|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Babu www.juzaphoto.com/p/Babu  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM Pros: Sharpness, overall yield between color, three-dimensionality, microcontrast and detachment of the floors, price, valuable construction Cons: Some chromatic aberration, af not in line with the general goodness of the lens. Opinion: I wanted a 85mm for years, I wanted it since I started making photography for fun.rnThe sigma EX DG 85mm 1.4 was my second choice after the model Art that honestly offered more but not enough to justify the expense that would have compromised the purchase of a second lens (Canon Biancone). For about 500 € I took a lens that is pure poetry, big blurred, soft and beautiful homogeneous, to 1.4 everything that is not the subject becomes a confused drape that enhances even more the figure taken. Bright at the right point, clear beyond measure. The main flaw in my opinion is that the autofocus turns out to be quite uncertain in situations where it should not be wrong absolutely, under a meter and a half effort to hook and the depth of field does not help absolutely, so it is a fixed that you need to know how to use and requires probably time to be governed in a way. The aberrations are present but just close 2/3 stop to have a fantastic rendering free from optical defects and for a sharp fright. From 1.4a 2 is poetry, from 2.8 to 9 is the thread of a blade just forged, over f9 I would not push because in my model the sharpness drops drastically. In any case, an extremely nurtured lens that is beautiful to look at and use sent on February 13, 2018 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Pros: Very solid, luminous construction, lightning-fast and infallible autofocus, already very clear at f2.8.rnColoring micro-balance, well balanced microcontrast and excellent tactile feeling Cons: Stabilization (with reserve on use), absent tropicalization (?) RnDo not have it supplied Opinion: Bought 2 days ago, but to me quite familiar. rnHo long weighted on his purchase as I wanted once and for all to add a 70-200 2.8 to the kit. On balance if Canon produces it from the distant 95 and has never stopped a reason there will be. Although it has an old pattern is always a good solution, its value does not collapse so if you can make the step to the brother IS II you will not risk selling this lens below a certain threshold; in any case it is worth every penny spent, weighs and feels, but it is justified thanks to its phenomenal robustness and brightness.rnNitido already at 2.8 gives a delicate and pleasant bokeh to the eye, also help the colors and the general contrast.rnThe first approach It can be frustrating as it is still heavy and with a FF or series 1 after a few hours especially in difficult light conditions it will be more difficult to have a steady hand (with a 5D with BG and biancone turns around 3kg) .rnThe stabilizer is definitely a lack, but it feels only when you can not raise too manythe iso or you make shots in critical light situations (church and interior), with the right firmness can be photographed quietly even to 1/60 without major risks.rnThe flaw if you can consider such is that as a series L I would have expected the tropicalization, however I believe that even in not optimal conditions this lens knows how to work perfectly. rnAf frighteningly quick and precise, with the 3mt limiter becomes even more precise! rnThe advice? YES, a yes as big as a house! If you do not have money to get the IS II or you simply do not need it, give yourself this real L Lens! sent on February 11, 2018 |
 | Canon 5D Mark II Pros: Quality of files, mpx "right" for full framernScreenshot, live view, video playback, price of used, microregulation, massive and ergonomic, tropicalized, simple and direct menu Cons: Vacuum cleaner, versatile in a very limited way, awkward shadow recovery, not a real upgrade compared to 5D1 Opinion: I came from 5D mk1 who has accompanied me in 2 phases of my life for about 5 years, always loved and appreciated for its rough and crude charm and the limitations given since its entry into the market. After the 5D broke, I had to choose to take something that was hard to work for, and make me feel like "home"; given the limited time in my possession I gave an opportunity to the 5D2 that I never considered a machine essential for work.rnIt has taken home the 5D2 hesitantly, it is definitely an upgrade to the 5D, but not extreme.rnUniche valid features are the live view, the ability to make videos, microregulation, the silent shot and the chance to shoot in tethering. The menu is modern but basic and easy as almost 5D, making me feel less frustrated than expected. rnQuantity of the megapixel right and not excessive, it manages to pull detail worthwhile