|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Fabio Cammalleri www.juzaphoto.com/p/FabioCammalleri  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Pentax HD FA 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR Pros: Sharp at any aperture (solves the sensor of the K-1). Tropicalized. Second-hand price. Cons: It starts from 28mm and not 24mm, 4mm make the "difference" in landscapes. Opinion: I bought it for 350 euros used by a loyalist of the brand. I needed a low-cost original lens for my K-1, since until then I had only put on Vintage lenses. I state that the "HD Pentax" treatment of this model, makes it contrasted and with "lively" color rendering. Sharp from the edges to the center is a lens that for "resolution" does justice to the severe sensor of the "Kappona". In the end, however..., having shot for almost a year with lenses -A, Super Takumar of the 70s has collected its duty: the "perfect" 28-105 seemed to me without "soul. If it had started from 24mm I would have kept it, but surely price and weight would not have been the same. That said, I recommend it for dispassionate shots without particular pretensions. It is a digital lens without art or part. sent on November 26, 2022 |
 | Pentax K-1 Mark II Pros: "All" what was superlative that there was already on the first version (so the dynamic range already absurd etc etc etc) helped by a co-processor that makes it even more impressive in the dark. Cons: Firstly... They do not seem to want to give her a worthy heir .... + obviously, it brings with it the defects of the first version that needed to be improved, but Nada. Opinion: What do I have to say... I had it for about a year after the "Mark 1" and then burned it completely (mea culpa). The CO-processor added in this version, makes it even more impressive bringing the already absurd ability to open the shadows of the first version (sensor of the Nikon D810) to a level of perfection almost if not equal to some Medium Format ... Am I talking nonsense? TRY it and you will understand that to reach it you are forced to switch to the new Mirrorless "Stacked". That's the point... Did it have flaws? Yes many: the autofocus is a hair better than the first but nothing striking, the improved Pixel Shift is always a non-professional function, the video quality always pitiful (but she is a CAMERA "MALE", PERIOD). So why so much BITTERNESS? Make a SLR that sees almost in total darkness, five or six years before the competition, stabilize it mechanically on 5 axes before Sony, Canon, Nikon ekkicavolo you want with ASTROTRACKER INCLUDED IN THE CAR, put everything in a backlit body to work in the dark in a body proof of hand grenades and give it the opportunity to mount all the cabbage of optics you want from fifty years to today. Then FORGET IT... as if it was worth nothing LET EVERYONE ELSE REACH YOU, like a formula one that dominated throughout the race and then suddenly decides to return to the pits on the last lap .... for no reason... sent on November 03, 2022 |
 | Irix 11mm f/4.0 Pros: It is the only 10-11mm option for Pentax full-frame. Distortion correction profile present in Camera Raw. Cons: Magenta/heavy purple chromatic aberration. Poor contrast. Opinion: Purchased new for € 490 in the "light" version, "Firefly", it is the only real 10-11mm lens (not fisheye), existing for Pentax K-1, so having no other choice I took it because I do a lot of architectural photography, both interiors and buildings. I first obviously checked the presence of the distortion correction profile in "Camera Raw" which in my case, is indispensable and then I ordered it. Arrived yesterday I immediately did my tests and for distortion there is to say good that even with the correction disabled is very controlled, only that this is smoke in the eyes, precisely because for the kind of photography I do where the detail counts to the hundredth, the presence of strong chromatic aberration purple / magenta is a very serious defect and exceeds any potential value. I made a comparison one by one with the Samyang 14mm f2.8 in my possession doing both the 1/1 crop test then cropping the frame from 11mm up to 14mm and the classic one on the whole frame. Here, in Samyang the chromatic aberration without correction is just present at 98% and vanishes by 99.9% with the correction profile. In this Irix the presence of Purple / Magenta in the edges of the objects against the light already at 2/3 of a frame is 95-96% (in the edges) and drops very badly perhaps up to 98% of the contour in the backlight, remaining however too visible for the kind of work I do unless I reduce the resolution of the photograph from 36mpx to 10mpx or less. Another rather negative side is the original contrast of the photo in raw. I do not know how to say that it is sharp and contrasted, since both the 14mm Samyang and the 20mm are in comparison lenses that seem to explode details and colors. From this Irix the colors come out washed out and the contrast does not live up to the sensor of the K-1 ... Having said that maybe I keep it ... because I have no other choice, but having to resort every time to a very heavy post production to revive its characteristics and try with some miracle to make the purple / magenta fringes disappear. If you don't have the Pentax K-1, take something else because it's a barely decent lens. Rating 6.5. sent on November 26, 2021 |
