|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Carlmon www.juzaphoto.com/p/Carlmon  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Nikon AF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 D Pros: Lightweight, small, economical, compact, very practical, excellent optical quality Cons: Non-tropicalized, old-fashioned screw AF, totally approximate autofocus accuracy on D800 Opinion: I had it and used it on Nikon D800. I was surprised by the very good optical quality for such an old superzoom. The price from used is good varies from 150 to 250 euros and there are also specimens still in good condition. The big problem I had is that on the D800 the autofocus was totally approximate in accuracy. The speed was acceptable but the accuracy unacceptable. I did some tests and on a tripod focusing 10 times in AF he got it right not even half the time. For the rest I liked it very much, indeed the optical quality had surprised me. blurry more than good sent on June 27, 2023 |
 | Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Pros: Lightweight, economical, optically more than good, excellent blurred, good stabilization, very fast af Cons: Plastic but sturdy enough, a bit bulky Opinion: Optics that I recommend. you buy at very good prices around 150 euros in 2022. Optically it is more than discreet always sharp in the center, and closed it is very sharp. the blurred is good. The construction is plastic and looks poor but actually works and lasts. I have carried it everywhere for years and it has always held up. I regretted selling it when I switched to 24-105L. it is very light but bulky. its rival today is the 24-105 STM. Between the latter and the 28-135 for me the choice depends on money and if you need the 24mm wide side. I would opt for the 24-105 because I love the wide sent on February 07, 2022 |
 | Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm f/1.8 Pros: cheap, lightweight, small, optically fantastic, blurry fantastic, razor-sharp Cons: nothing Opinion: I've had it for at least 6 years. I rarely use it but every time it returns fantastic images. fantastic in all inclusive price. I don't see a reason not to take it if you use the m4/3 system unless you want to avoid fixed ones for reasons of changing lenses. for the rest it has all the characteristics of the perfect optics: cheap, light, small, very well built, optically fantastic, sharp and blurry beautiful, abundant character. all optics should be like this. sent on December 30, 2021 |
 | Panasonic Lumix G 25mm f/1.7 ASPH Pros: cheap, lightweight, fast af, very sharp, very robust Cons: bulky in the sense of voluminous Opinion: bought several years ago, I use it very rarely. is the classic plastic 50ino with amazing optical qualities and a low price. it is very light, all plastic except the attachment and the lenses. it is small but I would have preferred it more tapered like the 45mm 1.8 oly. as it is the shape seems to me cumbersome for the optics that is ... but so much so I keep it like this. Decent macro features, blurry good quality. if you like the focal length I can only recommend it as it costs little and does not miss a shot. the evaluation for me must be done between this 25mm 1.7 and the 20mm 1.7. the difference is made by the preference on the focal length and the fact that the 20mm is pancake therefore even smaller. the price is quite similar between the two. the choice is yours sent on December 30, 2021 |
 | Canon EF 17-35mm f/2.8 L USM Pros: in the center always sharp, af very fast. great for street and sports. landscapes only at f11. holds up well against the light Cons: Split edges almost always, they become sharp only from f8 or more closed. forget the night at ta Opinion: bought at least 5 years ago on the bay for 300 euros. MECHANICS: excellent construction, af and zoomed very fast. Optically: in the center it is always sharp or very sharp, but only in the central part. at TA as soon as you move away from the center the quality literally collapses and the corners are almost totally smashed. this happens at ta and up to f8 at 17mm. at 35mm the quality already improves a lot at f5.6. the blurry is ugly, very nervous. what is strange is that on the other hand in the center it is always very very sharp even at ta and at all focal lengths. for me with this lens there are two possible uses: portraits, sports and action in general but only with subjects in the center or you can do some landscape but at f11. I do not recommend it for architecture because it distorts a lot and is difficult to correct. in conclusion I recommend this lens only for portraits and sports with subjects in the center. do not pay more than 300 euros because there is better https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/17-35mm.htm https://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/176-canon-ef-17-35mm-f28-usm-l-lab-test-report--review https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/lenses/canon-ef-17-35mm-f2-8l-usm-field-test sent on November 19, 2021 |
 | Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Pros: lightweight, economical, robust, af very fast and precise, sharp already at full aperture, excellent stabilizer, excellent colors and blurred Cons: nobody Opinion: one of the best optics I've tried and at a really good price. I believe that at that price there is nothing better. and probably not even at twice the price you will not find anything like it significantly better. a few years ago you bought new for less than 200 euros. if you consider switching to the ff in the future then consider the new 70-300is but it costs much more. sent on September 21, 2021 |
| Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Pros: lightweight, economical, robust, af very fast and precise, sharp already at full aperture, excellent stabilizer, excellent colors and blurred Cons: nobody Opinion: one of the best optics I've tried and at a really good price. I believe that at that price there is nothing better. and probably not even at twice the price you will not find anything like it significantly better. a few years ago you bought new for less than 200 euros. if you consider switching to the ff in the future then consider the new 70-300is but it costs much more. sent on September 21, 2021 |
| Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Pros: lightweight, economical, robust, af very fast and precise, sharp already at full aperture, excellent stabilizer, excellent colors and blurred Cons: nobody Opinion: one of the best optics I've tried and at a really good price. I believe that at that price there is nothing better. and probably not even at twice the price you will not find anything like it significantly better. a few years ago you bought new for less than 200 euros. if you consider switching to the ff in the future then consider the new 70-300is but it costs much more. sent on September 21, 2021 |
 | Olympus OM-D E-M1 II Pros: robust, space burst up to 20 fps, imperceptible silent shooting, the 20mpx is definitely better than the 16, a pleasure to use Cons: expensive, battery different from the other oly omd10 and epl, flash cumbersome, af good but not too much Opinion: opinion in 2021. they are used but almost new between 600 and 800 euros. in general it is a great machine. very high operating speed, crazy burst at 20fps. the 20mpx is definitely better than the old 16. alone does not justify the investment but that 25% more px help a lot. the af I find it good but not surprising. compared to a classic 7d type reflex is still behind in the moving shot. on still subjects it is fine and is precise. overall it is a very robust and compact machine with which to make great tours in nature or in dirty places. it is still worth buying it. sent on July 30, 2021 |
 | Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Pros: very small, light, good construction, cheap, very sharp, blurry pleasant Cons: af not very fast, a bit of chromatic aberration Opinion: Optics for canon m. system works only with small, light and well-built canon m. optically excellent, crisp and with pleasant blurry. some chromatic aberration. at full opening at the edges is not very sharp. used price in 2021 around 120-140 euros. autofocus is not a splinter, in fact it is decidedly slow. advised sent on June 23, 2021 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Pros: it costs very little, light, small, sharp, quick and precise af Cons: the new stm version is better and costs practically the same. so this version makes little sense. blurred at pentagons a little hard Opinion: classic and inevitable optics. overtaken by the better and more perforated stm version. in 2021 I would buy the stm but if you find the old mk2 at 50 euros in good condition it can in any case be a good price/value option. among the defects of the mk2 version to be noted: blurred to very obvious pentagons, blurred in general hard and with a "concentric" effect. very sharp even at full opening, but shows a drop in contrast. works discreetly well even in backlight. from the best between f2.8 and f4 where it's a real blade and you reduce the pentagon problem sent on March 24, 2021 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: focal range, robust, very sharp, holds well backlight, excellent construction, in 2021 it is at very good prices. stabilizer very good Cons: excessive weight, bulky, distortion at all focal points, blurred so so, ugly sunstars Opinion: one of the most popular modern optics. covers practically 90% of the most commonly used focal points. a real all do. robust and well built, indeed too robust and too thought out. the deformation is easily corrected in pp and therefore I do not find it a major problem. if it didn't weigh that much, it would be pretty much the only lens I'd use. in 2021 it is used at very good prices. I preferred it to cousin 24-70f4. I preferred the more focal points of the more clarity and I am not at all repentant indeed! I strongly recommend it also because in canon there are no alternatives in handymen. there is no 28-300 vr as in nikon so either this 24-105 or the cheap version 25-105 f3.5-5.6 or the latest version mk2 of the 24-105 which however costs a lot. in the backlight it holds well, but sunstars practically do not exist and are very ugly. to be used in the backlight I preferred the optical 28-135 IS that I will sooner or later buy back. sent on March 06, 2021 |
