|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Ciapagnao www.juzaphoto.com/p/Ciapagnao  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony A6000 Pros: especially compact, compact viewfinder side, 16-50 compact, high ISO Cons: devaluation when it comes out the next model, optical difficult to sell Opinion: I went from sony A7 + RX100 to this ML for one body to carry in your pocket with the 16 50. I scared the fact of passing from Zeiss optics to sony 16 50 but I have no regrets. I chose the camera especially for the compact lens 16 50 which makes the machine pocket and the ability to mount optical vintage. Its direct competitor the fuji xt1 I was not impressed with 18 because 55 is as big as the A7 and would much prefer the latter. Needless to couple it with long lenses and heavy so best to take otherwise directly A7r with a 2.8 or 35 14 70 (a7 of the fact I was not satisfied ghosting flare). Outstanding at high iso: in principle I would say that 2500 iso a6000 meet the 640 canon 50d or 1600circa the 5d or 5/6400 of the A7 in practice for my purposes I could not ask for more, mold size 45x30 and 2000 ISO images are acceptable. Viewfinder and then pivoting eccezzionali.AF are amazing, better than the A7 a bit 'less powerful SLR midlevel although for myuses (views-portraits) is completely unnecessary since use of the manual. sent on January 19, 2016 |
 | Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Pros: price, fixed 2.8, construction, suitable for FF Cons: weight, clarity, size Opinion: I tried a couple of times this lens that I was interested in the price / 2.8 fixed. Other zoom Similar fact much more expensive. My advice is: better a decent f4 which the canon 24 105L that a 2.8 to f4 that is worse than the canon. The quality is poor as the Tamron 28 75 2.8. I am a lover of 2.8 indispensable for portraits, like the rest also have a lens handyman but I say NO to such a compromise, a better f4. This is a speech only for FF, of aps-c obviously makes no sense, better as a handyman (in order of value / price / performance): sigma 17 50, 17 50 tamron smooth, Tamron 17 50 vc, sigma 18 50 . sent on September 22, 2015 |
 | Canon 60D Pros: weight 18mpx video size Cons: all the rest Opinion: I used the 60d of friends 3/4 times, did not convince me before, not like now. The two main things that made me curse were: 1) to change the dial of the various types of shooting by manual priority must press a button above. Are we joking? what use is it? maybe I'm too novice to know but it seems one of those things will test your patience. 2. there is a pretty big wheel to turn as we have always done with the 40d and 50d pretty convenient to use to change his diaphragm but it was too easy to let the command nice comfortable where he was needed to force change it so every time you have to change my aperture in manual must Premer button on the top right 'Zoom' and then circling the shutter dial. Utility that will have a similar system? maybe you take a 7D for despair? or probably is an obvious choice from the marketing department of canon or is always me who are beginner and do not understand these technical innovations. Apart from that, theas soon as you pick up the car it looks more like a number than a xxx xx because of plastic, so it is obvious, if you want the magnesium body or 5d 7d but at this point I'm keeping a 600d and 'those who saw themselves as self'. Another downside is that I never liked the swiveling display, will be comfortable there is no doubt, as long as you just have at hand. Also in this case the best 7d. I conclude by listing the positives, or the fact that he does video and 3k.mpx more than 50d. The advice to anyone who is used to very little or those who have a 600d and 60d selling it takes just a few euros more. Absolutely if you have a 50d or 40d Keep it. However a better 50d or 600d (for video) and for those with the availability of budget 7d. sent on September 22, 2015 |
 | Sony RX100 Pros: sharpness tascabilità Cons: not buying it first Opinion: You can replace an SLR? I odic yes. I always carry it in small pouch along with cellular seen compactness and I do more photos with the camera that I leave home. The reflex to use only for predetermined events or if I want to go out just for photos, in all other cases of compact go. Before I had a canon s90 held for years that I later sold, but it is not remotely comparable to the RX100 that is closer to a sensor APS-C that one 4x6 / 1.7 compact. When I go to the mountains or bike or walk always carry with a mini tripod that you never know. How many times I used to regret not having the SLR with me, now I do not regret the SLR because the RX100 comes off very well. I did several tests with canon 50d and I would say that for