|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Magnum58 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Magnum58  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM Pros: Lightness and compactness compared to the long focal length, possibility of use as semi-macro, unexpected sharpness on a lens of this cost and level. Cons: If you know before buying its low light I would say none. Opinion: I switched to this lens from the RF 200-800, given that photographic hunting is not among my priorities, especially for the excessive weight and bulk of the L series super zoom, which certainly do not make it a bag lens to always carry with you with the rest of the kit as this 100-400 allows you to do. The comparisons made with the various 100-400 L series make me smile, since it would be like comparing a medium-sized Dacia with a Mercedes or BMW of the same displacement... Is it necessary to specify that one of the latter is far superior to the Dacia?, or is it nice to fill your mouth by necessarily praising an L series snubbing everything that the market offers as an alternative to its absurd costs, weights and dimensions? Surely the choice of these lenses, in my opinion, in most cases is not dictated by the lack of economic availability (or at least it is not in my case) but by their versatility of use and transport combined with an enviable sharpness achieved even on basic lenses, perhaps helped by everything that post production offers today, with which you can very well make up for both low light and a contrast or definition that is not excellent given the containment of production costs of these non-pro lenses, which in any case offer the priceless advantage of being able to carry them with you without the fear of carrying an overweight that could ruin a pleasant photographic excursion. Obviously it is not a lens recommended for those who as a genre of photography practice primarily photographic hunting or sports photography, especially indoors, or night shooting or in any case in low light, but it is assumed that one knows this before making the purchase of such a specific lens ..., so I am surprised to read negative comments on characteristics that one should already know before buying, Especially for the fact that these negative comments, in most cases, are expressed in the evaluation of economic optics, as if the fact of being cheap is always synonymous with poor quality, without ever taking into account the parameter that in my opinion is the first to be taken into consideration, that is the quality/price ratio, even if, I repeat, in my case it is not the price that dictates the choice of a lens. sent on April 14, 2025 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Pros: Sharpness, lightness, cost of used Cons: Lack of tripod ring Opinion: I had the IS version in the past, my best lens used on 30D and 5D. I sold it because I had stopped photographing for a few years. Since I resumed I have always had the idea of having it back in my head, but having already the 70-300 IS II seemed excessive to me. Now, with the purchase of the R7 with stabilized sensor, for 300 euros I could not resist having the non-IS version, according to someone even better than the IS version, but I have no elements to be able to say so. Well, what can I say... Absolute handling (it weighs less than 700 gr), only a bit long, but having the internal focus it does not unbalance the small R7 at all. The only doubt could be the compatibility between the two, given the different eras in which they were produced. None of this! Precise and lightning-fast focusing even with AI Servo focusing, and perfect image resolution despite the 32 mega pixels (on aps-c), which seriously worried me. I must say that in combination with the 200-800 I have a focal range such as to be able to face any photo hunting situation, without overshadowing the performance of this lens on 6D mkII, even if here obviously you miss the stabilizer (but maybe it's just a fixation, since until now I haven't had blurred photos to bite my nails for...). sent on September 12, 2024 |
 | Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD Pros: Handling, sharpness, stabilization, all excellent in relation to the price (even more than used) Cons: For now, the only defect detected is the absence of the tripod ring, an additional cost, although perhaps not essential Opinion: Bought used in perfect condition at just over half the price as new. No need for adjustment, not even the fine one offered by the camera body (tested on both 6DII and 80D). I found it extremely manageable and manageable even without a tripod, also thanks to the very efficient stabilizer. I held it for about 15 minutes while standing waiting for the Mallard, which I posted in the gallery, to flail its wings, and I must say that I did not feel any discomfort. I found the autofocus very similar to the Canon EF 70-300 IS USM II, judged by many to be ultra-fast thanks to the particular motor it is equipped with. I can also say the same about sharpness, perhaps with a slight advantage in favor of the Tamron. So I would say that, for what little I have been able to try, I fully agree with the various reviews found on the net, in which I have heard this lens praised from all points of view, judging it second (but not by much) only to the Canon EF 100-400 L IS USM II, which by all accounts is the number one in the category, unfortunately also as a price....! sent on June 28, 2024 |
 | Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 L USM II Pros: Relative compactness (compared to its direct competitors), usability of the corners even at f/2.8 incomparable to all the compatibles tested to date Cons: I'll update the review if any come up in use Opinion: After trying four third-party competitors I had no alternative, I "risked" it (this time without the possibility of return) and it seems that this time we are there! Found used in excellent condition, indistinguishable from new, arrived in two days and immediately put on the "test bench", which is the garden of the house, where all the others had immediately shown their limits. I have to say that this time the result was amazing... Even at 2.8 the angles are perfectly usable although, of course, not perfect. To give an example, I found the same level of acceptability on the corners of the Canon at 2.8 aperture that I had found on the Samyang AF f/2.8 shooting at 8 aperture! Same difference with the Yongnuo AF f/2.8. Let's leave aside the comparison with the Sigma 14mm f/2.8, which is completely unacceptable. Obviously, everything is related to the amount spent, which was practically about a quarter of the new price at the release of the lens, while for the Koreans the price of the used was about 60% of the cost of the new one. In my opinion, there is no comparison. Obviously, this is only a first test of a few shots, but the same was also for the others tried previously, tests that were enough for me to decree the immediate return. Then, for heaven's sake, reading everything and more about this goal, well... it's certainly not perfection personified, but I think for this focal length it's still the best choice available today for Canon EF. I reserve the right to give a grade only after having effectively tested it "in the field". sent on June 20, 2024 |
 | Sigma 14mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical HSM Pros: Compactness, competitive used price Cons: Unwatchable corners and edges up to f8, they only improve at f11 but always decidedly insufficient Opinion: After trying Samyang 14 mm both MF and AF, both returned, and the Yongnuo AF 14 mm, which fortunately I was able to try in the shop, I ventured to buy this lens online (so with the possibility of withdrawal), and I must say fortunately...! A total disaster, to the point that comparing the photos taken to test the Samyang 14mm AF with the exact same shots, the photos of the latter looked like photos from Canon's L series compared to its budget series. I can't understand the fact that there can be such an abysmal difference between one specimen and another, given the enthusiastic opinions of other users who have used this 14 mm Sigma. I think I'll definitely give up the 14mm (I wouldn't want to have the same disappointment with the Canon, given its cost) and I'll limit myself to the old EF 20mm f/2.8, which certainly doesn't have a good reputation in terms of sharpness, but compared to the 14mm tested so far this seems to be a razor (which is saying something...)! sent on May 31, 2024 |
 | Samyang AF 14mm f/2.8 Pros: Super fast and silent autofocus, aesthetic simplicity, apparently very solid construction, but above all being AF it transmits all the automatisms Cons: Blur corners up to and including f 8 Opinion: After having tried and returned the classic MF model, since I could not focus at all and that it had the hyperfocal ring completely deranged, I ventured to buy the AF model (version for Canon EF) in the hope that it would solve the difficulties of use detected with the other model... result: in this respect I would say that the lens is exceptional, it works perfectly like a common Canon lens, moreover with a precise autofocus, very quiet (to the point that I had doubts about whether it worked), super fast, and I did not detect the risk of accidental movement of the focus ring. And that's no small thing, it reports all exif data like a normal AF lens. So I was hoping for an improvement, compared to the manual model, also in terms of definition at the corners, but unfortunately from this point of view things have gotten a lot worse (surely I happened to have one of the worst products), to the point that up to f/8 the result at the corners was unacceptable, just like at f/2.8. It was only starting to be acceptable at f/11, so I was left with no choice but to return it immediately. I suggest, if you buy it without the possibility of return, to test this lens before buying as it could reserve unpleasant surprises. sent on May 07, 2024 |
 | Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 Pros: Compactness, lightness, ridiculous price (used), unexpected optical quality. Cons: Relative to my sample: at 2.8 it underexposes by 1/2 stop, need for autofocus calibration due to visible back focus. Opinion: I bought this lens exclusively for its negligible weight and size, replacing it (coupling it with the 50 mm 1.8 stm) to the 24-105 mm L series even though I risked, reading the various reviews, to meet an optical quality that was not the best. Still having the 24-105 L series I was able to do a test, from which it emerged that at 24 mm the zoom gave a definition to the corners much lower than those of the fixed, and this to all apertures, making the angles of the fixed at aperture 2.8 higher even than those at aperture 5.6 of the zoom, which, however, proved to be slightly superior to the center. The speed of the autofocus is, although noisier, perfectly comparable (but perhaps higher) than that of the 50 stm, and the color rendering is nothing short of exceptional. I don't