|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Gozilla www.juzaphoto.com/p/Gozilla  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Fujifilm XF 18mm f/2 R Pros: Compact, lightweight, built with quality materials, optical quality especially in the center. Cons: You have to have to diaphragm edges acceptable. Distortion. The rubber stopper of the hood comes off easily and is at risk loss. Price. Opinion: Until a short time ago, before the 'arrival of 27 was the pancake lens Fuji XF smaller and lighter. Remains strongly compact and very well done. The optical quality of the center and 'high, but to have the edge with a good yield must close the iris. The blurred and 'pleasant though not always is a peculiarity to be found in a wide angle. The Af benefits of the update of camera bodies and the lens resulting in fast and accurate. I bought this lens used for its compact size and for its focal length equivalent to 27mm equivalent. Frankly, I must say that I prefer the 18-55 as surrender but as mentioned was looking for something portable. This lens, however, I was not disappointed and I recommend it to all those who seek the compactness without major sacrifices in terms of quality. At the moment the price is a little high. sent on August 14, 2013 |
 | Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Pros: Construction, optical quality, highly effective stabilizer. Cons: A 200 mm lens hood with grafted and 'very cumbersome. Opinion: The construction of the lens and 'excellent, as well as performance in the optical layer. The stabilizer and 'very effective and allows you to shoot at slow shutter speeds even at 200mm. The brightness is not miracle, but if it had been fixed to 2.8 weight and size would have been quite different. The lens' sufficiently compact and lightweight, especially when compared to targets of the same focal length equivalent to 84-305 do not forget to be unbalanced and not overly bodies like X-E1, much less X-Pro1. A 200 mm lens hood with grafted becomes very cumbersome, but basically when clicked it back to 55mm and everything falls into place. The blurry I'm not crazy but I can not define it, however unpleasant. The Af thanks to the recent upgrade of camera bodies and the type of engine used and 'adequate but certainly not like a lightning reflex system. The purchase price is going down gradually and at the time of writing although not given and 'anything but outrageous. Definitely recommended. sent on August 14, 2013 |
 | Fujifilm XF 60mm f/2.4 R Macro Pros: Weight, size, quality optics. Cons: The Af is not a thunderbolt of war, but after the update and taking into account that it is a macro lens and then with a helix in the long run we say you can define acceptable. Opinion: It is currently the home of medium telephoto Fuji. In my opinion is a desire to live at all costs a mediotele with a macro lens, which among other things will come to a magnification ratio of 1:2 does not seem apt. They could point to a 85-90 with AF a bit faster, like 35. Anyway the qualities in terms of quality both of the lenses of both the construction are indisputable. Even the blur is very pleasant. The lens hood is well made but it increases the size dramatically. Too bad because the lens is very compact and lightweight. LAF after the update is fast enough, but forget pictures of subjects that move quickly or unpredictably. I highly recommend it for its excellent optical qualities, but in truth they are waiting for the new Fuji 56 F1.2. sent on June 30, 2013 |
 | Canon 5D Pros: Quality of files, though not robust body to tropical fraction of the cost. Cons: Only one that is related to his age, ie the display, the slow autofocus and with a few points, iso than 1600. Opinion: Machine still excellent. It is located at the price of a good compact files and produces excellent. It lacks many features now taken for granted, like live view, video, viewing a screen with high resolution, ..... but .... teaches how to make photographs. It 'a real vacuum cleaner, but personally I make cleaning the sensor, so I do not mind' much. Do you accept the inevitable limitations and 'now the cheapest way to enter the world of FF. The filter on the sensor is non-invasive and this contributes to the sharpness of the files. The normally use with the STM and 40 together constitute a formidable "street machine". Straconsigliata especially in relation to its price. sent on June 25, 2013 |
 | Fujifilm XF 14mm f/2.8 R Pros: Optical quality, construction as a reference. Cons: The lens aperture ring and 'far too "soft", it moves easily every time it is touched. The hood and 'effective, but on a lens of this level (and cost) could make it in metal. Opinion: I was really pleased with the performance of this lens. It is razor sharp, with good contrast and also sports one blurred very pleasant. The mechanism that allows the transition from manual to automatic focus works very well, with a good solid feel. When in manual maf becomes visible distance scale and the one that allows you to calculate the PDC or set the hyperfocal distance quickly, very good! During the manual focus ring on the stop at the end of its run in both directions of rotation, .... not easy today. Ff corresponds to a 21mm focal length which is suitable for use in different areas with excellent results. I would have preferred an aperture ring more braking and if you really want to nit-pick .... a metal lens hood. sent on June 22, 2013 |