panoramic photos of the stand the difference between 50d and RX100 is almost the same as that between 50D and 5D MK II course using zoom handyman. The ratio of the difference of the sensor is almost identical. For portraits then I saw that the RX100 has more sharpness of the canon 50d because those mpx in pi & ugrave; then of course it is different fuzzy (and details) but not significantly different as I imagined before trying it. AF and sports photos / fauna do not know are not my thing, but to focus the pictures I found a lot of difficulties in the absence of light, many photos are blurry to me, so I assume that if he buys a lover fast AF that the camera will sell immediately because it is impossible to match or approach AF SLR. Night pictures of the stand are very well although at this juncture notice much difference with a camera, I would say that in this series, the SLR is much, much higher. I repeat yet again that I am excited about the compact I never thought that in a pocket there is such a quality. So I repeat that for the weight / quality of the photos in the first place put the compact obviously never sell the camera that gives me more emotions in the shot and then the quality is superior even if I repeat not nettamentand higher. At high ISO does very well to be a compact but as I said before an APS-C sensor performs better. I conclude by saying that I was undecided between the RX100 and a fuji x-e1 or sony nex but it is useless to have another aps-c NOT POCKET because when you have to take another pouch only for the camera that weighs 400 grams or a kilo does the Unlike then, or I go out with a camera in your pocket or better to have a camera in the old style marsupione. sent on July 20, 2015 |
 | Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Pros: stabilized, construction Cons: Price dell'usato Opinion: Having had the Tamron 17 50 smooth and vc, the canon and the sigma 17 55 18 50, as zoom handyman on aps-c I missed the sigma 17 50. Taken especially since stabilized, to make night shots without a tripod, I saw that 17mm can take a 1/6 - 1/8 against 1/13 of the Tamron 17 50 liscio.La stabilizzazzione should be better than the Tamron 17 50 VC but for now I think I would say slightly better than similar tamron but not much higher . Flare: in the range I would say, I expected better still less than 18 little brother 50 but it seems most of the Tamron 17 50 smooth. Sharpness: Blurring of 17 50 tamron, slightly but is still better as the Tamron 17 50 VC.Colori: beautiful, saturated. AF works reasonably, not a series L, but is better than the Tamron at least it seems to me. Weight in the range to be a stabilized 2.8, much less cumbersome however the canon 17 55 which is a cannon. I recommend it to anyone who wants to stabilized optics photo Hands free otherwise better tamron 17 50 smooth that weighs less, costsless and the sharpness seems to me slightly but slightly higher. sent on July 08, 2015 |
 | Canon 5D Mark II Pros: emotions. quality / price ratio. solidity. viewfinder brightness. shutter sound. huge lcd Cons: with only one slot CF card, wi-fi, no charge counters, remote shooting, only 30sec Bulb Opinion: Life is made of emotions, I did not think to try many with a material object. After using various aps-c and 5d old, finally saving 5EU here and 10 there, I took the liberty of giving me a 5d mark II.rnAppena taken in hand almost get emotional. Accustomed to camera bodies less solid as the 50d and with fewer options like the 5d old, my attention is captured immediately from the screen on the right shoulder: huge, the screen back LCD: spectacular but especially the shutter sound distinctly differenta an APS c.rnViene really want to carry it with them. rnOgni time I see the moon, or a starry sky, or to capture a portrait, always regret not having brought the 5d appresso.rnProbabilmente are also conditioned by the fact that I have desired for years, but expectations can not superar reality .rnComicio immediately by saying that the AF works well, I read various forums and contrary opinions about it but personally I definitely can not complain. But I must say that the use SLR lenses more expensive so I guess siano these affecting especially my giudizio.rnDevo say that I used a couple of 5d old that I was not given particular emotions, or rather, not have given me the confidence in myself to take pictures decenti.rnCon the mark II is everything easier. Thanks to the ISO and the bright viewfinder and detailed that helps, helps molto.rnFinisco by saying that I tried the direct competitors of the SLR in question: Canon 6D and Fujifilm x-t1. The first I ruled after taking it in hand: too plastic, too little strong (in comparison to the 5D II course). The second I always discarded after