|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Dario78 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Dario78  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon 6D Pros: Clean high ISO (up to 3200 ISO does not have big concerns. Up to ISO 5000 are acceptable), excellent workability of the raw, central point af fantastic, accurate, fast and sensitive. Weight more than good and I would say a good compromise even with heavy lenses. Cons: Perhaps 1/4000 in certain situations is limiting, lack second memory slot, viewfinder with 100% and, for certain requirements, not the AF system of 5dmk III (but not see it as a negative element, otherwise it would be a machine even better 5dmk III!). For the rest it is a machine that does its job. Opinion: I have the 6d now for almost two years and, after an intense use in a myriad of uses and situations, I also would like to share my impressions. Contrary to those who call themselves professionals and complain its size and weight too much content, I find the 6d compared to 5dmk III perfectly balanced, even with a 70-200 2.8 is (the balance in hand you do it more than on optics camera body ...). It 'a machine that you do not like the fatigues enormously 5dmk III and allows challenge it comfortably to those who, like myself, has great hands. This whole story about the absence of the joystick is excessive, the limit of hysteria. The control pad is gestibilissimo, indeed, reduces to a single element control of navigation is that the playback menus. The button placement, we know, can vary from model to model, but I have not found any problems in store in no time orienting its disposal, now, with your eyes closed. There is all the essentials that you need and, for the rest, the other mainC are useless) that allows you to work safely in many contexts. The only real flaw that impute is the absence of the double slot for data storage, unique element that puts it a step below the basic requirements for the professional. The metering system is reliable. Personally I almost always use the spot mode and I am fine. Another element that can be a marginally discriminating shutter speed is limited to 1/4000. This element can be discriminating for someone, and then be taken into consideration. Nikon from this point of view is more generous than Canon and offers the same price a lot more features ... rnComparto video: there is little to say, if you use video covers a good% of your business, then please contact 5dmk III. Either way you get good results even with the 6d but with due attention paid in particular to moiré.rnCosa ask for more? At the stator present a dynamic range that can be compared to the Nikon d810 in joint a bit 'more resolution (which in the workplace is now increasingly required) but that does not come at the expense of its excellent high ISO. For the rest, as mentioned, is a machine with few frills and that does its job and does it well. sent on February 08, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 24-70mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: Excellent construction, weather sealed, compact and relatively lightweight despite a diameter of 77. Sharpness from center to the edges smooth, distortion at 24mm and contained even less than the 24-70 2.8 II, contained excellent resistance to flare and chromatic aberration, vignetting at 24mm on FF enough contained, optical stabilizer of the latest generation super quiet and very effective, excellent bokeh and blur despite f4. Dedicated macro function quite usable for the occasional shots. Cons: Only real argument against by report and present in all samples as a "feature" project: the shift in focus shots at focal lengths less than 100cm and smaller apertures of f4 Opinion: Surely the 24-70 f4, despite the loss of 35mm, is in direct confrontation with the 24-105 f4 rather than with older siblings 24-70 2.8 I and II, also due to the fact that the two approaches are presented in kit with 6d.rnHo and had long used two copies of the 24-105 f4 L and is now struggling with a second sample of 24-70 L. The 24-105 f4 is I've used both on aps-c that ff (eos 60d, 5d mk III and 6d) and only 24-70 on ff. Therefore I will make a strictly comparative review between the two approaches for the ff.rnrnQuest 'perspective is very interesting although it has a big handicap as has been noted on several forums, including here, and I have personally raised the issue of the portal Canonclubitalia, or the presence a clear shift of focus to the minimum distance of focus, but I'll poco.rnrnIl 24-70 has on his side less distortion at 24mm, excellent resistance to flare and almost total absence of chromatic aberrations throughout his focal length. RNA 24-35mm and the 24-70 solves visibly better than the 24-105 and has a better definition on the edges & a gisevere; f4, which improves going to close. 24mm and 35mm on the definition you really notice the difference from 50mm upwards posting thins. rnElemento important, as anticipated, is the presence of shift of focus distances less than 100cm from the subject and is present at all focal lengths makes it ... except the macro so it is not absolutely love. Unfortunately this is a problem that Canon has officially called a "feature" due to the inherent design project (two aspherical elements instead of three) leads to a shift of the point of focus behind the subject when shooting, problematic due to the fact that the focus is always taken diaphragm fully open and close the aperture when shooting at the set value, postpones fire 1.5/2cm behind the subject (residual spherical aberration). I reiterate that the macro mode is absolutely not affected. So to each his own evaluation of whether it can be a limiting factor. rnrnGli stabilizers: the 24-105, although not one of the most ug &rave; noisy, presents scraping type noise when the stabilizer is activated and deactivated. Eventually we abitua.rnIl 24-70 f4 has the stabilizer quietest ever tried. It 's almost impossible to warn him! RnIl first is old technology 3 stops. The second is the new type 4 stops sensing panning.rnAnche the construction of 24-70 is excellent and gives an overall feeling of solidity and tropical conditions and better balanced than the 24-105. 24-70 rnIl finally presents a lock button (the same one that switches to macro mode) that prevents optics to stretch when held down. The 24-105 does not have the long and the lens tends to loosen and stretch alone. rnNel 24-70 is the new central front cap with clip and hood with button blocco.rnrnDa that I liked, the 24-70 gives more saturated colors and natural (but I have not had trouble reaching the same tones with a fast post-production on the 24-105), one of the most pleasant blurred Prettyand 9 blades against 8 of the circular bokeh of the 24-105 and offers very interesting to be an f4. rnSu ff vignetting is present but not at all annoying on the 24-70.rnChe mean, there are more in favor of the 35mm 24-105. Personally I do not care. Ride at least three optical, as they consider and, personally, where I do not get with the 70mm, 105mm I do not often bastano.rnRiguardo brightness, opens up a whole universe of discussion because the general tendency is to consider the 2.8 for indoor and 4 for the daylight. These concepts are too general because the diaphragm is not there just to let more or less light but at the same time controls the depth of field. For optical light, personally, I mean down to f2. 2.8 or 4 have a difference of one stop that, it is true, results in half or double values ??but with the new sensors to achieve very good results even at high ISO and times veloci.rnrnLa macro function, finally, but not bad presents a bit 'of theimitations away forcing you to stay pretty attached to the subject but usabilissima to do on the fly macro but with occasional light side or controluce.rnComplessivamente a nice optic but it has an Achilles' heel that can be annoying to anyone. The price starts to go down and it might be a good choice for those who want higher quality than the 24-105 inside the 800/900 euro Canon remaining at home. If you do not keep to all the amenities such as Canon in the first place the excellent service, then you might also want to consider the new beautiful and heavier stabilized the Tamron 24-70 2.8 but mounts 82mm filters against the relatively cheaper to 77mm of the two optical Canon.rnrnrn sent on July 30, 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
