|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Colbricon www.juzaphoto.com/p/Colbricon  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | GoPro Hero6 Black Pros: Stabilization *, voice commands, front screen, improved audio, raw photo, linear mode, fps x slow motion Cons: Non-objective reviews circulating on the web, price, flawless frames and frames, unstable firmware, * stabilizer that jerks to change of direction, saturated colors, small screen, poor equipment, android app not compatiblile with 4.4, windows app only with win 10 Opinion: The discomfort of the hero 5 remain, the new 6 has a different chip for the rest is all the same. Unfortunately, despite having changed 1 thing, the gopro released a machine with software still to be tested and optimized. So much so that the 1.51 firmware came out simultaneously with the machine. With the current one the car records badly (with screen cut in half) in some resolutions. The cost is too high. In addition to improved stabilization (but it is not like a gimbal) the voice commands can turn on the machine or start recording from off (within 8 hours of last power on). They have implemented the hevc format in some resolutions, but they are all non-stabilized. For the photos there is the useless hdr. Unfortunately there are chromatic aberrations on both videos and photos that were not there on the 5th. The colors are much more alive than 5, perhaps too much. The monitor has remained the same despite the fact that there is a larger one and the competition has already been around for a year longer. His sensibility is not that much improved (these advertise the untrue). The audio is less loud but more balanced for me. The transition between dark areas and light is much improved and now the clouds are not burned in the sky. At the moment with the firmware 1.60 have solved the problem of the split screen and the image is less saturated and certainly is a half disappointment even considering the price. unfortunately between advertising and machines that give to youtuber who never speak of bitrate and lose time in unboxing (tralaltro there is almost nothing inside) and endorsers who go around paid by gopro the cost remains exaggerated. Tralaltro one of the most seen stabilization tests is done only walking in the front direction without changes of direction where the stabilizer jerks, but still is compared to a gimbal. How to compare 2 cars on the road holding only on the straight and without making curves. sent on October 23, 2017 |
 | GoPro Hero 5 Pros: Sharp and bright colors but not excessively bright; Linear mode, timelapse with different options, lens protection, touch screen, voice commands, raw photo, high power led, front info screen Cons: Required frame to hang it ... uncomfortable, removable usb door that removes impermeability, too hard keys, voice commands that work when they want, bad audio, ineffective stabilization, raw only in broad mode, battery life, disproportionate cost Opinion: In a field where these various action cams are given to YT reviewers and various sites, obedience goes to be blessed. I've heard of useless info monitors and fantastic tactile keys; I think exactly the opposite. Nonsense like unboxing is worth more than a good review. Marketing and sponsorships (even in motogp) raise the price of this gopro. Useful in many circumstances and comfortably unfortunately it fails with little design commitment, too many defects and hardware outdated. The stabilization wanted to be inserted but works only with light movement. Voice commands work intermittently even though the utility is there. Waterproofing has many contraindications: bad audio, usb door to remove or put with the removed frame. Otherwise this frame is also of cheap plastic and it seems to break it x open it. The machine comes with almost nothing and I wonder if it is not the case to make a less expensive package with that unprofitable plastic case and maybe provide some accessory ouTo account for a more solid frame. For the rest the videos are good and there are so many resolutions. The raw pictures are discreetly recoverable but raw works only in broad range, a real shame. What can I say, I will return it to amz, a disappointing box of high points. If I leave a focus on amz I'll copy and paste it. sent on July 31, 2017 |
 | Samsung Galaxy K zoom Pros: Zoom 10 X, compact (as a camera), convenient snap button, integrated flash, complete camera app, good quality images at up to 8x, fast access to the camera. Excellent GPS signal. Cons: As the phone is a bit often, poor quality after the 8x, no Android 5 and nothing raw, zoom only supported by its app, the sensor gets easily covered with dust. Missing the notification LED. The price is high. Opinion: For those who feel limited by a fixed wide-angle lens and this smartphone k zoom is truly amazing. Of course the thickness is twice as much and perhaps more than a smartphone. as the sensor size is like that of a compact and not the usual phones. Basically it is like having a compact always in tow. Even the presence of a flash distinguishes it from the usual sm-phone. Pity that Samsung has decided not to update it and Raw farewell. After all I think it has not been a great success. The smartphone trend favors the minimum thickness and not the quality and versatility of having a zoom seems. sent on March 26, 2016 |
 | Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 Pros: Versatility, yield up to 640 ISO, raw processed (within the limits of the sensor), functionality and development on raw board, general responsiveness, viewfinder fluid and sufficiently large, video department almost full, fast autofocus with many options and disceto with low lights, silent , including electronic shutter, 5 fn custom, 4k video. Cons: At high ISO does not do miracles, battery life, only f 2.8 to 25 mm, nr applied even at low ISO, the colors are not the best, not excellent recoveries on the highlights on raw, noise stabilizer, ois efficient up to 200 mm equiv , a little excessive vignetting on focal wide, hood uncomfortable, monitor not touch, in 4k you lose the wide angle, not suitable for those seeking the blurred. Opinion: Purchased to replace my camera I immediately appreciated the clear difference in the field of video where the sensor 1 "makes the difference is that the yield on the blurred to the camcorder before. We're not at the levels of c aps, but I needed something more versatile. Anyway in the end I also used to foto.rnLa yield optics is very good, the sensor shows cmq their limits even at low ISO. Image resolution is cmq satisfactory, despite the high density pixel does not have details "pastiche" such as I noticed with c aps 24 Mpxl optics economic (D7100 + 18,105 x example). The machine default applies nr even at low ISO, I have set to -5, otherwise effect acquerello.rnI colors personally do not like in some cases, but I made a color profile in Lightroom customized shooting in raw.rnLa battery life, but using it in a few trips I made 400 shots + 10 min of video making the LCD 3 "in the closed position, likely to be disabled, and the consumer is minore.rnLo stabilizzatore not the best in telephoto, we are not at the levels of 4.3 oly.rnIl viewfinder is very good, you can calibrate the color and fluid. The monitor is not too bad touch. Excellent interior fittings (options, controls, customization) .rnI 4k videos are very clear (to disable afc especially of landscapes), sin that starts from 36 mm equiv. since croppa image. General responsiveness and af remarkable. rnrnrn sent on May 08, 2015 |
 | Sony A6000 Pros: Autofocus and burst, covering AF points, dimensions, controls and customization sensor (dynamic recovery), video department. Cons: Af in low light, lack of accessories, photo review, development Raw absent, and level. absent, selection points maf no immediate safety time in the car iso absent, raw 12 bit Opinion: 26egrave; higher (slightly) to 24 Mpxl the D7100. Recovery is less noisy in the shadows, and the banding is less obvious; but it comes to recoveries extremes. Instead, in situations where there is a sudden transition from darkness to light (eg a face that has a part exposed to the sun and the other in the shade) I have not seen the obvious noise that instead the D7100 was afloat even at low iso . * But after several thousand shots the difference between 12 bit and 14 bit raw at times sente.rnLa supplied as other sony series is lacking, there is not even the flash shoe cover over body cap and lens cap (if kit). The USB charging is only useful in some cases, much better than an external charger; tralaltro times by charging usb are greater, but not the collegherei never that of the car if not protected. Basic multilingual manual, pretty useless. To me, the A6000 does not come cheap, it costs the right. * As there are several limitations; from the viewfinder to the operating speed dictated by the electronics think. If you take una gust, for example, you can not simply change the drive mode, you have to wait for it to finish writing the file on the development scheda.rnManca raw and you can not even download applications, tralaltro apart from some app I find them quite useless. * The machine becomes very slow when the app is running. Bad review of the photo; Slow zoom in (tested with card from 95MB / s) and low in the definition of raw. For the wi fi, I found much better system of samsung nx. To put in mod. aircraft that do not exhaust the battery in a hurry please. I took 700 photos and 15 minutes of video with 2 batteries and the second still had 23% charge. Not bad direi.rnPer the rest is a great machine, light, compact and excellent performance that does not make me regret a reflex aps-c, except for the choice of targets, however, is almost good, * even the operating speed is even lower. The electronic processor (which you will) is not up to exploit the potential and the speed of* Add operazioni.rn after use with 5 goals sony (sel1650, sel16f2.8, sel35f1.8, sel501.8, sel55210) to fund the 24 Mpxl are too many. The optics mentioned make it better 16 Mpxl precedente.rn * details added on 30 08 14 sent on July 03, 2014 |