 | Sony A7 II Pros: light and small. well built. in 2021 it is at very low prices Cons: poor iso seal, af with inconsistent and slow adapters, poor system in general and af points only in the middle area of the frame Opinion: I joined the canon 6d to replace the latter expecting the famous precise autofocus and that does not need mirrorless corrections to use my canon lenses with adapter. Result: Sony a7mk2 + sigma mc11 + canon lenses adapter is not working well. very slow and unprecious. especially inaccurate in the dark despite the confirmation and inaccurate almost always at distances above 5m. with imprecise I mean strongly out of focus. for me precision and speed of af are the fundamental aspects of a camera. then machine resold after 6 months. I've never tried it with original lenses, but I can say that the file is really poor at high iso, in my opinion definitely worse than canon 6d. sent on March 01, 2021 |
 | Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pros: very small, very light, economical Cons: af slow Opinion: a perfective lens. I didn't find any optical defects. maybe a vignette visible at 2.8, but it corrects itself in posts with a click. surely obvious flaws I did not find any. for what it costs and what it does is a MUST. the only flaw is the slightly slow af compared to modern lenses. on the 6d is not always precise. and because it's very sharp, you can immediately see it. among other things he also used salgado, you can see in the documentary the salt of the earth ... sent on December 06, 2020 |
 | Nikon AF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 D Pros: it is cheap, light and small. decidedly sharp Cons: AF accuracy Opinion: I tried the tris 28-105, 28-135 and 28-200. they seemed aligned as a performance in general in fact I chose the 28-200 for the most excursion. are light and definitely performing. blurry pleasant. Sharp. very beautiful colors. on the d800 I found it very difficult to get a constantly precise focus. most of the time it was always wrong. nothing was worth trying to calibrate. check well that they focus properly. in the end I deleted it mainly for this reason. sent on December 03, 2020 |
 | Nikon Z 24-70mm f/4 S Pros: very small, very light. well done, and above all very sharp. great blurry Cons: you really have to be picky to find a con against him. cmq is all plastic Opinion: a modern perspective. of what define the new standards. for people who look forward and just want performance. to have absolutely if you have a Z. only problem now (year 2020) is that entering the Z system is still quite expensive, but on the other hand it is the future. I saw night photos of a friend and they were stunning. not even weird flares on the lights. sent on November 18, 2020 |
 | Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8 D Pros: very light, robust despite the plastic, very sharp after f2, blurry pleasant, costs almost nothing Cons: unusable in the future (it has no engine af) so get rid of it as long as you can, the water and moisture enter like a sponge Opinion: for me in 2020 don't buy it. it is difficult to give an opinion on an optics like this, which has been the school of millions of photographers in the last 40-50 years. impossible not to have it at least once in a lifetime. is it worth it? I don't think so. brother 1.4 is very little bigger and costs very little more but I liked it much more. version 1.4 is much sharper after f2 and has a better blurr. so between 50 euros for 1.8 and 150 for 1.4 for me there is no doubt. better 1.4 if you can. both of these optics are outclassed in all respects by the new afs versions NOTE WELL: these optics have no internal motor and nikon seems to be abandoning this old technology. so there will probably be no more machine bodies supporting them in the future. NOTE 2 the effects of these optics in my experience are very imprecise. even spending hours with the fine adjustment I have never been able to make them precise on the d800 ultimately are optics for vintage lovers or to start by spending very little. but in any case I do not recommend them and recommend the 50 1.8 afs sent on October 29, 2020 |
 | Canon EOS M3 Pros: excellent sensor. great files. battery slightly better than the first m but much worse than any olympus m4/3 Cons: very slow. practically a compact from 15 years ago. very little better than the first m. weight not indifferent. low rear screen of both resolution and color. Opinion: I write this review in 2020. so the m3 was born, lived and already dead. now you buy on the bay at about 150 euros. I had the first canon m which had poor sensor and was slow. I upgraded to the m3 and found myself with the same slowness but excellent sensor. still in 2020 the sensor for me is respectfully respected. in my opinion it is a machine that makes sense just to make panoramas and little else. I use it paired with 11-22 for panoramas and interiors. and in this area by its results. unusable with anything that moves. much but much slower than any m4/3 since 2012 onwards sent on October 26, 2020 |
 | Canon 6D Pros: great sensor, great raw, great jpeg, af with acceptable speed, battery lasts a lot, very good feeling. acceptable burst buffer Cons: af with a few stitches and the side ones serve little or nothing. inaccurate and slow. average burst. exposed while not very accurate. very large viewfinder Opinion: one of the best-selling cameras of the last 8 years, produced since 2012 and recently released. but there are still plenty of them around in new stocks at gift prices. everyone uses it: photo amateurs and professionals. artists and globetroer. even naturalist and matrimonial photographers I took it almost immediately at launch and even today, despite having nikon d800, sony a7ii and canon 5d, the 6dmk1 always remains one of my favorites. it simply does everything and does it consistently and the controls and the feeling of use are perfect. he lacks a built-in flash and the af is quite limited. the exposure meter is pretty simple and makes a lot of mistakes. but once you get used to it, the limits are very few. at the very low prices you find it at now it's a bargain if you're on a tight budget. today, in 2020, however, I would buy a used 5dmk3 which for a few hundred euros more has a much more advanced af and a better burst. sent on October 07, 2020 |
 | Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: light, cheap, fast af, always very sharp in the center, drops little only at the edges. pleasant blurry Cons: 24mm and 85mm. doesn't hold up backlight and makes sunstar hideous Opinion: it is found in ridiculous figures of 50 to 100 euros in 2020. its main strength is lightness. there are no other handyman canon ef ff so light. the sharpness is very good in the center ALWAYS. at the edges drops at full opening. ideal to f8 NOTE GOOD: the distortion and vignette are really strong. in particular the distortion at both 24mm barrel and 85mm bearing. so make sure that the post-production software you use has the profile to fix. using it on canon with dxo I correct but using it adapted with sony has no correction. it is therefore unusable. otherwise the photos, especially landscapes and architecture will be worth it. I also add that it does not hold the counter light at all and has very bad 6-pointed sunstars is the worst piece of the triad ef 20-35, 24-85, 70-210 all 3.5-4.5. consider the wide and the canvas. little expense as much yield as everything do the 28-135 usm is is much higher than this except that it doesn't have the 24mm and is priciest in the used sent on October 02, 2020 |
 | Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Pros: economical, lightweight, tiny, robust, very precise and very fast, sufficiently sharp, blurred very homogeneous and sweet, excellent stabilization Cons: it is not tropicalized Opinion: used for over two years in several parts of the world, mozambique, uganda, hong kong, russia, kuwait etc. in the end I lost it to mexico. but I'm waiting for a good price to repurchase it. I would think that is the superzoom ideal. light, crisp, fast af and excellent stabilization. You can criticize a certain loss of sharpness towards the maximum focal point. rnrnThird words an excellent and hard to replace travel companion! Highly recommended sent on November 20, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: Economical, lightweight, very crisp, distortion contained and easily corrected, tiny, nothing moves and does not stretch zooming, plasticous but great construction Cons: Flares everywhere and hardly removable !!! Strong contrast drop if used in backlight Opinion: Very sharp, small vignetting and a few chromatic aberrations and a little distortion of a stop is even sharper, it is not clear at all. Probably the focus is not correct. The problem with this optic is that it suffers much in backlight. Large and colorful flares, contrast drops rnrn the rest, if you need a broad budget for FF, for the approximately 200 euros you use it is a great and only choice. The only alternative I think is sigma / tamron 17-35 2.8-4 old generation I would not use it on apsc, i think a normal 18-55stm is equal or better with multiple ranges sent on July 27, 2017 |
 | Canon PowerShot S110 Pros: compact size (Pocket), image quality in its range very good, grand angle 24mm, touch screen very practical and well-calibrated, upper switch and back buttons more than enough in number. possibility to customize the buttons and functions Cons: I do not like the rondellone sticking front and that is part ÖBB. impiaglia is always in the pocket and in any other stock. Opinion: from consumer and user of large compact are very pleased with this. optical apart as iso and colors competes at par with my old micro 4/3 Lumix GF3's. Optical sharp enough and range 24-120 absolutely excellent. at full price about 350 euro would not take, but it is still around easily to 200E on many sites (as has already been replaced by S120) and at this price is hard to beat if you want to stay in the category of the real "compact" that pocket sent on April 17, 2015 |
 | Canon 100D Pros: small, cheap, and good af affdabile in video, photo-quality aligned with the latest aps-c, excellent touch screen Cons: economic construction but seems robust Opinion: opinion by amateur photographer who uses 6d as a reference: I lent it a friend and here sensations: machine small (almost pocket), quality photo aligned with other canon aps-c, low price, autofocus in video with 18-55 stm I thought was great, definitely better than 6d with the 24-105. the touchscreen is really practical and fuzionale, I would also on 6d. operation speed is discrete, definitely equal to the 6d. I repeat that the size is so small that it leaves you puzzled and after a while you adore this toy. if I had the 6d, with a budget of less than 1.500euro, in my opinion the 100d is the best choice for a machine specialist. goes well also to 10-18 to 24 and 2.8 to 40.2,8 (this last tried it on 100d) for a series of portraits on the outside in the late afternoon and gave amazing results. rnveramente a pleasure to use sent on January 30, 2015 |
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
