|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Landerjack www.juzaphoto.com/p/Landerjack  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 (1987 version) Pros: Value for money, building compared to Mark II Cons: Blurred a bit 'harsh, not af USM, the lens hood is hard to find and expensive Opinion: A lens that I have always held, you can do everything from macro (tube) to the portrait to landscape, good construction with metal bayonet ring and focus well positioned and not as ridiculous as the Mark II. The price of a copy in good condition up to 150 euro, for me it's worth it all, there were lenses with this quality / price ratio! My vote is nine also by virtue of the latter consideration, ever seen could also be an 8. sent on March 08, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 300mm f/4 USM L Pros: Sharpness, speed of focus, lightness, good seal even multiplied. Cons: Insufficient tropicalization and stabilization, the minimum distance of focus could be less, as in the IS version. Opinion: I bought this lens used, but in very good condition, I do not ever separerei, maybe I exaggerate, but I'm doing everything, even the homemade pasta, jokes aside, I use the macro (with extension tubes) to the landscape and birdlife, with the multiplier holds up well, except in the light, where I have found some problems with slight aberration cromatica.rnL 'aspect that makes me envy the IS version is the minimum distance of focus, that would allow me to Do not use extension tubes or overstating the, at least, one 12 mm, on the whole, however, I can handle it, use the monopod for stabilization. This is my opinion, of course, is one that does not look very latest model, both camera and lens, is a bit 'a philosophy, squeeze the most of what you have, the photo does not do it just the car. sent on March 05, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Pros: Brightness, sharpness, price Cons: Bokeh, build quality (in part), noise Opinion: I do not know if I could interject, in the sense that I have the first version, which from the point of view of construction is much better than the second. I find it an excellent lens in relation to the price, even if the used version of the Mark I, can in some cases exceed the price of the Mar II again. I think that if used well can give excellent results, many who decry in favor of the version f 1.4 sometimes just do it for snobbery, is a feature common to have more than knowing how to actually use, pardon controversy. Juza remove me if I was inappropriate. sent on January 14, 2012 |
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
