|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Peppe Cancellieri www.juzaphoto.com/p/PeppeCancellieri  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM Pros: Weight, size, sharpness Cons: Nothing apart from the f/2.8 but otherwise it wouldn't be so small and light. Opinion: I used it for years on 6D, 6D2 and 5D4 and now on R6 it has always given me excellent results. Put aside several times in favor of other brighter ones like 24/1.4 L II and Sigma 24/1.4 Art and just as many times pulled out of the pile. Even with the necessary EF-RF adapter it maintains unbeatable size and weight and, once you realize that you have taken very few shots with the 24mm at apertures wider than f/2.8, you are preferred. The sharpness, obviously comparable only from f/2.8 onwards, is the same as the other two most emblazoned. Unlike the 35mm it didn't make me prefer the only available 24mm of the RF series so I keep this one. sent on December 10, 2023 |
 | Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM Pros: Sharpness, 9 blades Cons: Moving parts Opinion: A pleasant surprise among these "cheap" lenses of the RF series. Very usable at TA and with the subject close and the background relatively far away, it offers excellent performance in sharpness of the subject in the foreground and also in detachment and blur, thanks to the "almost macro" and the 9 blades. These features give it a character that other 35mm doesn't have. From afar, the music changes, but once you get to know it and use it for the best it can give, it's a good purchase. Also considering the weight and size, really small for an f/1.8, it is often preferred to other 35mm even more performing but much more expensive, big, heavy and to be used with adapter. The minimum distance of MAF is remarkable. sent on November 17, 2023 |
 | Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM Pros: Everything, how much it costs Cons: Sometimes in low light it struggles to hook the MAF Opinion: I believe that when reviewing a lens it is always necessary to keep in mind the quality / price ratio. For this reason I do not dwell either to sing the praises of this but neither to denigrate it by comparing it with lenses of another planet. When you can carry around a wide angle pushed that fits in the pocket of the jacket and costs 300 euros you can only be grateful to those who made you meet. Canon in the past has done so many miracles that it has gradually left behind and is not doing new ones; Well this 16ino is an exception and his job does it well. sent on November 11, 2022 |
 | Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM Pros: Construction Cons: Value for money Opinion: I am a little sorry not to be able to express an enthusiastic judgment of this lens unlike the many that preceded this mine. It is built in an excellent way and the quality of the images is good but this is not enough to justify the price, the EF 24-70/2.8 L II version gives completely overlapping results at much lower costs. Of the RF series I think a better purchase the 24-105 that has perhaps an imperceptibly worse optical quality (but precisely imperceptibly) and one stop less (but an f / 4 with the yield at high ISO of the R is not a problem), however, it has 35mm more that are very convenient and .......... it costs half. The greater detachment capacity remains due to the extra stop but f / 2.8 is not enough to have a spectacular blur like the ultra-bright so a fixed with these characteristics serves the same in support. It also has merits that I am not here to repeat because the many who have expressed their opinions have already done it very well. A good lens (but not great) that I do not feel like evaluating beyond 8, above all, for the quality / price ratio. sent on August 28, 2022 |
 | Canon RF 24-105 mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: Sharpness, size and weight to be an L-series RF Cons: nothing for the moment Opinion: Rating 10 without hesitation for the best 24-105 around. I had EF 24-105 L first series and second series, EF 24-105 STM and RF 24-105 STM, this is the best of all and by far. Forgetting for a moment that it is an f / 4 I would say that it beats it even with all the 24-70 that have on their side an extra stop of brightness (which is not little) but do not have the 35mm more (which are not few). I will not dwell further, others have already said better than me and others will do it but finally I have a lens to take on the road without compromise of any kind, the optical quality is excellent. With a small RF 16mm and a 50ino you take home everything you want. sent on April 26, 2022 |
 | Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM Pros: Very comfortable, lightweight and compact, sharp enough to be a 24-105 Cons: none, to be a cheap 24-105 Opinion: I would like to say immediately to those who wrote the review before this one that, indeed, could have a copy that came out badly. This very small zoom is really surprising and can disappoint only those who expected performance from RF 24-70/2.8 which costs 6 times as much, I paid this copy 300 euros and, in my opinion, it is worth more than I paid for it. The sharpness is good already at TA (since TA means at least 4 up to 7.1), the colors are good and the optical quality in general also. But what makes this lens fabulous is the extreme comfort in terms of weight and size, you can take it anytime and anywhere, together with the RF16 and RF50 stm constitutes an excellent travel kit that will not massacre your back. The vote is 10 relative to the segment of interest where it is to be placed. With these non-L RFs Canon tries to repeat the excellent performance of many non-L EFs and I believe it will succeed. L-series RF optics are truly unattainable for many. sent on March 21, 2022 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: See paolomcmlx's great review below Cons: Basically none Opinion: on these focal points I tried a little bit of everything, the first love was (and in some ways still is) the hawthorn, that is, the 70-200/2.8 L IS II but the weight and the objective difficulty in bringing it everywhere became, over time, good reasons to change it but it was not easy. In fact, it took two optics instead of one and precisely a 135L and this 70-200/4 (which I also preferred to the 70-300 L). It is not white, in fact its nickname "affective" is "white" and it is not only a question of the obvious difference between f/4 and f/2.8, the hawthorn is superior to him in everything but, although not bordering on the excellence of white I found it surprising in real use on the street, I feared much worse, the optical quality is definitely good, the lightness and transportability do the rest. I find this couple more comfortable than just the white one, and if you don't have to go to an auditorium or other situations with poor light, you can go out with this alone. There's only one thing I didn't understand about Canon at this stage: why he wanted to do a useless version II of this zoom is a mystery. sent on April 24, 2021 |
 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM Pros: All Cons: Nothing Opinion: I realize I've written so many 85mm reviews but never about the Big One, the most fitting nickname that camera enthusiasts have ever coined. I had so many 85mm: Canon 1.8, Canon 1.4, Sigma Art 1.4, Tamron 1.8 to mention the last. All great and it's true but no one even resembles the Big One that remains the 85mm reference for lovers of this focal. Peculiarity, merits, defects, pseudodefects are now archnoti and I am not here to repeat them (great review of Roby that precedes this) but a portrait made with this lens is unmistakable and if you love certain atmospheres you will never be satisfied with anyone else. For those who want only as much sharpness as possible by passing over everything else (which is a lot) there are around great products that cost even much less. Vote 10 and praise. sent on September 24, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Pros: Size and weight, crisp at all focal points, tropicalized, 4-stop stabilizer, colors, AF speed Cons: nobody if you know what you buy, in the past the price was high Opinion: I start from the end, the biggest criticism in the past was the price and in fact it was high, currently it is under 1000 euros even in Italy so I would say that the criticism is exceeded. A featherweight compared to the various whites and smaller (closed) of the various whites. You can take it anywhere without too much trouble. I would say an excellent handyman's telecoms zoom. The 70-200/2.8 L IS II or III have a better optical quality but weigh a lot and stop at 200, the quality of the whites 70-200 is quite comparable but without the extra 100mm. The construction and stabilizer are series A, it is very pleasant to use and the 4 stops are completely realistic. I have been using the classic white 70-200 for years then replaced by this 70-300L - 135L , I find myself much better and I cover a greater range of needs: either one, or the other, or both. Convenient lock to prevent involuntary stretching. Diam.67 filters, the tripod ring I do not use but I took a compatible one for less than 20 euros. The direct competitors: I would say that the 70-200/2.8 and even the 70-200/4 retain some reason to be preferred to this 70-300 within the limits of the above, in short, absolutely around there is better but if you already have a good fixed in that range of focals it is difficult to have more. sent on July 16, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 L USM II Pros: Construction, size, brightness, AF, sharpness, colors Cons: For the moment nothing, perhaps a poor resistance to the flare that requires some extra attention Opinion: I took this lens a few days so it can not be completely complete nor definitive this review, but I wanted to say some things right away. It's the