|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Riccardozanna www.juzaphoto.com/p/Riccardozanna  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony FE 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Pros: Value for money, Nitidetta, light Cons: A little dark, a little plasticky Opinion: Honestly at the price I bought it (180) I do not find any particular flaws. Excellent kit lens. It's also sharp enough at all apertures. If it had been a 24mm instead of a 28 it would be perfect. I think it will be a lens that I'll bring forward in time, it's fun and especially proportionate for the mirrorless body. As everything is done since the Sony F4 24 70 (tried) in the corners I find it considerably less sharp becomes ideal if you do not want to spend too much on the 2.8. sent on May 23, 2018 |
 | Yongnuo EF YN 50mm f/1.8 Pros: Price, bright Cons: Sharpness, plastics, AF Opinion: That say a lens that is worth what it costs, no doubt a fifty that you can take on a whim and it is also fun to use for the game, but finished la.rnUna nitidezzaa embarrassing f1.8, a focus and a blurred even worse in I think not much piacevole.rnSe you want to take into account the value for money a 7 deserves it, but if we look at the lens in itself, hardly you can give as a 6 rating. sent on August 18, 2016 |
 | Manfrotto Pixi Pros: Extremely compact and lightweight Cons: For what it costs how do you find Opinion: I took it as a whim, to have a lightweight tripod to take me around because I go to visit the town for a few days with my girlfriend (so when I can devote myself to photography). I expected more heavy, and the ball head is not very fluid. The rubber feet are removed almost immediately, and then I had to re-attach with a bit of super glue. For the remainder with 20 euro I brought home a minitreppiede that manages to hold up my 5D and a 14mm Samyang. I recommend it, with a price so we might as well have it than not to have it. sent on February 26, 2016 |
 | Canon 5D Pros: Ergonomics, durability, color rendering, FF, price of used, good detail, iso Cons: The price at which you could say is no, however, if you really have to be picky the sensor gets dirty too easily and the AF is not the best. Opinion: C but I would recommend it only to those who make the landscape and / or portrait (also including the street), outside of these areas, I think it's difficult to use. sent on January 23, 2016 |
 | Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Pros: Price, construction, sharpness and f2.8 fixed Cons: AF, sharpness Opinion: I bought this lens because I needed an intermediate lens on FF while racimolavo money for mutual Canon. I bought it at a very good price (190) and for what it costs I am very satisfied. For me it makes no sense to make comparisons with the Canon 24 70 2.8 L since they have a completely different price and obviously there is a reason. Having said that, I can express my opinion. Having read mixed reviews about this lens and how varied the yield from lens to lens soon as I bought it I gave to various tests. Fortunately my copy does not suffer from the front or back focus, though I must say that the AF is quite uncertain on occasion of light is not so favorable. The barrel is well done, although plastic feels solid. The sharpness instead is variable, f2.8 is soft at all focal lengths, to f4 I must say that the middle has an excellent sharpness and f8-f11 has a frame completely clear. To my opinion in f4 you can use it safely (the I paragonato with other objectives to say this as the Canon 70 200 f4 L and I must say that they are), f 2.8 would stop only on those occasions when I'd rather have a photo soft rather than move. rnOvviamente if you have money to spend I recommend the Canon 24-70 2.8 L that you can use it in any situation avedendo always good results, on the other hand if you are willing to come to some compromise I recommend it to any amateur. sent on December 24, 2015 |
 | Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Pros: F 2.8 fixed, good sharpness (the price at which it is sold), diameter filters are not too big, handy and "light". Cons: Af noisy, chromatic aberration, construction plasticky. Opinion: The lens is for what it costs more than good, then obviously you can not expect something. We must say that is a far cry from the 18-55 but many from 17-55 2.8 (which is phenomenal). The sharpness I'm not crazy, though also very good compared to the sigma 17-50, but for what I had read I expected better, then TA does not even seem the same goal. The Af is not bad, at least I have used in the evening and made his "dirty work." I have read many reviews which reported that the dark was bad, in my case I can say that it is not so, although it is very noisy. It is highly recommended for entry level of photography that had no other terms of comparison than the 18-55. sent on December 09, 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