for many uses and great prints. The files are sober, without artifacts and familiar to the 5D, no artefacts or real problems. rnThreadly weak from editing on the shadows, whose recovery exceeds grain and disturbance with artifacts. Taking on with controlled light instead expresses a very different, phenomenal and high performance character, but only because it excludes high-end professional and medium-sized machines handle mixed light or difficult ambient light. By viewing the screen I could notice a annoying red cyan, big iso similar to 5D although I honestly saw the 5D already excel at iso 800 the 5D2 (probably due to the lower density of the sensor). Obviously it is not a machine designed to be versatile, it is only used for portrait, architecture and advertising photos where it is always using studio flash to pull out the claws. It is a worthy heir to the 5D but not too far from it, but for the price which costs at the moment is definitely worth spending. sent on November 06, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Pros: Opening, phenomenal construction, well-distributed weight, fast and silent, tonal, three-dimensional, blurry high-definition, clear, true-to-life, delicate and true colors. Wonderful hood. Discrete and full time manual focus functions. Cons: Variability of the models on the market, light vignetting at TA, rendered to the unconvincing edge.rnLent to be tamed and studied. Opinion: We start from the assumption that I had dreamed for 6 years to have this lens, which annoys a lot about the final judgment. Rn I could test the 24-105 L several times, so as to convince me in a short time that it is the most obvious between the lenses, something very successful But without too much "flavor," an ordinary handyman without real reasons to buy it unless it costs little and does his job as expected. On 24-70L, things take a completely different bend. You find yourself with a 1kg box in your hands, heavy, but artfully distributed. It works better on a Series 1 body or on a car with bg without it, in my opinion the weight weighs in an excellent way. Lens is poetry; Unfortunately the variability of patterns leads to the foundations of shaving blades or bottlenecks just enough.rnSpecially soft, soft and non-nervous, balanced, soft and deep colors, a general rendering that ensures a certain harmony in the shot.rn Vignetting is easily Removable with slow lens distortion, but not always necessaryTAA shows a very good clarity, which reaches the maximum peaks at f9 / 10rnI personally I see in the hood the best ally, I love the fact that it covers the little elongated barrel extension giving it a sense of uniformity, unfortunately making the optic very visible and Easily recognizable.rnThe bird is fast and silent, impeccable in any condition; Despite these observations, I could hardly notice that on modular low-tech cars tends to blur the fire even in full light, often revealing a problem to be checked. The real problem of this lens is its actual use difficulty.rnIt is not Objective that you learn to use right away and before you know how to use it best it requires attention.rn sent on August 07, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Pros: Lightweight / Economical / Clear / Robust / Robust / Blur / Stretch Maf Speed Cons: Annoying haze Opinion: After about 7 months of testing I feel that I can give a complete review of this lens. It has relatively small, compact dimensions and since the first approach it gives a pleasant sense of strength, the fact that the zoom section is integrated inside the barrel plays In favor of greater discretion in use. The overall character of the lens is well-marked, incisive in portraits, with a delightful color rendering, intense, but not overloaded colors, contrasted to the right point.rnA strong flare and backlight resistance. RnFollowing constant f4 I do not consider it absolute dark and with recent machines (if you do not use the tripod) you obviously overexposed with higher iso or simply finding a point to lean on. RnThe price is another pro, a circular lens check, If you want to resell it, it is unlikely that you will get dust at home. The only true neo in my opinion is the hood; Unlike Brothers 2.8, this lens is accompanied by a large, not petal-like, bell-like, uncomfortable and very vague look. rNFor the rest is an impeccable lens, impeccable and honestly to have absolutely no value for money approachable from any other lens on the market. sent on July 12, 2017 |
 | Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX DG HSM Pros: Crisp, light, good overall performance, construction, little AC Cons: suffers from the flare, but the version DG much less vignetting at RT, but noticeable distortion corrected, filter diameter 82mm Opinion: I purchased this objective (non-DG) because I needed a nice wide cheap prezzo.rnIl sigma has been proposed as the best among the options of buying a relatively cheap price for a good resa.rnA TA 2.8 is a little soft in the center but not a lot, but does not lose the edge vignetting is consistente.rnchiudendo to f8 sharpness is very good, the af is annoying but not bad; I also do not appreciate how many of the joint lining to Sigma, rnl'esemplare in my possession has no flaws in the headlights, so that as the only defect has the far right corner with a considerable drop in sharpness, but it is a very small angle the frame.rnA f16 starts to drop sharpness, f22 to lose tantissimo.rnNon use this light above the 24mm so I can not say, but the distortion is corrected and the vignetting is reduced considerevolmente.rncon the use of filters is a difficult use, but with a 100mm system filter holder with adapter rings WA everything is resolved without any sort of trouble as vignetting or otherwise. sent on May 22, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Pros: Sharp, bright, if you bought used price of a dinner for 2 at the restaurant. Cons: Slow AF, noisy untold levels, plastic construction, attack, plastic hood to buy separately, Vignette in TA. Opinion: Used several times, but for the immediate needs I had to buy usato.rnQuesta opinion I think it does not serve even (given the many review), but I wanted to share my opinione.rnUsandolo on a 5D I have noticed that the TA is not blurred is bad, not very creamy but do we claim for the price for which it is offered? RNAF slow, and very inaccurate, engages in optimal light "fast," indoors cane rarely, but the dark is wrong sempre.rnLa building is an embarrassment pure, even a 18-55 is better *. rnVignetta to TA, but with embedded profiles of CR corrects tranquillamente.rnTascabile, lightweight and minute, does its job and not delude.rn sent on November 06, 2013 |
 | Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Pros: Sharp, focal range on FF, bright and "light," made at the edges Cons: TA soft, non-usm, maf inaccurate. Opinion: I'm testing a few days, for the price it is really nice, 2.8 a hair soft, but not bad, for the use that I do not use it perpetually between f5.6 and f13 is gorgeous, very sharp edges and overall yield very buona.rnCostruzione a little plasticky, but overall it is not a problem, then saw the price! sent on November 06, 2013 |
 | Canon 5D Pros: Affordable, full-frame sensor, image quality and cleanliness, very solid body and well balanced and a pleasure to hold, management ISO wonderful, good files, excellent workability, discreet setting possibilities, Professional. Cons: Project a little old, AF module not great, very low burst, poor quality screen (although in some ways is a pro), CF door plastic. Opinion: I state that I went from 350D to 550D to get to 5D, 550D dissatisfied in many ways, I wanted to experience the FF increasingly enticed especially by the very positive opinions of the owners of the aforementioned users macchina.rnA comparing a entry level you immediately feel difference, especially in weight! rnMolto solid, a rock in short, weight evenly distributed (using short optical) and a very generous size big hands that help you find cozy place (another reason that led to the change). rnDisplay rear reading discreetly easy, the menu is old-fashioned so very basic, when compared to contemporary ones, but in some ways more direct and minimalista.rnRiscontro a little irritating aspects that have alarmed me not a little (especially the blocking of the aperture ring) .... especially seeing forced to read from top to bottom are 12.7 megapixel manuali.rnI but they are beautiful and large, outstanding quality, certainly produces files superlatives, especially in recovering shadows! rnMi expected worse from this machine instead mi also had to think again about the high ISO! rnHo tested the 1000-1250-1600 and setting H 3200, and despite the 3200 are only simulated, have a beautiful performance! rnColori beautiful, details are also at maximum sensitivity with an air vaguely reminiscent of the film, nothing compared to the entry level or semipro already broken down the noise at 1600 iso, knead the colors and lose detail and details more piccoli.rnUna surprise after another insomma.rnLo small screen can be seen as a pro or as a counter, personally bothers me only his resolution, which makes it very questionable to interpret the result. Important to say to who ever wants to buy it, I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT WASTE FILE SEEN ON CAMERA! RnPOTRESTE bitterly regret it! is the kind of machine that concern, and maybe when you take pictures of the screen will seem like shit, but put inside a PC will make you drop your jaw to the ground! RNAF not performing .... Canon