first time I've seen the faces of sharp people with a 14mm even at TA. The mystery of diametrically opposed judgments on some Canon products continues, I would easily understand the small differences between one judgment and another but the abyss that there is between "wonderful" and "cyofeca" just can't understand it. I have not taken pictures of stars or others that are normally done with these focal points, I have taken some shots of those I always do and behaves very well, several spans above various Samyang or Sigma that I had in the past and with size and weight decidedly contained p er an f2.8, we'll see further on if something terrifying comes out. Update: after some time nothing terrible has happened so I confirm the first impression that it is an extraordinary 14mm. sent on July 12, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Pros: Price, optical quality, lightness Cons: under construction Opinion: Unbeatable value for a handyman, and I said almost everything. The files are indistinguishable from those of the Big Brother, at 24mm it is perhaps better than the Big Brother L and it is also a brighter pelino. The construction is not even remotely comparable to the L series, we warn games on the extended part to 105mm. You buy new at 300 euros and used to just over 200 and it's not really the case to be picky. Recommended to all those who use little/very little this type of zoom, for an intensive professional use better to buy a L series. sent on May 07, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM Pros: Blurred, sharpened species from f4, construction, size and weight contained Cons: some copies are soft in TA Opinion: I take it from Filiberto's review, with which I agree perfectly, I have this lens for a few days and I have to say that I like it. In fact in a kit where there is also a 135 I do not see it, it is a kind of 135L but longer and less sharp at TA that in this case, also given the greater focal length is f2.8 . Excellent to isolate the subject from the surrounding environment which, with wide openings, is completely erased. A very dated lens whose design dates back to 1996 but is appreciated. Today in the age of the super correct there would be no place but I appreciate just that vaguely vintage air that returns especially in the bn. Difficult a fixed 200mm not stabilized, you always shoot at high iso and, if you are around without support, lacks the versatility of a stabilized zoom but is more manageable this fixed and also weighs much less than an f2.8 zoom. Update: I had, over time, 3 copies and I stopped with this latest production 2015 which is by far the best, sharp even at f2.8, difficult to distinguish it from a 135L , the difference between new and used on this lens is small and I would recommend without dubb I'll take it new or cmq recent. If you love lenses with character and need a long focal without gluing a fifth this lens could do for you but if you are looking for a supercorrect and stabilized lens better to turn elsewhere. Considering only this last copy my grade is a full 10. sent on April 15, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM II Pros: All Cons: Nothing Opinion: Maybe I've been a little drastic in Pros and Cons but things are pretty much the same. Of course it starts at 4.5, of course it's heavy but it's a 100-400 of great quality and it's worth it. For many years I preferred the 70-200/2.8 but if I really have to carry a cannon then that's at least a 400. I compare it to 70-200 because I will make a similar use of it and, from the first bars, I already see that it is not inferior as quality, indeed. It produces even the best blurring at focal points above 200, not probeable with the 70-200 of course. The difference in brightness can be a problem up to about 200 but during the day it does not prevent anything, in the evening or indoors in theaters or the like the light is always on the framed part that, necessarily, is less than that framed with 70-200. It also lends itself in all other application areas where you use these focals in their own way (and not as improper as I do). As a definition and sharpness I didn't really think it could be even superior to the classic white. I have taken it very recently but, at the moment, I am fully satisfied. Update: I confirm everything I said as first impressions except the fact that indoor f/2.8 is always f/2.8 so these whites serve both and for different purposes. sent on April 02, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM II Pros: Sharpness, precision, colors, general yield Cons: It's not stabilized Opinion: A rock, gives absolute security, does not miss a beat. Of course at f2.8 it won't be a dream lens with a f---ing, although at 70mm it's not bad, but when you need the certainty of taking home the work there aren't many alternatives to this superb level of quality. I use it on short trips when I carry a single lens. When the lack of the stabilizer is made important use the flash. For targeted outputs, however, I prefer brighter fixtures. No comparison possible with the various f4, it is not only for the extra stop but for the general quality of the image, when you bring a single "universal" lens in general you have to settle but with this no compromise, the photos also street and reportage are excellent. Probably the best 24-70 around. Paired with a 135 can constitute an entire set. It's worth how much it's currently expensive. Vote 10 despite being without IS. sent on December 06, 2018 |