taking it in hand: zero emotions, too small, I could not hold it even though it must be said that it has a viewfinder really good. The Canon 7D but I had a FF for the types of photos that I prefer is higher. The Nikon I have not even considered because I do not like, I tried various aps-c and I must say that I find interesting color rendering only for pictures but not for the photos I do for the greater or the paesaggi.rnPosso dirand that these impressions are shared by a couple of my friends, so I assume these criticisms are probably / perhaps condivisibili.rnCome downside I have to say that Canon should modernize: I understand that it's all marketing, you have to earn as much as possible and then not put the wifi so you buy separately, but come on, a wifi card occupies some mm and even when output could enter with other interesting things as remote shooting, adding the pay tone, programming the bulb, the programming of ' alternating shots to the sky stacker, etc ... rnNon could however conclude the review with the various negative notes then award the 5d still relevant to the ergonomic handle, really good: I tried to take in hand the various 1D and 1DS that they are significantly larger and may give the impression of being more robust but I have to say that the 5D MK II is no less: is more compact but the strength and the taking of both hands makes my SLRottimale.rnConcludo saying that I will change only if I have financial problems, otherwise I think it will become THE my SLR. sent on June 04, 2015 |
 | Benro C0180T Pros: weight compact speed of opening Cons: prezzo Opinion: Indispensable. Unparalleled. Only. faithful companion, slips famous everywhere in your backpack or purse without occupy space. Weight as a goal. Opened in 20secondi. I recommend it to tutti.Sono one particularly cheap but better investir in a tripod that will last 10 or 20 years in a camera body that every year is devalued and maybe cambia.Lo recommend it to everyone. sent on April 30, 2015 |
 | Canon 40D Pros: cost used construction penultimate true semipro quality / price ratio Cons: at the price that I paid I can not afford to write anything Opinion: Repurchased in 2015 the price of a compact warehouse I am more and more enthusiastic. Past as many from 40D to 50D and 7D and 5D are passed back to the 40D for economic / practical. How many times I did not take the SLR with me because they are too expensive and for fear of ruining it. With 40D + Tamron 17 50 paid both within 400eu not have that problem. The reflex to use forever, walk, mountain etc ... Before I used the car to come out and take pictures, now it's my prosthesis. What reiterate the 40D: Color unrivaled best of 5D and 7D (especially v1) and of course better than 50d. He 10Mpx but let's face it, I've done a thousand tests, in the landscapes as you can 'see the difference if you crop or print posters in exaggerated? I have photos of 5D and 7D 40D and sometimes I'm wrong I d have done it instead with 5D and 40D, for heaven's sake I will be a beginner but I think there are many like myself so I say once again: + 40D and -marketng. For portraits in the interior 7D has an edge (the ISO from 400 and up are best), the 5D then you can not or &serious; even compare because light years ahead. For sports photos do not know is not my thing. However I am always of the same opinion, if you have a limited budget like myself better 40D and an optical rather than a 7D and then risparmiar on optical because the cana gas sent on April 30, 2015 |
 | Canon 7D Pros: construction megapixel Cons: none for the price that is used in Opinion: purchased in 2014 400eu I would say it's worth the expense. Excellent quality / price ratio. At high ISO it is worse than 5d old but much better than the 50d from 400 upwards. I made many tests and I would say that is better than 50d 7d to ISO 100. In the landscapes is phenomenal thanks to 18mpx. E 'was distraught after the firmware upgrade for the better, clearer photos, more detailed. I think the aps-c with the best price-quality ratio in 2015 after the release of 7d mII, I would say that if the plays with the 50d. If you are undecided between the two I would say of the 50d to acquire 300eu or 7d to 420, both are valid, I do not consider the 60d because the price you would take is the 7d directly. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon 5D Pros: building Cons: none for the price of used that are unable to purchase approximately 350eu in 2015 Opinion: Purchased in 330eu worth all the money spent. Better to have it in the kit if you have a aps-c and rather give up a goal. Best of the 7D for portraits and high iso but I would say that I prefer the 7D to do landscapes. Let me explain, if I have a limited budget and use the 5D with lenses as economiti 50 1.8 or Tamron 28 75 I can not get up and I have not seen in making landscapes differences with the 7D + Tamron 17 50 (available with the same budget) I would say to for landscapes and perhaps better quest last coupled. For ritatti instead you can not compare a aps-c in a FF: the 5D old emerges vincitrive (obviously). sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 III Pros: economic Cons: sharpness Opinion: Price here is the only pro of objective data in 'gift' with the reflex acquistata.Lo would change immediately with the Tamron 17 50 much clearer to the point that not even compare it. I used it with the first SLR that I purchased and was asking myself stè reflex cos'anno of so different from a Canon S90? I knew when I sold the lens and passed to goals best. It is a lens that takes 'to free' with the reflex of the kit I can not say that they are a waste of money but do not ever buy it separately. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Pros: pocket Cons: f2.8 Opinion: Very, very best and worst of the 50 1.8 50 1.4 I would spend those immediately 100eu more to take this last rather than do that with the 40ino for a period and then want more and take the 50 mentioned. I would recommend it to those who are not so many portraits and has no place in the bag for bulky & heavy lenses because let's face it, if you take the 50 portraits 1.4 and I will keep on for most of the photographs. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical Pros: building Cons: sharpness weight Opinion: Purchased anchio because curious to prove a very wide angle without svenarmi not l I found particularly sharp because I think they are indeed used to use such extreme goals. Then I thought better in terms of sharpness. I recommend everyone to try it before you buy it if you have no experience in the wide-angle sottoscritto.Devo as soon as I tried to say that I was amazed. Looking at human eye with a landscape and then looking back from the viewfinder can be seen as if I had two eyes even instead of orecchie.Lo advice to those with 200 / 250eu from spenders to have a lens in the drawer to be used on rare occasions, because let's face , apart from the milky way what you can photograph or do you leave house with upwards the lens for forografare only landscapes set or not you will almost never in the bag. Like all opinions everyone has different needs, mine is not to go into the mountains with a zaiono in with 4kg of equipment and 1kg of sandwiches, better the other way sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD Pros: building excursion internal Cons: weight Opinion: Past the 70,300 VC for the weight I have to say that this is the only fault I have. Used for two years you can make really everything. It does not lose sharpness with the focus or rather not I have never noticed. It is located in 400eu if you look good in used at the same price bianchino, indeed I have always preferred to the quest for the last opening. My question is: better tamron 70,200 to 2.8 400eu or Tamron VC + 70 300 50 1.4 canon at the same price? I opted for the latter and have not regretted. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD Pros: Price sharpness construction Cons: zoom range outside Opinion: Bianchino sharp as the more or less at all focal lengths. AF rather different from the canon 70,200 f4 slightly worse. Very compact usable for all. Really I recommend it to everyone plus it can also be used on FF. For portraits sharpness better than a 100mm f4 70. photo hunting I would say that the VC works and is the minimum lens that you must avere.Escursione focal exceptional I would not say that loses a lot between 200 and 300 contrary to 300mm can be used. The hood from exhibitionist is as long as the goal. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: sharpness - AF wonderful Cons: prezzo Opinion: Unbeatable clarity and excursion apt. F4 drive is not that bad. Council the aim especially to those with FF because of aps-c does not make sense or is better suited for photographers with special needs. Sharper's 17 then 55 is the zoom lens best I've ever tried albeit on aps-c between 2 consiglerei the opening 2.8 for obvious reasons. I selected the lens for photos in arenas because 2.8d'aperuta is really minimal. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Pros: clarity in relation to focal length - construction - Price Cons: none for the excursion and high price of used Opinion: Much, much better than the canon 18 200. I used the lens for a couple of years as a handyman from viaggio.Nitidezza less than all zoom 17-50 but almost better than canon 18 55. Compact with a zoom range apt. Price of used advantageous because it was included in the kit of various reflex. How handyman still always recommend the Tamron 17 50 smooth. