisingly good blur for the type of lens. AF fairly fast and quiet and IS normal. Good companion to an EOS M as long as you don't look for extreme sharpness. sent on November 07, 2024 |
 | Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Pros: Tiny and bright Cons: lack of stabilization Opinion: Used for years on the M5, it was always present in the bag due to its tiny size (along with 32 and 56). Taken to replace the 24 stm, with even smaller dimensions despite the extra stop. The quality is good both for sharpness and for the absence of aberrations. In my case, however, it didn't seem exceptional to me, the 24stm was more engraved and the 35 2.0 with speedbooster more three-dimensional. The lack of the stabilizer, not even present on the eos M bodies, limits its use at night or in videos, so in these situations I prefer the 35 2.0 IS. However, due to its good features, affordability and exceptional compactness, it is a "Must Have" for Canon M users. sent on November 05, 2024 |
 | Sigma 56mm f/1.4 DC DN C Pros: Sharp, compact and lightweight Cons: He only lacks the stabilizer Opinion: Used for a few years on the Eos M5, it won me over immediately, undermining the excellent EF-M 32, and becoming the lens always mounted on the camera. Used in every context, from portraits to landscapes, from sports to macro (with extension tubes) it has always performed very well with sharp images (already at CT), well contrasted and practically free of defects (not even a hint of fringing). Behavior more like a macro lens than a medium-telephoto portrait lens. Of course it is not stabilized, and this on Eos M bodies can be a limitation, especially in night photography, but perhaps also thanks to this it remains small and light. Too bad I can't reuse it on R8, it's a lens that I really miss (and it makes me want to pick up the M5 again), although the 100 2.0 behaves well, the performance of the small sigma is of another level. sent on November 04, 2024 |
 | Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM Pros: Sharp, compact and lightweight, fast and quiet AF Cons: a system abandoned by Canon, lack of IS Opinion: Used for a few years with much satisfaction. Excellent sharpness and contrast, no chromatic aberrations, fast and quiet AF in a compact, lightweight and well-built body. For the same focal length it is better than the adapted Canon 2.0 IS USM. I think it is one of the best lenses to combine with an Eos M, perhaps second only to the Sigma 56 1.4. The only lack is stabilization, which by the way is not even present on M bodies, which makes it unsuitable for night photos or handheld videos. sent on October 31, 2024 |
 | Sainsonic Kamlan 50mm f/1.1 Pros: Compact, economical, bright, bokeh, decliccata ring for video, construction. Cons: sharpness, declied photo ring Opinion: Taken for fun at a few tens of euros, in ef-m version coupled to an M5. The construction is amazing, all metal, despite the compactness and limited weight give a good feeling of solidity. The focus is fluid, while the decliccable aperture ring is quite uncomfortable for photography, forcing you to continuously check the position both to vary it to the correct value and to verify that it has not moved (it happens often). The bokeh is creamy at TA and remains good even closed without ever becoming nervous (better e.g. canon ef 50 1.4). The contrast is pretty good as early as f1.1, and it was a nice surprise. The sharpness is very deficient at TA, of course it improves closing up to f11 (and then worsens again) but it is never really high. It is a lens that must be used with its peculiarities in mind: for landscape photos it is worse than a standard zoom such as the ef-m 18-55; So his natural field remains the portrait, with a very good detachment of the planes, and in which the lack of sharpness is not a handicap. sent on March 22, 2021 |
 | Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Pros: Small, light, crisp, cheap. Cons: Vignetting. Opinion: Surprising goal. I use it on the M5, instead of the Sigma 10-20. Excellent sharpness, good stabilizer, in a compact and light body. It also has a focus distance low enough to allow close-ups set. As with all ef-m optics, you don't have to faint to buy it and it pays off with superior quality. Vignette a bit even from closed, but it resolves into posts. Of course it is limited in night photos for low brightness, but this is taken for granted. sent on March 22, 2021 |
 | Canon EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM Pros: Good quality, small and light Cons: Nervous bokeh Opinion: Purchased from a month and paired with an M5 to replace a 24 2.8 STM for close-up and macro set. The quality of the files is more than good, with a good sharpness already from 3.5. The flare is very well controlled, good starry on the light points and chromatic aberrations almost non-existent. The focus is sufficiently fast and quiet, comfortable is the IS (which gave me some advantage even in close shots freehand) that the front illuminator. At the construction level I would have preferred to have on the barrel the commands to disable is and AF, but it is a choice that canon has made for all M series optics. Among the negative notes the bokeh. Perfectly creamy at macro distances at intermediate distances becomes quite nervous, with a marked "onion ring" effect. Moreover, the diaphragm blades do not seem rounded because already from 5.6 the bubbles are no longer circular. However overall I am definitely satisfied, and although perfectible, for the price is a great purchase. sent on February 25, 2019 |
