|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Stenogau www.juzaphoto.com/p/Stenogau  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Rollei 35 (40mm Sonnar f/2.8) Pros: Very small and light, solid mechanics, central shutter, optical viewfinder bright, excellent optical performance. Cons: Focus on estimation, sufficient exposure, focal length 40 mm, hard to handle with gloves. Opinion: The possess the early 80's and has found a place in my backpack for decades. The modest limitations due to fixed focal length lenses are largely offset by the optical performance and easy to transport. Shutter accurate and reliable, valuable in combination with the flash because shutter that allows for full synchronization. Yield very homogeneous to the various diaphragms over the entire surface of the frame and also good to f. 22. With excellent color and perfect for landscape and architecture. The angle of view is offset by limited distortion practically absent. sent on April 10, 2013 |
 | Soligor 400mm f/6.3 Pros: good already wide open, improves to f. 8-11, 11 diaphragm blades and good yield of blurry, not too heavy at the time (late 70's) statement. Cons: diaphragm preselection, down from f. 22 to 32, but improved in contrast discreet PP, tends to warm colors. Opinion: This is a version with a diaphragm preselection, and to set the aperture unfortunately need to maneuver a double ring. The first is to choose the working aperture, and the second coaxial set before shooting. The solution, very old and uncomfortable, it is clearly dictated by economic criteria, but luckily it performs well at full aperture. Aperture 6.3 working? 8? 11. The construction is pretty solid, and there is a ring coaxial kit with adjustable tripod mount. Tends a little 'hot colors, but PP can be compensated quite well. All in all it can give the satisfaction of groped photo hunting at modest cost, even at his age. My vote for this view is 7, mainly because of the good optical performance, weight and size content and cost. Things are different if I remember everything. sent on April 08, 2013 |
 | Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5 Macro Pros: maximum brightness, light weight, with a strong helical extension to the prim. 1:2 without extension tubes, excellent overall yield also very closed to diaphragms, blurred beautiful, good construction. Cons: my copy shows some modest all'elicoide game but worked very, lens hood is not supplied. Opinion: as an alternative perspective, at the time I did not expect such good results. Also excellent for portrait and landscape, and of course macro photography. Very well with the color. The only drawback, probably motivated by the strong excursion the helix. Over time and tends to show some game to ring focus. My original works heavily since 1982. sent on April 07, 2013 |
 | Minolta Rokkor 135mm f/2.8 Pros: good brightness and excellent overall yield up to f. 16, moderate weight (not down), lens hood, very solid construction. Cons: decrease in f. 22 Opinion: great for portrait and landscape even with the color, but also valid in the internal good brightness. Very clear intermediate diaphragms to f. 16, made nice with the focus. rnDiscretamente heavy and compact, with lens hood kit is manufactured with high quality materials. Ring focus very smooth and free of play, even after heavy usage. My copy works since 1978. sent on April 07, 2013 |
 | Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm f/1.7 Pros: very good brightness, excellent overall performance with a small decrease at maximum aperture, weight and compact size, solid construction. Cons: I do not know, but at the widest aperture I had occasion to test it thoroughly. Opinion: was the focal standard offer provided with a very good performance and homogeneous. Diaphragms work by f. 4 to f. 16, with excellent color. Lightweight and compact, shows a building with materials of good quality. Focus ring is very smooth and free of play, even after heavy usage and years of work. My specimen is attivoa since 1973. sent on April 07, 2013 |
 | Minolta Rokkor 50mm f/2 Pros: good brightness and excellent overall yield also apertures, low weight and compact size, solid construction. Cons: blurred because of the hard diaphragm few lamellae. Opinion: it is the economic version of the standard f. 1.7, but it is enough to test him to change his mind and realize its pretty good quality. The yield is very homogeneous even as low as f. 2, but the diaphragms of work ranging from f. 4 and up to f. 16. Internal reflections content and lack of flare phenomenon. Lighter and more compact brother f. 1.7, shows a construction with good quality materials. Ring focus very smooth and free of play, even after heavy usage. My copy works since 1978. sent on April 07, 2013 |
 | Minolta MD 24 mm f/2.8 Pros: size and weight, brightness, good overall performance even at maximum closure, made in backlight with very low internal reflections, lens hood also if it helps very little. Cons: distortion in line with the focal length but beware the falling lines. Opinion: I found this view of second hand in perfect condition, and at a good price. I think the focal length I use most of all, and I was also impressed by the yield with the color and backlight violent. The distortion is quite good, but with pictures of architecture have to be careful, or resign themselves to correct in post production. sent on April 07, 2013 |
 | Vivitar 28mm f/2.5 Pros: At that time (early 70's) cost, maximum brightness, light weight, good performance from f. 4, built strong enough. Cons: vignetting by the widest apertures up to f. 8, suffers much the backlight Opinion: In spite of its economy is doing very well in many situations, particularly with regard to shooting in low light. Good sharpness and micro-contrast and low distortion, goes well with the color. Unfortunately cartoon clearly, but today it is possible to limit the defect in PP. Suffers greatly backlighting with internal reflections marked. All in all, the judgment is positive, but its shortcomings have convinced me to replace it with a 24 mm Minolta. sent on April 04, 2013 |