 | Fujifilm XF 18-55 f/2.8-4R LM OIS Pros: Construction, materials used, made the lens at all apertures, effective stabilizer. Cons: Overall height to 55mm. Opinion: In my opinion and 'the best 18-55 supplied by various manufacturers. It is versatile, sharp and with a stabilizer really effective. And certain 'that once enabled on my X-E1 significantly increases the clutter, especially at maximum focal length, but basically similar machine which keeps the compact with a zoom of the same excursion? At the moment when updated the FW of the machine and the lens and 'one that allows the maximum speed of the AF of the entire line-up Fuji. If purchased in a kit with the car and 'also very affordable. I like fixed, I have to say that the quality and versatility of this lens make it an attractive product. sent on May 17, 2013 |
 | Fujifilm XF 35mm f/1.4 R Pros: Sharp scary, beautiful wide open, compact. Cons: I can not find, but the rubber stopper of the hood .... Opinion: That's a fifty on FF and the little and 'able to give the paying most of the same focal length on the market, for image clarity and quality of the blur. It is compact, lightweight and with a budget first class. The hood and 'metal and has a specially designed rubber but lose and lose easily run away because that is a beauty. I keep it with a lens and a good uv filter always be engaged without plugs so you do not think about it anymore. It is perfect as I said, even though "my" focal '35 mm on FF. Recommended course and passes the desire of other brands of lenses with adapters. sent on May 17, 2013 |
 | Fujifilm X-E1 Pros: Size, weight, quality files, construction and design. Cons: The small size in relation to my hands (large) makes it un-ergonomic. The automatic white balance tends to make pictures taken in full sun a little cold. Opinion: I bought this machine for many reasons, starting with the extraordinary quality of its sensor, portability, the ability to use lenses I already had, and also for its classic style and decidedly vintage. I was not at all disappointed by this, but .... For all the pictures taken in those circumstances where the camera must remain "fair" and 'phenomenal. In practice, no one note and another, and between the 'whisper quiet. L 'AF is not up to a SLR system but it is more than enough for general use. The lenses are excellent tradition Fuji as finding the 18-55 kit zoom much higher than any other of equal excursion normally supplied with the machines also reflex. The 35 F 1.4 and who also possess' excellent with a very pleasant blur. The electronic viewfinder and 'very good, bright, and with a "ghosting" acceptable. I do not really like the white balance in the car, since it makes it a little cool pictures taken with full sun, but is fine in all other cases. The dim sent on May 11, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Pros: Construction, characteristics of fuzzy, three-dimensional images. Cons: Weight and size, but it is a defect? Opinion: And 'one of those lenses that are tested to fully appreciate. The cost is high, but as soon as you touch it you feel the quality of the materials and impeccable construction. Also possess the Canon 50 1.4, and if under the optical appearance by stopping the results seem similar, they are "animals" different. The focus is particular dream I would say, especially wide open, and in the end I made this purchase for its use in these conditions. Anyone looking for a bright 50 to use on the road or street can in my opinion be on version 1.4, but those who seek the very characteristics for which it was built, budget permitting, is not to be missed. Always shooting in raw, and developing the files with DPP using "digital optimization goal," the results that I see make me forget the cost of this glass. sent on November 22, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pros: Weight, size, good construction, nice bokeh, sharpness even at full aperture. Cons: At this price just can not find them! Opinion: Bought on a whim because I own the Canon 50 F1.4 and 50 F1.2, but very satisfied with it. My 5DIII becomes a "compattona" but the quality of the files is very respectable. Autofocus is not a rocket, but we are talking about a speed accettabilissima. Quiet, the bottom has been designed with an eye on the video. The TA is correct vignetting on my camera "on camera", but also by software (DPP) disappears with a click (I often like). Does not seem to require any lens hood cap lens cover and finally, being little one especially for my hands, it is awkward to remove (preferably new). I updated the firmware of the lens but I have to say that never before I had the problems that the same should have corrected. A purchase highly recommended, especially in relation to its cost! sent on November 20, 2012 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Pros: Optical quality, effectiveness of the stabilizer, autofocus speed construction. Cons: Vignetting. Opinion: I basically said it all in the introduction. I should add that when used on FF (5DMKII) sticker unexpectedly for un'obbiettivo of this class. Without the necessary evidence to TA cartoon bad, it is acceptable to F4 and then disappear. I did this test also divese focal (70 - 120 - 200). All this results in PP, but at this price it was a surprise. Obviously it can depend on my copy. For the rest ..... in my opinion is the best ever produced in this range of focal lengths. sent on June 02, 2012 |
 | Canon 600D Pros: Compact body, swiveling display and high definition, battery life, image quality, precision meter. Cons: The absence of an upper display and body "plasticky". Opinion: I have a 5DMKII and I wanted a lightweight and compact body to take advantage of the crop with the focal lengths. The 600D is oggni euro it costs, and even more if we consider basically the same quality as the 7D. Obviously has no vocation for professional and robust for both fast an access to key functions. The swiveling display is excellent for image definition and brilliance. The AF is appropriate to its price range but if you want to try sports or birds in the photos better think about the older sister (7D). The handle is uncomfortable given the size and my hands, but with BG returns to be adequate at the expense of compactness. The meter is accurate especially after you understand how it connects with the point of maf, so that so far I practically never used the compensation function. Recommended especially for the price. sent on May 18, 2012 |
 | Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8 D ED Pros: Size and weight, sharp, fast AF, optical performance. Cons: Hard to find, yet expensive. Opinion: Very versatile lens on FF for his versatility as an optical journey, landscape, ceremony, reports and more. Of robust construction although it is not tropicalized. AF very fast and quiet considering it is not a lens recently. Made the "old way", ie smooth transition between the various shades of color and trend unlike the "N" series latest to open the shadows. Not by chance is still very popular with photographers ceremony. In contrast to the 14-24 can mount filters (for those who consider it necessary) as long thin type as the field angle. Loses detail at the edges at the widest apertures above all to 17mm, but is still very clear in all other focal lengths. Also possess the 14-24 that assures outstanding performance, but I've always resisted selling this lens because of its portability and because covering focal lengths more suited to my needs. Still costs a lot and on the used market if you do not find many. Someone complains about a hissing sound in 'AF after that has not been used for a little time, but in my case I never noticed. For Nikonisti .... a must! sent on September 29, 2011 |
 | Nikon AF 16mm f/2.8 D Fisheye Pros: Construction, optical performance, portability, presence aperture ring. Cons: It 'dated, still costs a lot, lack ultrasonic AF, made the edges adiaframmi open. Opinion: Dated lens that has aperture ring and allows the application to always excellent bodies pellicola.La construction is frighteningly professional, a real feast for the eyes. No plastic, but hard and raw heavy metal! Does not accept filters before, but at the back we have a slot for real? Strainers? optical glass bayonet are supplied with: L37C (uv), A2 (amber) for white balance, B2 (blue) as above, O56 (orange) for b & w. A filter, in general (and obviously) the first, must always be grafted or lose? Focus? the edges since it is part of the optical system. Eye so if you buy it used you have to check its presence. AF only with the bodies which so allow, and the ring maf that rotates during operation. Great for small apertures, suffers a little open systems. To note the useful references for setting the hyperfocal distance without much preamble. Not yet replaced on FF, I deserve an update of what type of DX Fisheye 10.5mm f/2.8 G ED as the stratospheric 14-24 does not cover the same angle (180 ° diagonal) and despite having a job obviously different weights and cluttered significantly compared to the "fish". sent on September 28, 2011 |
 | Nikon AF DX 10.5mm f/2.8 G ED Fisheye Pros: Compact, sharp. Cons: Chromatic aberration. Opinion: The? Lens (DX) shows very good construction with hammered finishing yellow typical of the brand, providing just a reassuring impression of solidity which is not bad in an object as small as ridotte.Il hood is integrated, but watch the front lens given its convex shape. It 'a fisheye lens with a 180 ° diagonal field. The AF (silent) is not straveloce but given the type of lens is not a problem. The sharpness at small apertures (but watch out for diffraction) is exemplary (at the bottom of these lenses is exploited in general all the pdc possible) and the edges to maintain a sufficient aperture more detail. Suffers from chromatic aberration, but if you shoot in raw via software is a problem easily solved. Nothing to be done for the filters, but you can use jellies inserine in a rear housing. It 'a creative lens to long can also tiring because of the typical distortion of a fisheye. All in all it does not cost even a blunder and the quality it offers is an "experiment" that is worth a try. sent on September 28, 2011 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 G ED Pros: Construction, optical performance, quiet and fast AF and versatility. Cons: Weight, size, lack VR, distortion at 24mm. Opinion: FF is a handyman of high quality, and not coincidentally is often a first choice of many Ceremonialists and beyond. Used on a reduced size, is usabilissimo the longer focal lengths, but often remains too long in the shorter ones. The AF is precise, fast and quiet. The collars are well sized and correctly "braking". Handle this glass, made of magnesium and tropical is a real pleasure. The presence of the VR would be a further evolutionary step, but I think that at the moment would increase the already significant weight excessively. Distorts to 24 mm, but this can always be corrected by software. Unexceptionable in optical performance just a little diaphragmed, defends himself very well at full aperture. With the hood grafted clutter is truly remarkable, but especially when the lens is mounted on the "flagship" is a collection handy and balanced (apart from the weight). The price is high, but the quality and robustness, with a view to use for and not limited to, certainly justify. sent on September 28, 2011 |
 | Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G Pros: Construction, clarity, weight, silent AF, blurred excellent. Cons: Distortion is just 50mm AF slow, soft to 1.4. Opinion: Focal standard for many years has been equipped with ultrasonic motor in order to be used on all new Nikon bodies, even those of low-end. What is missing is now the aperture ring, which limits its use on older but still good film bodies. The construction is very good with a ring maf correctly sized. The sharpness is a reference, but not wide open where, however, allows you to take home accettabilissimi shots. The focus is fabulous, relying on the 9 aperture blades. The AF, extremely quiet, it is slower than you expect, but obviously the helicoid of the maf, more like a macro lens, makes it very accurate. The 50 of the past were known to be very correct with regard to distortion, but this is now present and noticeable even though certainly not in an exaggerated way. The price is adjusted to the quality of the lens, but unlike the competition, there is provided the useful un'astuccio lens hood and soft. It 's always a lens that has its own natural use of FF, but that turns into an excellent 75mm remarkable openness on aps-c. sent on September 28, 2011 |
 | Nikon D3 Pros: Indestructible, image quality, resistance to high ISO, fast in use thanks to the dedicated buttons for common functions such as AF reference, precision meter, possibility to customize almost unlimited battery life. Cons: Cost, weight, not just the front wheel max ergonomics, lack of "50 iso", lack of self-cleaning sensor. Opinion: Workhorse exceptionally fast and precise thanks to the many dedicated buttons for common functions. Excellent actionable despite the heavy weight. Excellent quality of the files in spite of the resolution (today) only acceptable, and no noise even at high ISO. The lack of the cleaning device of the sensor feels (although it is certainly not a solution of absolute effectiveness, but it helps). The quality and brightness of the viewfinder is exemplary. Excellent LCD screen is very resistant to scratches. The clicking noise, although excessive, is for many a "feast for the ears" which recalls the previous excellent film cameras, but makes it not just for photos in contexts ... silent. Dual slot CF customizable depending on your needs. Speed ??in continuous shooting. Long service life of the battery. Today there is a lack of ability video, but the D3s which represents the natural evolution totally abandons fills gap. The D700 produces substantially the same files at a price less than half that of the D3, but a car like this has pro features definitely targeted to heavy duty and extreme. sent on September 25, 2011 |
 | Nikon D90 Pros: Construction, image quality, portability in relation to weight and size. Cons: Noise at high ISO and lack mirror lockup. Opinion: To be honest this machine now retired was one of the best ever produced by the house giallonera the end consumer. Testifies over the success of sale also the fact that has never been produced for a firmware upgrade the product, with the exception of that of the database of the lenses for the correction of the distortion directly from the camera. The body is strong enough and very good ergonomics. It can also use the lenses AF devoid of internal motor. The monitor what today would be considered as sufficient, is actually still very accurate. Excellent battery life. The yield at high iso is suffiente but not striking. A great device that will populate the second hand market for much longer. sent on September 24, 2011 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Pros: Sharpness, accurate construction and weight. Cons: It 'sa F4 unregulated. Opinion: On paper it is the ugly duckling of the family 70-200 but optical performance is uncompromising. In relation to the cost there is no argument that can actually detract from this lens. The AF is fast and incredibly accurate. As I said is a F4 but with small steps to "manual of photography" you get a good focus. If your budget does not allow the F2 .8 or the stabilized version of this (but it costs almost twice as much) lens is a must-have. sent on September 24, 2011 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: Crisp in relation to the range of focal lengths, stabilizer effective, construction. Cons: Distortion at 24mm and vignettaura at RT. Opinion: The use of FF where "spread" its range of focal lengths with excellent quality. Suffers enough flare and distortion at 24 mm, but this easily controllable via software as well as vignetting at full aperture. The effective stabilizer compensates in part the max aperture. The building, as befits a "L", is absolutely excellent. Great all-rounder, especially on the road without any compromise in terms of quality. Also excellent in color reproduction. The only flaw, at least for my hands, the zoom ring that I personally would have preferred a little wider. sent on September 24, 2011 |
 | Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM Pros: Construction, AF very fast, price in relation to performance. Cons: The maximum aperture and lens unusually long for the range of focal lengths. Opinion: Lens definitely recommended because of excellent performance center edge at all focal lengths. Chromatic aberration is virtually absent (at least in my copy). Can not mount filters, but personally I do not think existential, however is its already quite "countered." Sometimes you have to be careful if you keep the cap inserted as slips off very easily. sent on September 24, 2011 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Pros: Sharpness, construction, good AF, portability. Cons: Chronic lack of hood and soft at full aperture. Opinion: Excellent in everything except for the yield at full aperture which is maintained comunqua acceptable. The focus is very good but the competition on this is better. As you start to close the diaphragm becomes a blade. Worth every euro it costs, but the parent does not understand that a hood would cost them a few cents and earn millions of consensus in the image. sent on September 24, 2011 |
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