 | Canon 6D Mark II Pros: AF compared to 6d old, swivel screen, live view and touch functions Cons: For the use that I do not see Opinion: Maybe I feel it, after now 6-7 months I use quite intense of this controversial body, to leave a review. The first question is: where is the error of the professional reviewers, certainly much more capable of me to test camera bodies, I have had very few to aspire to this function. And yet there is a mistake. Relying only on the reviews that appeared everywhere one should escape as far as possible from this car and without ever turning back, worth staying of salt as it happened in times away to someone. Either I'm a little dull or the catastrophe announced loudly is not there, or at least I do not see it. Incredible but this machine makes photos, photos in my opinion and for my field of use, absolutely indistinguishable from photos I have done in the past with the 6d, but also with the 5d3 and recently I tried also a 5d4. Then where is the problem? Maybe with the photos that I do I stress little, too little the camera body? The AF works well, indeed very well and also work the side that are many, more than enough, even if a bit too grouped. The articulated screen does not have any other FF SLR in the house Canon, the Live view is simply sublime also considered the touch functions. The sensor, reviewed by those good as a kind of bug that is accidentally inside a camera, in the end his craft does, perhaps imperceptibly below those of other Canon cameras but the tragedy frankly I do not see it. It costs half of the 5d4 and in my opinion better two of these than one of those. Video I do not then skip this compartment. What else to say? I have to complain about how it behaves with low light or even partial backlight, "That's where the skinny is" I said to myself and I was going to change it with a 5d4 until I tried with the last, well we are there, no miracle, in the wrong light conditions the REFL Ex behave in the wrong way. Rated 10 for this FF Economissima (located at 1200 euros new, I do not understand how they can claim to sell it used for the same price). Try to believe and without reading the reviews, not even this mine. sent on October 21, 2018 |
 | Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Superb image quality, even sharpness at TA Cons: Weight and footprint superior to the competition, 86mm filters, "mysterious" AF Opinion: This is an excellent optics and not only for sharpness but for all aspects of image quality for a bright. Hard to do without after trying it for a few days. It needs fine calibration with usb dock but then, at 90%, it's fine. The residual problems, at least on 6d2, are exclusively related to AF, generally it is perfect, even at TA but suddenly it can go wrong without being able to understand why or at what juncture. The optics are so excellent that I do not intend to do without it for this, if you are in "day no" I go live view and the shots are even better than the best in AF . I must say that with the 6d2 and its articulated display it is not a big problem to use this mode indeed, once used "by necessity" I tend to use it often as an already excellent image quality becomes excellent in 100% of cases. Update: Contrary to what I thought in the end I had to do without it, the weight, size and uncertainties about AF convinced me to give it up. For the moment I stay with the excellent 85/1.8 Canon from 300 euros. With the 5D4, sooner or later I'm going to try again. sent on June 04, 2018 |
 | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Construction, size compared to other Sigma, sharpness also at TA, image quality Cons: Sometimes you have to resort to live view Opinion: Excellent optics that in the past I could not use on 6d, with the 6d2 the problems related to AF have gone better, I calibrated in the car already in the store pointing to 1mt about, in the following days I made numerous shots at all openings and All perfect. Apart from the "question" AF of this optics you can only speak well. In the following days I noticed some problems at distances more than a few meters and I took the USB dock. After this fine calibration no more problems. I am very satisfied with this purchase and I would redo it despite still, under difficult circumstances to explain, an uncertainty in AF, suddenly many shots can come out of focus even closing at f 2.8 or more and the only remedy is shooting in Live view. With the 6d2 the thing is quite smooth and I'm getting used to, in LV never misses. sent on June 04, 2018 |