 | Minolta XM Pros: Electronic shutter with exposure to titanium aperture-priority, 100% viewfinder and bright, very sensitive and soft good shooting for when using long time, good way to cushion the blow of the mirror and low vibration, slides and interchangeable viewfinders, easy cleaning viewfinder and slides, also works without battery on a mechanical time of 1/100, very sturdy and well-built, long battery life (over three years) if you had the foresight to just dash by holding a big front button and turning off the 'exposure. Cons: A bit 'cumbersome if accompanied by prism viewfinder type Photomic, poor readability of the exposure meter needle illuminated by a small prism which in time becomes unusable, shutter lock if you shoot with the meter off. Opinion: I possess 77 and has worked a lot in all environmental conditions, earning a slip on the ice and remedying a blow. rnPensavo was ready for the landfill, and instead has held up very well, and continues to grind without missing a beat, subject to a dent brought along as a souvenir. very precise shutter, and optimal exposure even in AUTO mode. Excellent system to cushion the blow of the mirror with movement 'to lift'. Almost all cameras have a mirror hinged to the upper side, and they are taken simply flips over. Minolta XM is designed with a singular movement of the mirror, and it locks you have virtually horizontal plate, and rises upwards compressing a big cushion of air as well as two cylinders that fit in the seats. The system works fine and results in very low vibration, to the point that they are achievable handheld shooting freedom in otherwise impossible conditions. If I am not mistaken, the Minolta repeated and perfected the system in most rooms & ugraC just try again. sent on April 04, 2013 |
 | Minolta SRT-303 Pros: Very strong body dimensions you hold well, perfect mechanics, slide rangefinder with microprism effective. Cons: with shutter curtain fabric and metallic sound, sight of discrete brightness and good outdoors but a little critical internal and optics under f. 3.5, sync at 1/60, but fragile enough exposure, accumulation of dirt in the viewfinder caused by proliferation of insects that eat the strips of foam used to cushion the mirror. Opinion: I own the 73 and the street has come a long accumulating many thousands of shots. On one occasion, in 5000 more than two months, but the frequency of use has not always been so high. In spite of the age still gets along very well, even in harsh environments. From time exposure meter does not work anymore, but my habits is not a problem. I have no idea of ??its value in used in good condition, but I think very modest. If it were not that confident and care necessary for the treatment of emulsions is irretrievably lost, it would be recommended. Or do all in their own (like the writer), and with the color is not easy. sent on April 04, 2013 |
 | Canon 5D Pros: excellent image quality, pixel large, light weight, good body strength and resistance to weathering. Cons: suffers from dust, gust limited Af unresponsive especially with off-axis points, lcd screen enough, lightweight plastic counters Opinion: It 'was my first digital camera grip for work. I've never been disappointed, even when used in unfavorable weather conditions and transported to shoulder, including everything that I carry below. Ideal for landscapes, portraits, wedding and studio photography. Is fairly good for moving subjects and in low light, and sometimes need to activate the central AF point only. Good from 50 to 400 ISO. Good up to 1600, later still provides usable images. Given the current prices for the body in good order, to recommend. sent on November 29, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Pros: excellent image quality, accurate and silent AF, robust construction and low weight Cons: I do not know Opinion: It 's so handy and that I would use it forever. Great for landscapes but especially for portraits. Just try to make a crop of a small portion of the image, and you realize how it bene.rnNon are still able to prove it to the bottom of the ambient light in the interior, but the first tests tell me that the maximum brightness is not reduced is a disadvantage, and I refer to the possibility of framing well in low light. And then the brother f. 2.8 weighs a 'ton', and it is big. sent on November 22, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Pros: image quality, accurate and silent AF, rugged construction, does not suffer from the backlight Cons: weight, focal length 24 distorts a bit 'but just keep it' on the bubble 'and be careful. Opinion: I was able to find new and cheap, because of the expected release of version MK II. Great for universal use, ceremonies, portraits, landscapes with light rain. The big hood protects well, and the lens shows to hold the backlight without flare widespread. Behaves very well at night, even at maximum aperture. sent on November 22, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 35mm f/2.0 Pros: image quality, weight, price Cons: Af noisy, hard blurry Opinion: It 'a focal universal ideal for those traveling with the backpack. Optimum efficiency even with large apertures, but excellent from f. 3.5 and up. The maximum closing it drops a little. He's doing very well at night in low light, even in combination with the AI ??Servo mode for shooting subjects in movimento.rnConsiderato the price, the limited dimensions and the beautiful quality, from consigliare.rn -------- ------------ rnModeste adjustments to the first giudizio.rnPiuttosto good to f. 2 to f. 3.5 also because of the beautiful brightness, from 5.6 to 16 I would say excellent, f. 22 suffers a hint of diffraction but the decline does not appear to me netto.rnIn low light my copy is doing very well, but using only the center AF point, the typical problem of the Canon 5D, I guess. I found this lens almost new and cheap, but also paying it in full is definitely worth serious consideration. sent on November 22, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Pros: Excellent image quality, accurate and silent AF, price, construction Cons: I missed the hood, also due to lack of front lens protection. Opinion: AND 'been mine first optical Canon 5dmk1 acquired for business purposes. It was to play a large number of antique prints on behalf of a newborn museum in 2007. My choice of using a digital camera, at the time, it did turn up their nose to customers threatening to refuse the work, and having to divert one A0 scanner .. Sic .. (the originals were very large) .rnAlla end, the quality of the images provided dall'accoppiata Canon 5d and 100 mm. f. 2.8 macro has been such, and to the very edges, that none of my interlocutors strict dared fiatare.rnEccellente for portrait. sent on November 22, 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