 | Pentax K-1 Pros: - 10 Impressive dynamic range of 14.6 EVS. - 9 Perfect resolution to handle (36mpx). - 9 Superfine detail (optics permitting). - 9 Rich and "deep" colors. Cons: Firmware with functions full of flaws, no longer updated (HDR and Pixel Shift of amateur calibration). Autofocus is usually inaccurate or slow to understand (optics depend). Video compartment exceeded (max 1080p 60 interlaced, not even progressive). Opinion: The Queen of the Night. I had in test several Reflex and ML full format but none has bewitched me so much for its ability to recover lights and shadows and to shoot in low light ... She, for me (excluding of course the new Sony A-1 and the Panasonic from over 2500 €), taking into account the price of the used, is the "Queen of the night", comparable if not superior for night seal to the A7RIV. If you have the right technical and theoretical bases it is possible to have shots with sharp lights and shadows rich in detail even with a single shot (as far as possible with almost 15 stops). Obviously it is not easy to tame: it claims "quality" or "unforgiving" optics, coma and aberrations are around the corner because its sensor pulls out of the lens 100%, as indeed all full-frame, but in particular she multiplies any defects / merits of the optics. When you do the post production of the RAW of this machine there are no surprises of dominants (optics depend.). But what you have to take into account when you buy it is that it is not a "sports" machine ... The autofocus (always optical depend.) is generally slow and inaccurate and, combined with a mediocre burst leads you to miss about 70-50% of the shots in case of motoring, motorcycling, football etc. making it unsuitable (but not impossible to use) to the action and compensating a little but not sufficiently, these defects with the stabilization of the sensor. It should not be forgotten that it is quite heavy and combining it with bright telephoto lenses means getting tired a lot. Fortunately it has an exceptional ergonomics that reduces a lot the impact of the weight but its place is the tripod, a good one! The video sector I do not judge it either, because it is NOT a machine dedicated to videomakers, although it has an almost useless audio input and the stabilization of the sensor that if it had been combined with a more recent video resolution would have paid off but would also have raised the price. What I heavily criticize is the support for the firmware update, abandoned for quite a while now, the machine in the functions has several defects that should be fixed: the number of shots in Bracketing stops only at 5 (and not at 9 as in Sony), while we have 3 useless HDR modes badly calibrated that return useless files and false colors, except perhaps one (I do not remember which one) a little more realistic than the others, but nothing serious or usable professionally (there are Smartphones that do much much better). The Pixel Shift despite its two settings, is another of its dangerous functions, made me throw in the toilet some important shots , cause mosaicization of some details, so, taking into account that we already have 36mpx what the hell is it for I do not know, better not to use it. Finally I can say that it is a machine of excellent quality, solid, tropicalized, it is the machine of the landscaper and the naturalist, I could talk for hours about her, it is a machine that when it came out dictated the law, but it is a pity it has not had a worthy evolution given that the MKII is practically IDENTICAL. sent on July 26, 2021 |
 | Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX DG Pros: Street, events, portraits, interiors. Cons: Poor sharpness already in the center, even worse at the edges. Opinion: Bought new with Pentax frame, to do multi-evening installations, via Lattea and similar, however landscape in general, at a really ridiculous price, I put it to the test to diaphragms between f5.6 and f11 just to keep it nice sharp on my K-1 that in detail pulls out a lot, in the village of Bobbio, in the afternoon and at the blue hour. Needless to say, for what I was doing, it was not good and I resold it the next day at 20€ less so much the shame of proposing such a poor optics ... at least to make landscapes. Its opening can be useful indoors: birthdays, parties, events, nothing more. Maybe in crop on apsc it definitely goes better, no on full-frame. sent on June 04, 2021 |