 | Sony NEX 3N Pros: Compactness, price, sensor, tilt screen, compact lens and built-in flash Cons: Commands, af slow lens bundle (quality), we start from iso 200, not including post and cap machine. target Opinion: Aps-c that with its 16-50 can fit in your pocket or a small enclosure. The sensor is the excellent 16 Mpxl seen in many cars. Definitely a coffee by the excellent price / quality / size of the sensor. The controls are not the best though customizing the ring is pretty straightforward; functions are those based and does not allow the selection of iso intermediate. Limitation start from iso 200. The af is not the greatest in low light and is unresponsive. I would say 6 + with good light, 5 with poor lighting. The objective 16-50 is very convenient and useful in shooting videos, as little as we overcome the sufficiency; but given the size ... Useful built-in flash, although the yield limitato.rnOttima sensor, working in RAW you recover a lot. Definitely a higher level than the sensor omd EM5, as visto.rnIn final good car (if you think about the cost) with its limitations that should be supported at least one fixed lens to exploit it to the fullest. sent on March 29, 2014 |
 | Olympus OM-D E-M5 Pros: Construction and materials; reactivity Af and Af touch, stabilizer on the sensor, weather sealing, good iso 1600 Park optics available Cons: Buttons uncomfortable and small, non-integrated flash, shutter lag, speed of operation, size 4/3 (personal opinion) Opinion: The Omd EM5 is a great car, building care, different features, but frankly I did not have much feeling with the system. The Af it is responsive but the time between pressing the shutter and the actual finger feels. The yield at high ISO is really good and also keeps many details, the stabilizer is really valid. I used the machine for about 2000-2500 shots in RAW and developed; recoveries shadow and lights are not at the level of the D7100 to make a comparison with the car that I had, and even the dynamic seems a bit lower. Altogether it is a valid machine but as characteristics put in the order: construction, features, optical system and after the image quality. sent on March 29, 2014 |
 | Nikon D800 Pros: Image quality (dynamic recovery, noise, details); ergonomics, build quality, autofocus, possibility clipping (1.2. DX. 5:4) dx + compatible built-in flash; viewfinder, ISO 1600 excellent. Cons: Operating speed is not really adequate to the 36 Mpxl (writing files, processing); turret controls and selection mod. exposure is not just comfortable; beyond 3200 iso must exhibit good. Opinion: It has already been said much of this machine, I can only say that a car is not difficult to use as opposed to what to say. Surely it is more difficult to use a D7100 to bring comparable results. Up to 3200 ISO is very good (then depends on how you expose), at 6400 iso image is usable even if not ideal for recovery but requires a minimum of attention in post. The metering is very accurate and as usual the automatic flash are at the top. The timing of security in the shots are the same as other cameras, of course if you have to zoom in to 100% due to the higher resolution if there 'shake-it highlights the more time a little faster are recommended but at the same magnification are always the same as other cameras. rnrn sent on October 31, 2013 |
 | Samsung NX210 Pros: Construction, with a double ring commands, functions, wi fi and accelerated video. Light lens kit sharp enough. Cons: Maf slow and inaccurate in backlight, shutter lag, write, file a bit slow, huge raw for 20 Mpxl, made from 640 ISO up, external flash uncomfortable, colors incarnate. Noisy in the shot. Opinion: Convenient to carry around more to the weight for size. Excellent for outdoor outputs, low iso does its job well and I did some shooting in raw and beautiful views. The colors that come out of the jpg I do not like much. Construction and excellent lens kit top of others I've seen in a kit with the SLR. Not so compact but light. The maf is a bit slow and inaccurate if the subject is low in contrast. Noticeable delay between pressing the shutter button and shooting. After the 640 iso images degrade enough. sent on September 20, 2013 |
 | Nikon D7100 Pros: Available commands, weight, clarity, lcd monitor 3.2, automatic flash, 1.3 crop mode, autofocus ... even if Cons: ... I was expecting a better af in low light, unintuitive menu, no icon in the viewfinder metering mode, battery life, speed AF in liveview, noticeable noise in the shadows even at low ISO, plastic handle. Buffer deliberately ridiculous. Absence of the timelapse function. Opinion: The D7100 is definitely a good SLR with several improvements over the previous model. Honestly I expected more in terms of sensitivity to low light AF, if there was not the illuminator would focus at all in many situations. As a comparison using a Pentax K5 I. Compared to the latter the difference is abysmal. While in precision there 'a difference in favor of the D7100. Both in low light in all other situazioni.rnIn term of image quality are very satisfied although in daylight conditions I noticed in the shadows too much noise already at ISO 200-400. The highlight recovery I was impressed, especially in the picture with the flash too strong. rnOttima the layout of the controls but I think not very intuitive menus, fortunately you can create a menu personalizzato.rnUtile crop mode, but not essential. Buffer ridiculous though rarely snap raffiche.rnUna car deliberately not perfect but very good. sent on August 27, 2013 |
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
