|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Alessandro Mattiello www.juzaphoto.com/p/AlessandroMattiello  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Lowepro Flipside 400 AW Pros: Resistance, compactness, light weight, opening on the back Cons: For me, no Opinion: I have it from 2012 ... brought in Namibia, South Africa, Costa Rica and various European locations, with a little 'skill in the joints can lead 2 SLR, the 300 f2.8 vr, the 70-200 f4, a' other smaller lens and at least a pair of multipliers. I tested several times the resistance to shock and tears, as well as the climatic conditions, the dry Namibian desert to tropical downpours, and it's still like new! For photographic safari is highly recommended as long as you do not exceed the size of a 300 2.8. Another good thing is that it does not give much in the eye, and hardly seems a backpack for pictures ... and sometimes it's a nice benefit ;-) sent on June 29, 2015 |
 | Nikon D750 Pros: Autofocus; held at high ISO; auto white balance; image quality; ergonomics; display tilting; tropicalization. Cons: for lovers of technology, GPS (also because it could use geotag shots); limited buffer compared to Nikon products end a bit 'higher Opinion: FF good handyman. I took it as a replacement for the D3 to the lower weight and the best performance at high ISO, also having to face a trip to Costa Rica, and I was not deluso.rnPartiamo body: light and handy, good grip, did not give me particular problems of unbalance while being almost always attached to the 300 2.8 with various multipliers. Tropicalisation excellent: we were hit by tropical downpour (who have been there can understand what I mean ...) at Tortuguero, while we were on a boat discovery ... I tried to protect the equipment but the water has completely washed , for about 40 minutes, camera, lens and multiplier. No problem! RnDisplay great for macros, live-view worthy finally, allowed me to easily do the photos to the tree frogs in notturna.rnAutofocus the very top: I almost always used in the AF group, which rarely failed (also considering conditions - objective often multiplied and high iso) rnAgli high iso is great even though beyond 3200 are preferable flagship D4 / D4S (but I did not do the resampling);obviously does not do miracles, so if you use a lens multiplied or duplicated, the loss of quality at high sensitivity is evident. Over 300 smooth 2.8 you can instead take to 6400 ISO without problemi.rnAvevo with me even the D800 so I did a little 'respect but in the end I almost always taken with the D750 because it has a faster burst (even if the buffer is limited), better autofocus and is easier to handle, ensuring greater reliability especially in light conditions not ottimale.rnQualità high picture, white balance perfect even at high ISO. I consider it a small D800; I recommend it to those who do not have the resources to take a flagship but try anyway a good level of quality and reliability and a good camera for any genere.rn sent on January 16, 2015 |
 | Nikon D800 Pros: Image quality (dynamic range, detail), autofocus, crop Room 1.2/1.5x convenient and fast, right compatible. Cons: The file goes far beyond ISO 1600 and worked, however, the loss of quality is evident, not digests well multipliers also very sharp lenses like the 300 2.8; heavy files, you must keep time well above the limit of the shake- Opinion: I come from experiences with D300, D7000 and D3 (which I still hold to clean files, and the operating speed of light), the D800 I use it exclusively for nature (landscapes and birdlife). The quality of the file from 100 to 800 iso in my opinion has no equal (compared with flagships both Canon and Nikon), and instead you have to expose carefully and the decline in quality was pretty obvious (though I would say that up to 1600 ISO can be fairly quiet even on moving subjects). Exceptional autofocus (I did not think it was so improved compared to the D3!). Convenient for those who photograph animals, the ability of the various crop in camera.rnFin here the positive aspects ... the downside derived from the same features that are appreciated: the 36 Mp! The dense sensor does not forgive, time should always be well beyond the safety limit, not a machine "one shot, one kill", it is always better to use a good tripod, also goes well with clear objectives (usually fixed) smooth while illBears multipliers (with 2x of VRI 300 2.8 as the decline is also evident if, resampling, you can "disguise" some flaws), and even the level of stabilizzatore.rnA photos of landscape, using the usual precautions (solid tripod and stand up mirror with remote cable release) gives no problem and in fact due to the wide dynamic range sometimes allows single shots without having to resort to double exposures. sent on January 28, 2014 |