understand why any test or review I've read on the net everyone agrees in defining this lens as obsolete, antiquated and not at all reliable in terms of sharpness. As mentioned above, and in agreement with some test results found online, the only negative point I found is that the lens needed to correct the centering point of the autofocus, making it immediately evident a back focus problem on short and medium distance focus (on Canon 6D). For the rest, I find it the only product equivalent and comparable in price and quality to the EF S 24 mm STM, which, however, is not usable on ff. The alternative could have been the EF 24 mm f/2.8 IS, but in the used the latter you can find it exactly twice as much as the non-IS version, which is also very little available compared to its more recent brother. I can only evaluate this perspective with a full 9. sent on April 20, 2024 |
 | Samyang 8mm f/2.8 UMC Fisheye II Pros: Size and weight, sharpness up to the corners, flare resistance, possibility of obtaining super wide straight effect Cons: For now, none, except perhaps the unstable attachment of the lens cap Opinion: I state that I bought this lens for the Canon M50 Mk II because it would worthily replace the Sigma 12-24 coupling on Canon 6D ff, and I must say that this 8 mm apsc (therefore a 12.8 mm equivalent) does its job very well. Having never used a fisheye before, I was afraid that the "curved" effect was inevitable and only suitable for impressive photos. On the other hand, I have found that if used in the right way, this lens provides images that are not distorted and fully usable without any correction, making it perfect for landscape photos. In shots with lines perpendicular to the sensor, if you have the foresight to frame their convergence in the center of the image, they are perfectly straight already starting from the extreme angle. On the other hand, straightening the lines parallel to the sensor, especially the vertical ones, is more problematic, while for the horizontal ones, if you have the foresight to keep the horizon line in the center of the image, the latter will be perfectly straight. I don't know if this happens with all fisheyes (as I said I had never tried one), but I have to say that this lens worthily replaces a super wide angle on apsc! Another plus point is the sharpness up to the extreme angles already from f/4, contrary to the Sigma 12-24 (at least the specimen in my possession) which on ff left a lot to be desired on the corners, even closing to f/8 or f/11... Obviously, those exposed are the impressions of the first half day of use, on shots taken with the exclusive purpose of bringing out the limits of the optics, so much so that I get to shoot framing the direct sun, and surprisingly I did not see any flare and no loss of contrast. What else to say..., for now I could only give a score of 10. sent on April 05, 2024 |
 | Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: Lightness, extreme compactness, good construction, exceptional focal coverage, excellent optical performance in relation to the price (of the used, of course). Cons: Yield at the corners quite poor even at the most closed diaphragm. Opinion: Purchased used for a soothing, and combined with the 20-35 f3.5/4.5 to be used on FF, it has replaced the 24-105 L IS worthily, if only for the weight and footprint irrelevant to the latter, thus extending to 20 mm the availability of focal points with an exceptional portability compared to the various 17-40, 16-35, 24-70 L series, as well as a cost that does not make you feel breathless in case of shocks or falls. With this combination I found the taste of always prune with me photographic equipment, a habit that I had now abandoned due to weights and dimensions. From the point of view of the showdown, after comparisons made against the 24-105 STM, I have noticed that it gives way compared to the latter on the short focal points, I would say up to 35, while otre definitely goes to balance the books, up to 105 mm where understanding who has the best is really very hard. The yield in the colors is decidedly different, very hot in the old man while, in comparison, the yield of the STM is "glacial", which I personally prefer. If I had to make the assessment in a number I would say 8.5. sent on February 22, 2021 |
 | Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: Lightness, compactness, does not turn the front lens and does not stretch in the zoomed, optimal focal for FF format, good sharpness even at the corners already at TA, in the optimal center, low distortion, excellent value for money (used). Cons: So far I have not found any downsides. Opinion: I did not know that this lens existed if I had not read a sales announcement. In just over 300 grams it contains 4 wide-angle focal points, all with their own charm and peculiarity (20 mm, 24 mm, 28 mm, 35 mm, fascinating!). I bought it used, and after trying it I decided to combine it with a 28-105 f 3.5/4.5. Although I do not consider the latter to be at the level of 20-35 (both optically and constructively) I must admit that, due to their compactness and lightness, the two constitute an excellent combination, especially in terms of portability, with a respectable optical yield, although not from the L series. This 20-35 seems un diffuse and quite difficult to find. The value for money (of the used, of course) is really the best I've ever found. In a vote I would undoubtedly give a 9. sent on February 22, 2021 |
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