 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS USM Pros: solid construction, aesthetics, AF, stabilizer Cons: it's not the big one Opinion: Maybe it's early to release a review since I've had it for a day but the good-day (sorry the pun) is seen from the morning. I start on the one downside: it is not 85/1.2 nor could it be, no one is, a little for the 1.2 that it does not have but also for the general yield especially on the portraits. For everything else however is a splinter (which the big one is not), despite being a little bigger than the big one I find it more comfortable, the AF fast and precise makes it more responsive and the stabilizer is a real treat that helps not a little in many situations. For those looking for a portrait lens posed or in the studio I would still recommend the 85/1.2 , which I had and appreciated, but personally I do not do this type of portraits and the 85 I need to go around as I always do and photograph here and there. The big one was not ideal to do this, I used it with satisfaction but I never felt a lens like the others that mount and go, sometimes I preferred even 85/1.8 which is a very great economic lens. Not very easy to use at f1.4 on moving subjects, like all bright ones. What has cut off the bull's head permanently is the stabilizer, an 85 is often used indoors, instead of 135 for example, and the stabilizer serves, other than if needed. The image quality to me looks great, colors and blurred also, it is much sharper than the 1.2 (micro-adjustment was needed at -10 on 6D), an advantage in many cases but not for portraits where the big one is still the No.1. After all, it's a bit of the same reasoning that I did choosing 35/1.4 L II instead of 35/1.4L I, for what I do I'm better the L II but for a thousand other things I find more poetic the L I, well could have made Canon leave them in production both as he did with these 85mm. For now I feel that I have solved the needs related to this focal, let's see further to deepen the judgment that, for the moment is 9.8 Update: after a long time, going from 6D to 5D4, I have to say that the positives are all confirmed and the negative ones simply are not there. No micro-regulation was required. I would like to clarify the comparison with the big one, I had them both and I consider them excellent both but extremely different, so to say that this is not the big one does not mean that one is "superior" to the other but that they produce images that occupy different emotional atmospheres. sent on February 22, 2018 |
 | Kenko Pro 300 DGX 1.4x Pros: Value for money, keeps EXIF data Cons: For what it costs nothing Opinion: I use very little and it is the second time I purchase it, my focal range goes from 35 to 135 so I use it once a century right on the 135, that time that 135mm is not enough. The occasional use would not justify the purchase of an expensive duplicator, nor that of a 200mm f2.8. For such a described use I think it's the best. The quality is, all in all, good. It is difficult to compare "with" and "without" duplicator because the focal of course changes, the sharpness seems almost the same, maybe some slight indecision to 100% but small indeed. I know that with 2x things change dramatically with the 135mm but with 1.4 x on both the 135/2 and the 200/2.8 (which I have not but I could try) is very good. Especially recommended for fixed objectives and within the limits of use described above. I recently discovered that on 6d2 it does not work, it crashes the machine even. sent on January 16, 2018 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Pros: Clarity, color, internal focus, excellent even in non-macro use. Cons: For the use that I do none Opinion: Taken almost by accident during an exchange, actually looking for the 100/2, has become a staple of my kit. Apart from the macros, which I always promise to start doing but for the moment I'm a freak, I use it in all those cases where I do not want to bring the biancone. In fact this 100mm is fine even in non-macro use and especially in portraits. Of course there is the 100L which is also stabilized but I did not want to spend too much for this lens that is useful but not indispensable. To recommend definitely, a nice 9.5 sent on August 30, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM II Pros: Construction, tropicalization, comfortable and wide focus and zoom ring Cons: for the moment none, maybe a little price Opinion: it would be a little early for me to review this zoom as I took it from a few days. Of the previous one I had 3 to I appreciated the comfort of the excursion and I also saw the defects at 24mm and the not exhilarating definition to f4, after a trip or holidays , to bring only one lens, I always sold them. However, I do not think I resell this