should and should have understood the dawn the digital increase the number of punf you do not hurt anyone; 9 are few and think they are just valid ... I made a generic test with various L lenses and high-end Sigma, which can confirm the reliability of the center point, a little less those around, and complete inability to engage the subject at the outermost points. a little slow with Aperture 1.4 but very open as for example with the 70-200 2.8 I was amazed! (A bit less than the failure of the balance). RnFunzioni personalized really bad, or you learn a few things to the letter or you may think that the machine is broken (block AFAE for example). RnPer about € 500 (I paid almost new, in immaculate condition 450) is the best you can have, is worth all the money it costs, if not more, I disagree with those who think that the 5D II is so much better, the 5D has far too little to envy! Buy it and experience the pleasure of a lady car that still has much to say. sent on October 16, 2013 |
 | Ricoh Auto-Rikenon 50mm f/1.7 Pros: Economic, clear, precise and hard maf ring to the right point, F1.7, light, no AC, actual colors and pleasant Cons: some specimens are without caps, the lower ring AM sometimes hinders given its size and the awkward position, enormous suffering to the flare or in full against the light, but not so soft at room temperature, slightly marked contrast (it is a counter?) rn Opinion: I wanted a 50mm, the 1 .8 did not convince me lately and to be honest I like to focus on hand so I just tried a little gem for a few Euros, briefly appeared this "anonymous" glass ... paid 35 euro, I has been stunned by its sharpness, 1.7 is soft but not much, it shows clear improvements in 2.8 but turning the ring to f5.6 sharpness unleashes a crazy, I was surprised by the bold colors and very nice, a little less contrast very delicate (correctable pp). rnLavoro with live view so I feel even less the lack of automation, and then the feeling is indescribable hand, a fluidity that only the older optical regalare.rnsfortunatamente know how many other optical time in backlight is a tragedy, dropping, sharpness lever curtains in less than an instant, unusual contrails are formed and reflexes but some might find artistici.rnIl bokeh is not like the others, is unusual and to me either like or do not like. rnIo .. personally I have version "old" which is also thist the most sought after from what I've seen around, even if the network there are almost no sources of any kind! sent on July 15, 2013 |
 | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical Pros: Bright, high sharpness, affordable price, very nice colors, focus ring pleasant to the touch, building good workmanship, no AC Cons: ("ON CANON" No chip for confirmation MAF, does not record exif data,) ring diaphragms slightly soft, distortion, difference of 2 stops between viewfinder and live view Opinion: How to start? for me this view is outstanding, comparing qualitàprezzo you have a winning combination, true wide-angle, panoramic I was able to admire the masterpieces, very bright (which usually means high price) with a similar price is mandatory to do a little thought in his favor , on FF (I currently use it on APS-C becoming a 22mm approx) has a bit of geometric distortion (especially visible in the architecture, while the landscape shows no signs of suffering) fortunately does not suffer from AC and above all is clean and razor sharp for me not against it enough to call into question, perhaps only the unforgivable lack of care MAF making it difficult, if not impossible to focus at night or without live view and tripod, so you must work hyperfocal sent on June 05, 2013 |
 | Jupiter 21M - 200mm f/4 Pros: very low price, fixed lens, solid construction Cons: heavy, not excellent optical quality, a bit dark Opinion: memory of my father, it is a perspective that is more like a shell cannon, of weight and construction, all-metal, I personally would break easily if one foot out of hand, relatively inexpensive (the network is also within 40euro) is not is nothing exceptional after all, has a discutibilissimo hood and the aperture ring is prone to damage, some people (I have tested 3) and in particular mine, have fingerprints of those who have mounted on an inside! however, is not to throw it clear sent on May 16, 2013 |
 | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0 Pros: Practical, good sharpness, bright, price abbordabilissimo adapter, easy to find and buy Cons: the coating is excellent, forcing a bit the ring of focus is likely to run dry (at least in my model), suffers slightly flare Opinion: I have had this light for a few years, giving me good shots, for reasons of force majeure I sold it (with regret) is an f: 2 bright, very nice hand, and precisely in focus, even if only manual. suffered the flare, and resulting chromatic aberration, especially during peak hours, but otherwise great piece for that price then! sent on March 05, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Pros: Lightweight, practical, USM, affordable price, decent focal range Cons: a dark hair, the barrel "dances", not IS, 105mm to lose quite a bit of sharpness, AC visible at long distances Opinion: Often use this view for what photographer, is comfortable, lightweight, USM also does not suffer from distortion (personally is almost nonexistent, the focus is very fast, although species in low light suffers slow, after all has a very attractive price, in my opinion then up to 85mm has a quality quite good, valid for an optical photos of every day, suffering from AC correctable but always present when photographing something distant, even a few meters sent on March 01, 2013 |
 | Canon 550D Pros: sensor performance, customization interface, large LCD screen, ease of use, does not have the adjustable screen (positive note for me this manancanza) battery life, dedicated ISO button Cons: slow burst, noise at 800 ISO, only reads SD, is plastic (though it would partially steel), grip ridiculous, too light, long exposures of the raw file is processed in a car with a considerable waiting (maybe only mine is that) DOES NOT HAVE THE MONOCHROME DISPLAY. Opinion: I have the 550D for about a week, I come from a 350D, however, noticing a jump exponentially over its older sister but less powerful, but I did enjoy a period of 2 months to get hold of other cars and try to make me a general idea, (I've got to try patience with a 5D mkIII, 50-60D, 350-400-450D, 7D) notando primarily a high quality shooting, far from obvious 5D mkIII but identical to the 7D and 60D ( useless to argue with those who are mad to say that they are different, we see that the seller has listened too live without trying), but despite their merits, defects are there and you see how! the ISO, the noise can be seen in black from 400, but only if you look carefully, 800 iso appears to 1600 starts filling pores, in 3200 almost unbearable, just a blast of noise resolves, but compromises the detail . Il grip is quite to forget, tiny comfortable at all, not the slightest sense of safety and reliability in the house should rival Canon the idea of building entry level camera bodies slightly larger and more robust, but most should decide to put 300350D as in the monochrome display, although at the moment it seems (excluding the question magnesium housing for the 50D), the only substantial difference between entry level and a semipro (although below are other details, sometimes very little underlined). LA decision to only SD card reader does not seem a nice touch, certainly more comfortable, but I preferred the CF burst to forget , 3.7 fps is nothing, the sound of the shot made from the entry level is sometimes unbearable, all in all for the price is not a bad car, in fact I recommend it to those who want something more than just a low-end entry level, and pointing to something that looks more like a link between amateur and semi-professional. sent on November 25, 2012 |
 | Canon 350D Pros: It is located at ridiculous prices, image quality should not be underestimated, monochrome display, light weight, simple and immediate, CF Cards Cons: piece of plastic, high ISO files, display size, burst shots, hot pixels on long exposures Opinion: What can I say, it was my first car, I took my first steps with her in this hobby.rnSenza pretentious and conscious of my very small economic resources, I aimed at something old but decent and what to say, it was a pleasant surprise, than the selling price which is now very low, has much to offer, 8 megapixels are more than enough and offer images dignitosissime, of course the car expresses all her sisters as the best of optics well made, unfortunately I never had the opportunity to take advantage of similar quality then we can say that with the mean optical machine will not give certain performance sublimi.rnRaffica too slow for any sports photo, above 800 ISO noise can be seen how, and long exposure night shot are formed in large quantities of hot pixels on the whole is very good and then the monochrome display, which is absent in all other entry-level outputs after which condemn especially for this absence imperdonabile.rnNonostante is a piece of plastic and the grip is not at affidabile, confirm its strength, fell 2 times, even in a disastrous way, the worst damage was on the cover but no damage funzionamentornConsigliata respect to those who want to get started without spending a fortune, perhaps combining it all immediately with some optical face the difference! sent on November 16, 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