 | Tokina AT-X PRO 28-70mm f/2.8 Pros: solid, bright Cons: flare, chromatic aberrations, weight Opinion: Taken a few months ago version 2.6 - 2.8, and used on Eos 60D. The first impression is stunning: Solid as a rock (although age has a sign) ... and just as heavy. More than the absolute weight the problem comes from the fact that it is quite unbalanced towards the front lens, and then the long tends to tire wrists and fingers. It is probably more suited to heavier SLR as a 5D or 7D. Optically risolvenza has a good (though not great), especially if closed at least f4.0. A TA is a bit 'soft, with a decrease in contrast. The AF is fast enough and with few uncertainties, but a little 'noisy. Suffer from flare enough, as many Tokina lenses, and also chromatic aberrations are sometimes present (like many of the objectives in its class). They are still marginal defects, avoidable with a little 'attention in the composition of your shot and a few clicks in postproduction. Altogether a lens with good value / prezzo.rnrnPS. onlla my 60D does not seem perfectly compatible with the live view, often not being able to connect with the subject, especially at the minimum distance. sent on September 26, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Pros: Bright, light, compact, moderately fast AF Cons: chromatic aberrations Opinion: Got it used for about one year is the lens that I am using the most. Mounted on the 60D is a great portrait lens, also "stolen" given the good AF speed. It has shades a bit cold, especially in artificial light compared to most modern Canon optics. The best will be if used in low light, where the max aperture is actually exploitable. In full sun, unfortunately, there are strong phenomena of chromatic aberrations (purple that is green) is at high-contrast edges in the blurred areas. This is not always easy uncorrectable, often it threatens to ruin the "correct" edges to correct those with halos. In addition to the entire coverage it is a little soft and with a slight loss of contrast. All these defects improve by stopping down to f2.0 and f2.8 to come almost to disappear. To this last focal Opening it reaches levels equal to those of the 40 2.8, but the latter maintains (of course) a more circular bokeh. Overall, the buona quality at f2.8, the ability to open up to 1.4 when conditions permit together with its light weight allow me to always take it with me often finding opportunities to use it. sent on September 26, 2016 |
 | Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM Pros: light, crisp, no aberrations Cons: It produced only from 2014. Opinion: Having already had a great experience with the 40 stm I decided to take even the 24. The optical qualities are amazing, especially compared to the price: Very crisp, harmful really minimal, the absence of chromatic aberrations, blurred quite pleasant. Adding good speed focus (best of 40 especially in low light), weight and dimensions almost nil he is a lens to which the holders of aps Canon can not give up. With two pancakes'm 'leaving more and more the 15-85 at home, especially for family outings. Perhaps it could have been a bit 'brighter, but in that case the price would be much higher and you would run into the 35 f2.0 is. sent on January 19, 2015 |
 | Samsung NX3000 Pros: Relatively compact, lightweight, aesthetically pleasing, good photo quality (definition and held at high ISO), tilt monitor, charging via USB, Included Software, Micro SD Cons: Jpg little saturated and contrasting Android Application x WiFi slow and cumbersome, low-resolution displays Opinion: Socket from a few days (and still not thoroughly tested) to have a body alternative to 60D for the outputs read and not purely photographic. The first impact of the body is positive retro look very nice, small and lightweight (compared to an SLR, but not to the level of a compact), especially thanks to the 16-50 Powerzoom collapsible. The plastics are a bit 'cheap, but for the price they're fine. The first experience of use is fairly positive, although not comparable to a reflex, both for ergonomics for ease of adjustment. Designed primarily for use in automatic control buttons and dials are a little 'small and feeling uncertain. THE 16-50 zoom has operated with two buttons, and would certainly have been nice to have even the classic lever concentric with the shutter button (as in the compact) for use with one hand. The screen is quite visible even in bright sunlight, but the resolution is a bit 'low. Very convenient for the micro usb lead directly clicks on smartphone or tablet, whilevery slow and cumbersome application Android via Wi-Fi (unfortunately I can not test with NFC). The supplied software is Adobe Lightroom 5.rnAbituato color Canon, the first pictures I took seemed to me a little saturated and contrast. I'll do a little 'porve with the settings in the room to see if it is a surmountable problem, given that for the purpose for which it is dedicated, I would like to avoid as much as possible the post. sent on November 03, 2014 |
 | Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Pros: Eclectic. Very good quality / price ratio. Cons: Dimensions and weight given the low light. Opinion: Great all-rounder, perfectly balanced on my 60D, it's probably a bit 'too massive to match a X00D. Despite a construction compeltamente plastic is another level to the objectives set. It distorts a bit 'after the 70mm to 15mm and has a soft fur, but otherwise it can be very rewarding. Autofocus fast, quiet and accurate. Every time I remount the reflex seems to me to go home. Definitely the lens more comfortable than my kit. Maybe not the most "artistic" but that's what pissed when I want to be sure to take home the shot. sent on October 29, 2014 |
 | Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4x Pros: Small, economical, compatible with objectives not multipliable, good quality Cons: Not compatible with EF-S lenses Opinion: I use it occasionally for a year, on a Eos 60D coupled to the VC Tamron 90 Macro or the Tamron 70-300 70-300 VC.rnCon the point of central focus stops working with focal lengths over 200mm, but remain active side. In general, the quality is not much worse, with the exception of a higher chromatic aberration. In particular, the 90 macro, I struggle to see differences in the definition. rnNon I noticed great delays in focus, only a few "indecision" in più.rnPurtroppo does not seem compatible with my EF-S 15-85. This is the only flaw I find in this perspective on the relationship price / quality layer. sent on September 04, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 Pros: Lightness, focal Cons: dominant colors Opinion: I use it on APS-C, adding 40 2.8 stm, in light output. It has a quality unexpected, given the age (it's a 1998 model). Suffers, sometimes, a dominant cold that forces to a greater post production work. The AF is precise but not very fast (but better than other objectives, eg. 1.8 50) and fairly noisy. If you Riec to find a used copy, it is a good buy that a quality / price ratio doesn'te to beat for this focal length. sent on September 01, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pros: Lightness, clarity, price / quality ratio Cons: Autofocus is not fast Opinion: It replaced, in my kit, the 50 1.8 which I had never found the right feeling with the engine autofocus.rnNe am very satisfied, the speed (though not excellent) and accuracy are from another planet. On APS-C the sharpness is very high even at 2.8 and the focal length, with a little 'of habit, it is comfortable. I use it mainly for portraits (alternating 90 VC Macro), and every time I want to lighten the weight of the camera. I think of FF acquire greater ecletticità.rnPer the price is one of Canon lenses not to be missed. sent on September 01, 2014 |
 | Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro VC USD Pros: Sharpness, AF speed, stabilizer, value Cons: Compatibility with mirrorless Canon Opinion: After trying the old version and its quality (but also its painfully slow AF) and confidant of Tamron enhancements with new technologies USD and VC (I already had the 70-300 vc usd) I was convinced and I did not regret the purchase. Immediately became my favorite lens, on Eos 60 d sharpness is already very good at f 2.8 (and gets impressive from f4), the stabilizer is useful for portraits (and in some cases even a little help in macros) and AF although slightly + slow of USM 15-85 is adequate for a macro lens, and absolutely accurate even in low light. Definitely a product got it right, with little to envy to 100 l (I've got to try) but with 50% less cost. Update-use on Eos M5: after upgrading the firmware I was able to use it even on the M5. Here the AF speed is slightly reduced and especially more inaccurate in non-optimal lighting conditions. Usable but definitely better out of reflex. sent on August 27, 2014 |
 | Canon 60D Pros: Relatively compact body, swiveling screen. Cons: Lack fine tuning focus. Opinion: Just bought out in 2010, it was expected that the camera after years with the 350D. The photo quality the great judge, often shooting at low ISO, but when I was needed, I worked up to 6400 ISO and still get shots that discrete downstream of a little 'cleaning job with Lightroom. rnIl its added value is smaller than a semi-pro bodies, but much more ergonomic and robust series x00D. The only flaw "real" is the lack of fine adjustment of the focus that I had to discard a Sigma 24-60 2.8 with significant problems with front focus.rnLa would change only with a 6D if this was not limited to a time minimum of 1/4000. sent on August 27, 2014 |
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