 | Nikon D7000 Pros: Quality / price ratio, resistance to high ISO, good burst, good quality files Cons: AF is not really accurate, especially in moving subjects; many Mp. The sensor tends to get dirty quite easily. Opinion: I photographed for over a year (landscapes, macro, marriage, birds) at the same time with the D300 and D7000; when it's time to take only one of the two, the choice fell on a D7000 for keeping really good at high iso. .. no problem in taking 800 iso and also (but I try to avoid) at 1600 iso. The AF performance is not like that instead of the old D300, but it's more than acceptable. The controversial issue of megapixels in this camera is an interesting synthesis, in fact if the subject is close and with good light, the detail is enhanced it (the file is qualitatively optimal and you can crop and also a lot), if it is far away and with hard light on the contrary it is the typical "mixed" (even at low ISO). In the field of aps-c, I hope always nell'erede the D300 that still do not see the horizon ... However, the D7000 does its dirty work in any condition (I brought her in the mud, in the desert and in the rain) and has an excellent value & agrave ;/ price, which is why I recommend it highly. sent on June 11, 2013 |
 | Nikon D3 Pros: Professional body and indestructible, excellent button layout, precision metering, burst, excellent quality files Cons: no one, especially now that you can buy used at relatively low prices Opinion: Great for portraits and photos of sports / nature as long as there is no need to crop in an exaggerated way. The low iso file is a cleaning and incredible sharpness, and the burst is more than worthy; meter is very reliable. Regarding the accuracy / AF speed and the seal at high iso D800/D4 is lower, but is also more than 5 years old ... and for what it costs nowadays (used) I would say that the difference in cost with the new flagship is not worth the real gap between the two cameras. The layout of the keys in my opinion is always used migliore.rnHo Aps-c (D300 and D7000) for the nature (birds in particular) and thought I could not do without the crop factor, but from the time around with the D3 only in a few cases I had to replace it with the D7000 to "capture" a subject smaller and / or away; in each case the difference between the files is evident. That of FF is ready and needs is small changes, also, in general, Thanks to all the features listed above, the percentage of sharp shots and in focus, especially in dynamic situations, is considerably higher. Other positive factors: it balances very well with the paintings and "holds" much better than any aps-c 300 2.8 duplicate. sent on June 11, 2013 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4 G ED VR Pros: Sharpness, fast AF, stabilizer, weight, handling, versatility Cons: no one Opinion: Excellent zoom generation, and it shows ... light and handy but extremely sharp, AF and stabilizer are designed for the most demanding amateurs or professionals. I was undecided until the last of this brand new f4 and f2.8 big brother, I must say that if you are shooting indoors is definitely better to save and take this little gem. I've used it for portraits (good blurred) and birds in flight at close range (but very fast), where he has not shown the slightest hesitation. D3 on the resulting file has an excellent quality, on D7000 behaves ottimamente.Consigliatissimo however for those who have discovered this focal range and photographer prevalentamente outdoors. sent on May 08, 2013 |
 | Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Pros: value for money, opening 2.8, sharpness Cons: building, especially the hood, not just af lightning and difficulty in low light type churches Opinion: Excellent "all rounder" for aps-c that has nothing to envy compared to big brothers brand, especially if it relates to the disbursement monstrously lower. Sharpest from f4 on, but also af 2.8 is not doing badly. Great for photos of the city (monuments, etc..) And landscapes, good for the night. Mounting it on a tripod and using all the techniques of the case, the result is assured in every situation. Much less powerful freehand in low light situations such as in church (weddings etc..). Good resistance to flare. I always carry with me in all my travels, I mount on the D7000 and I could not do without. sent on February 15, 2013 |
 | Nikon AF-S 300mm f/2.8 G ED VR Pros: Sharpness, can be multiplied with TC-14, TC-17 and TC-20, value retention over time (if bought used), made with the limiter Cons: Weight, size, cost Opinion: For me it is a point of arrival. It 'superb lens exploited mostly by the shed, but still has a sustainable weight for those who do (like me) also use freehand. From smooth has made incredible, with the TC-14 in practice it loses almost nothing in terms of speed, with the TC-17 loses something but the image quality is still excellent. With the TC-20 III is like a dream, especially on FF. Certainly does not have the versatility of a zoom lens, however, with a single objective, according to the situations, you can have a 300 mm, a 420 mm, a 510 mm and a 600 mm. sent on June 06, 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