 | Pentax SMC M 50mm f/1.4 Pros: GOOD for APS-C. Constructive quality, openness. Low distortion. Price? Cons: Low-brightness chromatic aberrations. Actual utility on the K-1. Price? Opinion: So I've tried the K-A version not featured on Juza, but that apart from the automatic diaphragms adjustment is pretty much the exact same lens. I put it to the test: I did a low-light shot on the F.F. K-1, pushing it to FREE MANO at crazy times 1/10 1/8 (helped by stabilization on the sensor) and maximum opening f1/1.4 to capture as much light as possible. The lens gave good sharpness (generally excellent only to the most closed diaphragms) and gave in the worst case a chromatic aberration only on the lights, magenta color, easily recoverable in the post. Lack of focus is not a problem on portraiture, an area in which it lends itself more. For the rest I think the price today is an enigma and in fact I put it both on the pros, and on the cons, but it depends on who buys it and for what: in fact, it is true that the autofocus Pentax-D FA HD 50mm f1.4 in comparison costs a kidney, but it is also true that in addition to having the ultrasonic autofocus the modern version has a SUPERBA quality, the maximum opening that reduces the area of fire you use it "maybe" once a month, in short, I bought it at 130 degrees, thinking it was different from the Pentax-F 50mm f1.7 that is around at less than 100 degrees... but I was wrong, in addition to the Pentax-F f1.7 has nothing apart from the opening to f1.4, so... SU Full-Frame if you don't need to use it, except in particular conditions that oblige such an exaggerated opening, so for the K-1 I do not recommend it at all. INVECE on aps-c (tried on K3) where thanks to the crop factor uses only the central part of the lens, so the best, it makes much more sense to use it at maximum opening (f1/1.4) and "seems" to be much sharper (of course, you only use the middle part). SO YES, ON APSC are 130 euros well spent. Today I would give him a rating of 8 out of 10. sent on March 06, 2020 |
 | Samsung NX 45mm f/1.8 Pros: Sharpness, weight, precise focus, quality/price. Cons: Nobody. Opinion: I took it again in super, super-discount from Comet online, even in 2019 that since Samsung no longer producing machine bodies, they needed to get rid of it. Initially given the price I had no great pretensions but as soon as I came to compare its yield with that of the Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Sonnar T's I did not believe in my eyes, it is absolutely comparable to the point of noticing almost no difference, both as sharpness, as well as as distortion of the lens equal to 0.1%, as a chromatic aberration, and as a loss of sharpness at the edges. The only difference is the speed of focus slightly lower than the Sony but the focus precise ness combined with the body in the NX1/NX500 is surgical. It does not present aberrations under any circumstances, neither if there is strong light, no backlight, no minimum focus distance, nor hyperfocal... which I noticed in the much more expensive Pentax-A 50mm f1.4. I think Samsung did very badly to terrinate such a qualitative line of mirrorless and objective because the surrender was absurd. Now I can say that this was one of the BEST goals I have ever tried. Absurd... Guring my pictures to believe. (Eq 35mm: 69mm) sent on February 03, 2020 |
 | Samsung NX 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED OIS III Pros: - Very high detail quality even at 200mm. - Zero chromatic aberrations and distortions. - Holds the performance of the NX500 - You can do some great portraits... - It's well stabilized - I mean it doesn't look like a tele-standard but something built by Sony or Zeiss... Cons: - You should be able to block it because sometimes I get it out of my pocket and it goes to 200mm. This bothers me. I don't want to see him fall. - Opinion: The thing that left me most incredulous about this lens is the fact that, closed at between 50mm and 100mm set in opening priority, I churn out portraits that (obviously not those of the 45mm f1.8) are really BEN, BEN contrasted, detailed and with a pleasant Bokeh .... He's good at my Sam's performance. NX500, not donating bad light grain from the sensor earlier than expected by the camera's performance and trust it is a very important thing. Now why don't I compare it to canon/Nikon tele-STANDARD? Because I've already tried several and just go up to 100mm and away with the graininess, poor detail and crap portraits. To believe it? Look at my gallery. sent on October 20, 2019 |
