|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Swallero www.juzaphoto.com/p/Swallero  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Fujifilm XF 56mm f/1.2 R Pros: versatility, f 1.2, optical quality Cons: Minimum focusing distance Opinion: I had this beautiful slow for a few months, then I sold it and replaced with 90mm. The 56mm is better than 90mm for: versatility, size, maximum opening, "dreamy effect" of photos, three-dimensional (perception and personal opinion) The 90mm is better than 56mm for: sharpness, auto focus, bokeh, minimum focusing distance and resulting in higher reproduction ratio (0.2 vs 12:09). This last point is the main reason why I replaced the 56mm in favor of 90mm: too often, in tight close-ups, the minimum focusing distance constringeva me to move away a few millimeters. With 90mm you can stay further away (especially useful in the early levels of children) to obtain a final magnification increased and this, paradoxically, makes it 90mm longer usable for me, despite the 56mm is on paper a more versatile lens. For full-length portraits, or better yet a half-length, especially in low light, the 56mm produce wonderful results. sent on April 03, 2016 |
 | Fujifilm XF 90mm f/2 R LM WR Pros: constructive and optical quality, sharpness, autofocus, WR Cons: a little 'large, quite specifically for portraits Opinion: I share the opinion of Xchris82xx who preceded me in review: the 56mm is more versatile (and smaller). However, after several months of 56mm, I chose to change the latter in favor of 90mm. The minimum focusing distance of 56mm fire was a bit 'low for my taste, with a magnification ratio strongly in favor of 90mm. I also prefer this focus for portraits. Like optical quality, color, sharpness: perfect. Autofocus: perhaps the best of all the X lenses I have. I must admit that the XF 56mm aspect gave more magical and dreamy portraits (perhaps for the f1.2, perhaps because for the same magnification deforms a little 'more the features and gives more three-dimensionality to the portrait, of course subjective opinion). I must also admit that, compared to the canon 135mm f2 that I used to 6d, the stop unlike the blurry and full frame a little 'you see ... I have the impression that the 135f2 isolasse a bit' more subjects, specialmente when fotogragati full length wide open. As for sharpness and pure image quality, the 90mm lens is the best picture I've ever used. sent on April 03, 2016 |
 | Fujifilm XF 16mm f/1.4 R WR Pros: construction, sharpness, WR, minimum focusing distance Cons: largest 14mm Opinion: My favorite lens X. Sharp even at the edges, even at full aperture. Not tiny (similar to 56mm). Focal: great for landscapes for those who prefer the wide compared to super-ultra-wide; usable for portraits ambientati a bit ' "caricatures" with blurred background. Aims to landscapes, I would prefer the 14mm, which is more compact with quality comparable to small aperture (and perhaps is the focal "perfect" for landscapes). However the possibility of opening a 1.4 XF16mm makes the most interesting in terms of creativity and usability of the shots in low light. Best lens for me since I use Fuji X. sent on April 03, 2016 |
 | Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD Pros: price stabilization, quality / price ratio Cons: was f / 4 L IS would be better :) Opinion: Great lens from the very contained price and quality more than satisfactory. Taken as an alternative to the canon 70-200mm f / 4 L IS, that "point" again, but for now will not buy, given the price difference and the 100 mm longer (sometimes return their profits) in favor of the Tamron . As lens from portrait to these focal prefer the Canon 135 f / 2 L, but for my trips to the mountains, the canon 17-40 (attached to the camera) and the Tamron 70-300 VC (in the backpack, to be extracted in the case of sightings of animals or landscapes "long") are a good combination. sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical Pros: Sharpness, price Cons: On canon does not record exif, not usable screw-on filters Opinion: Using a version of nikon canon body adapter paid 20 Euros. Very happy with the result. In this way I have the confirmation maf anyway even if I do not have exif data nor given aperture. High optical quality for the price it has. The distortion note is easily corrected in post production. sent on July 17, 2014 |
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