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Pros: building Cons: sharpness price Opinion: It is worth taking a camera and use it with a 18 200? I say no, better to use a compact. However if you want to force a comprar obiettiov travel much better than the canon 18 135 a bit 'more clear at the expense of the slight decrease in focal length but can be used in almost all focal although light years away from the nitidità tamron 17 50 smooth. And 'one of the objectives the worst I've ever bought, resold immediately. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Pros: sharpness construction IS Cons: Price & weight Opinion: A little 'sharper the Tamron 17 50 LESS smooth and clear of canon 105. 24 The same goes for the AF. I would not recommend. Costa troppo.Piuttosto'd take the Tamron 50 and a 1.4 if you do portraits or Samyang 14 for landscapes. It pays to spend three times more for a hair more sharpness? I say NO, but everyone has different needs. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Pros: price - used on FF Cons: sharpness construction Opinion: Behaves decently / best of FF do not recommend it on aps-c. impossible to shoot with aps-c under 2.5 and 2.8 is sharp as the Tamron 17 50 Smooth 50mm that is a zoom. Instead of FF 1.8 also it can be used. At the price I can not say that I am recovers waste of money however I would take it just to FF. The move almost mandatory I saw: 50 1.8 - 2.8 40 - 50 1.4 so I can only recommend to immediately take the canon 50 1.4 used to 250eu so you avoid waste time. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Tamron SP 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Pros: construction - VC Cons: better smooth sharper - with VC activated not recovered much of its time Opinion: A little 'less clear the VC NOT. If you disable the VC is slightly sharper, but not as smooth. Shot at 8.1 to 50mm for portraits against 1/13 of the smooth, I thought to recover more. With the Sigma stabilized or canon 24,105 I managed to take 0.8 seconds then the stabilizer of the sigma / canon works best. All in all I used the lens as a handyman for a lot, I can not complain, going back but then smooth it weighs less and costs less slightly sharper. sent on April 29, 2015 |
 | Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM Pros: cost, robustness, the body that does not stretch, 2.8 to 18mm, stabilizer Cons: 2.8 not fixed, soft to 18mm, flare, 4.5 to 50mm Opinion: I traded a 40ino with this lens and I must say that I was surprised. I have found over the aspettative.rn First for the OS that stabilizes well (arrival 1/10 and 1/20 to 18 to 50mm much better than the Tamron VC 17, 50), the sharpness is decent after all, I thought it was of much worse than the Tamron 17 50 smooth but this sigma not doing too bad. I would say better than the Tamron 50mm (but not with 4.5 you can use it for portraits) and worse than the Tamron 18mm. I think to keep it a little bit more for the price, I have a canon 5oD and combined with sigma 18 50 is not that I walk around with a big investment so the reflex port always with me without fears various, fears I had until a few time ago when I used cameras and lenses more expensive. sent on December 24, 2014 |
 | Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Pros: nitididà, price, convenience Cons: at a price that is I would say that you have no right to complain, but if we want to find a counter: the building could be improved. Opinion: Practical, zoom handyman: sharp maximum between 30 and 35mm and f4 f5,6.Con a little light if you can consiglerei to use f4 which is the ratio nitidità - optimal focus. The lens of course and 50mm 2.8 is slightly soft but in the end is what I always use and up to the largest. For those accustomed to shooting with a compact 3x and moved to SLR is the ideal goal. It is not comparable with the 18 55 which is undoubtedly less clear. A 35mm and compared with the Canon 50 1.8 after doing a thousand tests on a tripod I have concluded that it has the same nitidità to 2.8, for no other openings. So for those looking for a clear lens at the price this is ideal if you can even tweak compared to a fixed (although cheap). I could not notice distortion or leakage of clear 17mm. Money is the lens of the relationship best I have found. I would recommend this version and not the VC that I had changed and to have more nitidità. With a steady hand you can shoot at 1 / 15-1 / 10 with the smooth and 1.8 with the VC, then you can not recover a lot more from my point of view. If you disable the VC stabilized lens is sharper, but not as smooth as I repeat, is fenomenale.rn sent on October 15, 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
