|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Apeschi www.juzaphoto.com/p/Apeschi  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR Pros: Very good on all focal lengths. Light. Compact at the lowest focal length, it lengthens by increasing the focal length. Very comfortable and creative lens. It allows you to range over any type of frame. Very good stabilization. It's not macro but it allows 'almost' macro shooting, meaning very close (obviously not at macro magnification but almost). Cons: Dimly lit. Opinion: I think it's a unique lens (at least until now), as it allows you to photograph from 28mm to 400mm. I find it very convenient (on bright days) for long walks, for trips, for excursions, for general photographs. Optical performance that once did not even exist with zooms with a shorter focal range and that today is really very good despite the considerable excursion. Well stabilized. What is it and what is it not? It is not (and should not be thought of) as a lens that replaces a kit. Optically (in terms of focal lengths) it certainly replaces a kit, but it is wrong to think that it is the same thing and you must avoid making comparisons with other kinds of lenses. It's pretty obvious (and it needs to be very clear) that a 28-400 f4/f8 can't (and shouldn't) be compared to any other lens. It will never be as good as a fixed camera, it will never be as good as a much brighter zoom with a shorter focal range. It is a fact linked to the type of project. When is it good? Always, whenever for whatever reason you want to have a wide focal range but you don't want to or can't carry numerous lenses with you. Comparisons like this should be avoided, but if I want to do macro I bring the 105 Micro Z vr or the 50 MC (very true but if I don't want to and can't take them with this I can settle for close-up shots even if not macro in the true sense of the term), but the 24-120 f4 is much better (certainly but it stops at 120), but the 28-400 starts from 28 and not from 24 (but what does it matter to you? bring the 14-30 if you need a wide angle, or bring the 24-120 if you don't have to go up to 400 which from 24 to 120 is certainly better), but the 70-200 f2.8 is another thing (obviously yes, but bring that and then also a 100-400 or a 180-600 or a fixed 400 and then you have to cover the focal lengths below 70 And if you don't need focal lengths below 70mm, what are we talking about? it's not the lens for you). Is it good for photo hunting? In my opinion it is not recommended as a lens for that purpose, but if you go out with only the 28-400 you can also do photographic hunting (but you don't have to choose it for that precise purpose, there is better). That is, it is an excellent lens (28-400 f4/f8, to be emphasized and kept in mind), versatile, universal, which knows how to do everything and in the best way (in bright light or going up in sensitivity with the sensor and then maybe using an excellent noise reduction SW), it has no terms of comparison with other lenses, as any other lens does not have this focal range, But it should also not be compared (in terms of quality and performance) to lenses with a shorter focal range designed for more specific uses. If you know a priori what you will have to photograph and you can bring brighter, fixed or zoom lenses with focal range, it is better to bring those, weight permitting. If, on the other hand, you photograph for pure pleasure, on a bright day, you have a camera with a sensor that holds noise well at high ISO (and maybe then uses the noise reduction SW), with the 28-400 you can take all kinds of photos from almost macro to super-telephoto with a single body and lens. Considering the excursion, it is really a very well made and correct optics. sent on May 22, 2024 |
 | Nikon Z 85mm f/1.8 S Pros: Great goal. Great blurry. Cons: Nobody Opinion: It is certainly a very good goal. In the past I have always liked to have in my kit an 85mm that I used both on film and on the Nikon D800. I have an 85 f1.8 AFD with which I enjoyed playing using the full-aperture lens taking advantage of the very selective focus and blurring the rest. I missed a native 85mm Z. I must say that it is an excellent lens, pasty colors, soft blur as I remembered with the old and best historical nikkor. It seems to me much sharper than the AFD 85 version I have and definitely superior in everything. I am very satisfied especially for the quality of the colors and for the overall yield. Great bokeh. NB: I have never owned an f1.4 nor nikkor nor Sigma Art or other brands, so my judgment is relative to the previous AFD f1.8 that I own. I am therefore not able to make a comparison with other higher-end lenses, but this I must say that it is still a very good goal, one of the best (or perhaps the best) in my possession. It ranks, in my opinion, absolutely among the high-level objectives. sent on March 22, 2022 |
 | Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 S Pros: Great goal Cons: It's not really a compact goal, but given the level of construction it's not a big deal. A bit expensive to be a fifty f1.8, but it deserves the money it costs. Opinion: On Full Frame it is the classic 50mm normal lens. At one time, when zooms were not yet fashionable, the 50mm was sold in kits with film mechanical bodies. The lens in question is an excellent lens, very sharp, light but robust, with an excellent blur. Great for portraits and general photography. It is very sharp starting from f1.8 included. It can be used at all openings. Maybe one of the best 50 mm nikkor f1.8 ever produced (I had an AI f1.8, an AF f1.8, an AFD f1.4, but this is perhaps the top in the f1.8 brightness range). sent on March 22, 2022 |
 | Nikon Z 20mm f/1.8 S Pros: Great goal. It is a wideagolar pushed on Full Frame very bright. Despite being a 20mm it is still very correct in yield and has no obvious distortions. It is very bright and extremely sharp even at full aperture. Cons: It is not a compact lens. The price is not really cheap, but it is still a great lens that is worth all the money it costs. Opinion: Very sharp lens even at full aperture. Great blurry. Fall of light at the edges at full aperture absolutely very contained and negligible. Usable from f1.8 included onwards. Minimal aberration considering that we are talking about a 20mm. Definitely a great goal. It is a lens that can be used in many fields. I like it for landscapes wanting to frame a wide field but also for full-person portraits set in the context (obviously it is not a lens to recommend for portraits, given the focal length, but in some cases it is still versatile). sent on March 22, 2022 |
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