series because the advantages, related to the excursion and therefore to the only really all-rounder lens in Casa Canon, remain all. To these well-known advantages I have to add a more well-groomed construction and not only for the anti-stretching lock and the attachment of the lampshade. Even the hike, the path of the zoom seems to me lower, like that of a 24-70. It all seems to me to be much improved, the feeling of solidity by maneuvering the dials, for example. Optically and especially to diaphragm a little closed, frankly it seems to me better than the previous one especially in the rendering of colors. What else to say, for now I have only seen pleasant things and I am very happy with the purchase, then we will see... Don't forget the very effective stabilizer. I vote 9 only as a precaution but it seems to me a product of considerable quality, I absolutely do not share the average vote too low resulting from the votes of the users, by the way, if I have to judge by the reviews so far I do not seem all dissatisfied, how come so many people break this lens without even motivating their vote? By the way I see a lot of confusion between this new L II and the previous L I, even some reviews present here I think refer to the previous model and should be moved. Even in the market there are ads that clearly refer to type L I mixed with those of type L II increasing the confusion between the two models. Update: After intensive use during a holiday period I would confirm the goodness of the product only if the price fell to the level of the previous one, there is nothing that can justify buying it at a double price. I recently researched this lens (September 2019) and found it at a price of less than 700 euros new with European guarantee and I would say that now it is definitely worth it, it is cmq a great all-rounder that allows you to start on the road with only one lens and lead to house beautiful photos. sent on July 17, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM Pros: all Cons: nothing Opinion: Purchased 2 times 3 times, and then resold to the weight, the size, the flashiness etc.etc. but this time don't sell it anymore, I have suffered every time I would serve and I didn't. His main areas of application are varied but where it excels and where I would say, is indispensable in situations like the theatre or concerts (which is why I bought the first time), low light, distance that can't decide at will, quality in difficult conditions. I won't repeat what has already been said by many on this superb lens, would say only that it is a definitive Canon lens, certainly the best zoom in its range and in some cases exceeding the fixed the same focal length. Even the 100-400 L II is a super zoom but the aperture 2.8 is by far prefer this 70-200 in the above situations, although at 70 mm is not razor sharp at f 2.8 as it is focal. It works fine with 1.4 x and becomes a fixed f4 from about 100 to 280 mm. With the 2 x I've never tried it but I read positive opinions and you have a f 5.6 from 140 to 400 mm. Costs and weighs but the results are always exceptional. The tripod ring is standard. rating 10 sent on May 19, 2017 |
 | Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD Pros: construction, stabilizer, tropicalized Cons: cost Opinion: I'm trying this goal by a few days and it is still early to make a judgment. They attracted many positive comments especially the foreign press and Stabilization (quite unusual on a 85mm, indeed I do not know if there is another). rnUn aesthetically pleasing object and well built, I have the chance to try a few days before acquistarlo.rnLe very first impressions are "without infamy and without praise," some uncertainty in the AF 1.8, but right or wrong pictures to take home, but take home even with items that cost less at this level of quality. rnFrancamente not even see all this nitidezza.rnLa definitely positive note is the presence of the stabilizer but I've already seen that, if not used, the better off because the picture gets worse when it is inserted (and makes noise) .rnChiudendo aperture sharpness comes out but already we start from 1.8 .rnTamron, as well as Sigma, invented the Tap-in (like a USB dock) you need to go crazy to microregolarlo, I tried to see cI dare costs and found that in the US are also $ 59 on Amazon but do not you can send and then you have to take it up to € 80 and Amazon.it rotti.rnIo I played around with the chart and micro drive, if just enough ( are already to +5) and if it is not enough to immediately carry indietro.rnPer the rest, even if all the promises and maintains direct competitors much more without costing stabilizer, this is a 1.8 and if we add a bit of images so so coast too (considering the cost of Tap.in) .rnFarò some other around and see a pò.rnUpdate 1: made mocroregolazione room +5, things are better, the sharpness is out and f2, from this point of view, is very good. However, it remains