 | Samsung NX500 Pros: - Value for money (2019). - ECCELLE in portraits and landscaping, for colors the superfine detail and above average resolution (28 mpx). - Detail in 4k videos. - Functions almost from smartphones between filters, editing possibilities and Wi-Fi connectivity - bluetooth. Cons: - Absent sight on the body (sold at a very high price and impossible to find). - Sufficient low-light freehand shots but not up to the height of an F.F. - Optics (few and rare) that once used for her can be thrown away because they do not have a future. Opinion: I bought it in August 2019 in a reasoned way since, wanting to make good "photography", in the cheapest way possible, I noticed that DXOM-rk put this machine, (buyable used at attractive prices), to a stunning 40th place among "monsters "Sacred" like Leica M10... I found it at only 350 degrees (body) and when I got home I tried it with the standard 18-55 ois that I had left from the nx3000 and I swear to you: I was going to throw it away. Very distorted shots, high graininess even at low ISO and yellowing as the light goes down, I wanted to split it, 350 degrees thrown away I thought... Meanwhile, hurriedly, the week before I had bought a 45mm f1.8, and as I was about to close the deal by selling it to a guy on Subit, I got home the new goal. Curious, lost to lose, I fitted him to try and.... I was in disbelief... The machine went from discreet to ECCELLENTE. I found that the 18-55 and 20-50 are not at all suitable for the high performance but overthrusts of this backlit sensor (a bit like mounting a very small intercooler to a 3000 turbo petrol machine), which is precisely true that it is an APSC, but not being great as an F.F. needs "quality" lenses and a good opening to give it its all. Convinced with an excuse I kept it and studying the manual thoroughly I discovered that this machine is a "bomb", especially in the landscape, with the 16mm f2.4 gives panormami worthy of an Alpha 7-7s, Nikon D610-750. Obviously where she is overcome with low hands by the aforementioned is in the freehand shots made at low brightness, where A7 and D610 manage to give "perfection" even with very low exposure times. With the NX500 I churned out evening files of ALTA quality on one condition: easel, long exposure and a good goal, as I said, forget the Standard Lens kit. It is a machine that wants its tricks and its "cuddles", after which it can give enormous satisfaction, since (with the 45mm f1.8 for example) churns out RAW in very "standard" colors without chromatic aberrations, white lights neither hot nor cold, deep black and not disturbed, everything up to 1600 ISO impeccably, in short I would say perfect to work then in posts without "killing yourself". I recommend shooting fHD a50p videos, the 24p of the 4K although of superb quality is fine only in case of quite "quiet" videos where the framed subjects move little or nothing, otherwise you will start to notice the vintage film effect. Defects? I discovered from the original Samsung site that the additional viewfinder exists... but it's nowhere to be found. For the rest I keep it and I am particularly jealous, since my classmates with the money I spent, yes are bought only an EOS 2000d that does not have a quarter of the performance of this flagship, unfortunately but without future... sent on October 20, 2019 |
 | Samsung NX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS Pros: - Current value (Aug 2019) 100 degrees. Good stabilization. Manual length. Paralight included. - "Closed" at 18mm has a good amplitude with a controllable distortion that can be corrected in post. Cons: - It greatly lowers the performance of the Nx500. Horrible at night. Bad for portraits. - Tendency to low-light yellow. - From too much noise compared to the same identical shots made with 16mm f2.4. Opinion: It was the first lens I used on my NX500 and... was making me BUTTARE VIA THE MACCHINA. I was convinced that the problem was the body and instead. in extremis I mounted on the body the 45mm f1.8 and I thought again just an hour before receiving a payment on Right Away. It's a good lens only for bodies like the NX3000 or the NX200 also because the shots thanks to the fact that it is OIS always manage WELL STABILIZATIONS. By day used in priority opening behaves discreetly, but at night it is horrendous. That is, Let me explain better: at 18mm I made a long exposure of a chisetta in Cremona 30sec. the shot came out decent, BEN STABILITO and with an appreciable detail, but yellowed, which with the 16mm did not happen, besides the quality of the evening shots from 1/500 down is pitiful... Do I recommend it? Only to those who have an NX100 NX1000 3000 3000 but NEVER AND NEVER TO WHO HAVE An NX1 or NX500... sent on October 18, 2019 |
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