a certain flatness, as also says another recensione.rnUpdate 2 and finally, despite considering it a good lens I decided to bring her back to land the final choice fell on 85 / 1.2 L II, I think this 85 Tamron is still to be taken inconsideration, apart from the 1.2 Canon and of course, being 1.2, is of a different category, this Tammy was the best 85 that it happened to me (but I'm not've come all all) sent on March 19, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Pros: Small and light Cons: Minimum distance MAF, most copies are fine but there are also new busts. Opinion: Unfortunately I can not associate with the many positive opinions on this lens, I really have not had the minimum time. I bought this new lens about a month ago and I realized right away that something was wrong. He suffered from fear front focus, I had to microadjust in the car to-20 and it wasn't enough either. The sharpness left much to be desired. I had to return it after 3 days, I did not want to go to the CS or try a new one. I'm still looking for an 85mm. In truth some alarm bells about the variability between specimens, to read well all the reviews here present, there has been and well described, it is a gigantic flaw that important houses should avoid like the plague. I will try to take another copy and update the review. Upgrade: I took a copy used to the CS of Rome and is spectacular, I am very satisfied with 250 euros I have a very good 85mm. Upgrade: I'm on the 3rd model and this is also fine, it can happen the copy is wrong but if you find the right one with 300 euros you bring home a great lens. I have to say again that I had in the time Canon 85/1.2, Tamron 85/1.8 VC and Canon 85/1.4 L IS But on the road and dynamic situations I still prefer this. sent on February 21, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Pros: sharpness, tropicalization, stabilizer Cons: nobody Opinion: I got this lens after it had sold and I wonder why. It 'a super wide-angle zoom and replaces the large (for f4) of any fixed focal, even 16mm is very good and serves more often than you think, the distortion is contained and / or easily corregibile.rnI files are sharp, rich in detail and the colors are never "fired", when you want a more lively there are all the means in pp to make interventions desiderati.rnNon spend other words that best other than me have already left here, just remember that once a user the forum said that Canon has only two final lenses and one was this (the other the 70-200 / 2.8 L iS II although now we would add the new 35 / 1.4 L II) .rnL'f4 of these focal is not a significant limitation, the stabilizer instead serves, incredible that of longer focal lengths, type the excellent 24-70 / 2.8 L II, Canon has not even really there inserito.rnAltro to add. sent on December 11, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM II Pros: Exceptional sharpness even at full opening, image quality, colors, autofocus accuracy Cons: for now none Opinion: 35mm "definitive" probably the best in circulation (probably as I have never previously had 35mm fixed but for a long time I look at everything I can of other equal focal and brightness). The construction is also at the top, I do not even find it cumbersome indeed it is very pleasant to handle it. The lampshade is of the comfortable type with the clip. It looks constructively like 16-35/4 and 24-70/4 and I really like this aesthetic. The image quality is excellent throughout the frame and the autofocus is fast and accurate. It costs a lot, indeed a lot, but it also returns a lot. I found myself again doing virtually no intervention in pp, if not marginal as some cut, which I tried only with the 70-200/2.8 L IS II. I used it with the 6D, 6d2 and now 5d4. In my opinion it does not "replace" any previous Canon optics of the same focal. For example the 35 L I which (as well as other well-known Canon optics) has a typical and recognizable imprint that is difficult to give up, economic availability allowing I would like to have both but I can choose only one. I kept this optics a few months, sold and bought back, hard to do without. The 35 Art in the interlude is a good lens but nothing comparable (leaving out the many shots to discard for the usual problems of Sigma on Canon). My opinion is this:10 and praise and it is the first time that I happen to give such an extreme judgment, if only for that ability to sharpen the whole frame even at 1.4 and also for subjects taken from afar, great quality for a 35mm that allows to carve out the part that interests among many that a 35mm resumes. Some kind of posthumous zoom. sent on December 09, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 24mm f/1.4 L II USM Pros: construction, sharpness (from f/2), colors Cons: the initial price but today (2019) much decreased Opinion: big lens, very expensive (in my opinion) but big lens. Not too heavy, fast autofocus, very usable at TA but good sharpness is from f/2, distortion virtually absent (compared to the 24mm of the most popular zooms). Total feeling from the first shots. Quality of shots and typically Canon. I use it a lot, more than I thought before I bought it, to recommend despite the price. Sold once, I still don't know why, and bought back recently. However, I do not think that many people can use this lens frequently, so I would not recommend it at all given the exorbitant cost. The 24 is a "strange" focal point and if you expect the spectacular blurring of other superbright, you risk being disappointed. The possibility of boredom is around the corner. The cost, especially in the used, has fallen a lot. sent on April 18, 2016 |
 | Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Construction price (?), Sharpness (?) Cons: inconsistent AF Opinion: I repeat mostly what he said Pkkleopard and add some of the same things that I had said long ago about the 50Art, unfortunately it is no different, the AF is inconsistent, random, non-repeatable. The front back focus feared is not the worst flaws of this lens, at the end you can possibly fix the USB dock or by sending in assistance immediately. The big problem is that it focuses haphazardly in over 50% of cases, in an incomprehensible manner, what was back focus until recently become front, or not focusing on anything. But this time it's all right is a scream, a large lens, like the others Art but how? If you forget that it is an AF or Sharpen always live view is fine, so it's not an AF lens, or if you close some stop is much better, so it's not a 1.4. Many faults and many virtues, to posterity will judge. For me is not good, the 50Art I kept a couple of months because I was quite flabbergasted and I tried afarmelo go well, this 24 lasted half a day and I gave it away. I feel Nikon users who have had problems but in the end it seems to have resolved them, or you take some defect known that once you exceed, for Canon I think it's a tragedy that Sigma should study better, compatibility is not just a matter of attack but especially of the AF sensor that pilot. I will remain in the eye those few truly memorable photos (promptly posted here on Juza), I'm sorry, I would have liked more but keep it just is not possible. sent on March 02, 2016 |
 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: construction, excellent quality from f/4 onwards Cons: weight, difficulty micro-wireing, non-existent assistance Opinion: I gave it away today, as much as I liked for some performances, this lens that would be excellent if it were not for some problems in my opinion insurmountable if only for matters of principle and fairness. After a while you use it, often in optimal light conditions, you consider this optics excellent and in fact it is, and you don't realize the rest. Then you start to notice that TA doesn't focus practically ever and find that it's INDISPENSABILE to perform a microregulation, ok nothing that, you do. yes, but how? Take a nice chart, put yourself with the tripod etc. etc.and notice that at 50cm there is a problem and correct it with the fine adjustment in the room. I solved it! I miss it for nothing because you find that it is no longer good at 4-5 meters, and you discover the existence of a contraption that you have to buy for 50 euros and calibrate by you on 4 points but you do not understand a tube of how to do it. You do it once and you discover your head, you do it a second and you discover your feet. There are people who swear that it took 5 minutes to do all this, personally after 3 days of tribulations and despite the help of so many friends here on the forum does not come to the head. This lens is not a low cost yet there is no writing on the box that you will spend so many afternoons trying a calibration, there is no writing that absolutely serves a strange contraption called Dock Usb. Now how does Sigma tacitly claim all this from a client to me is a mystery. The assistance is practically non-existent in Rome as in many other cities. That's why I didn't want it anymore. Probably the lens, given so many enthusiastic reviews, among which there was also mine because "I did not realize", although considering that it could work well in the long run I do not think it is correct all this and I do without. Update 2019: at that time I had only tried with 6D, already with the 6D2 things were a little better, I will try again with the 5D4. sent on November 05, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: Solid construction, sharpness even at 4-5.6 Cons: none Opinion: I took this zoom with the 6D, say that I did not choose how I did it instead with the next. E 'became my main lens, I use it even in difficult conditions. The stabilizer and MAF are always perfect. An irreplaceable companion while traveling. Some shots wrong is definitely my fault .... but are decreasing sent on April 04, 2015 |
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
