|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Gamberello www.juzaphoto.com/p/Gamberello  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 EX DG Pros: Opening 2.8, good bokeh, light and comfortable. Absent distortion. Cons: Not clear at the first 2 stops. Lack of integrated AF motor. Opinion: Objective f / 2.8 but that opening is in my opinion unusable ... af / 4 starts to be decent, 5.6 is good. The corners are never the highest quality. It's a shame that a bright zoom is taken to be able to be used at full opening and not closing it 2 stops ... it's a good handyman for tourist, landscaping and shooting photos, certainly not when looking for the highest quality. I'm pretty critical, but it's still a high-level goal, and also the fact that even wide-angle distortion is almost irrelevant. sent on May 21, 2017 |
 | Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.8G Pros: Sharpness, AF, price Cons: The usual economic G "series" Opinion: What about .... is Nikkor is series G is 1.8 ..... The mountains and not take it off anymore. Sharp also to 1.8, a few aberrations or void, absent distortion .... Forget the AF-D ... The defect is the usual plasticosità and softness of the ring that unites this series of fixed ... I recommend to all to approach the 35mm focal length in the fundamental picture ... Then if they want to move to the Sigma Art can do that but I think that as a walking lens no longer spring ... sent on March 25, 2017 |
 | Yongnuo YN 35mm f/2 Pros: cheap (it really is a "pro"?); well correctable in LR with the profile lens 35 AF-D Cons: Sharpness never adequate, unreliable autofocus, built in "excellent" Chinese plastic Opinion: Nikon has a plastic body of the AF-S 50 1.8G and about the same physical characteristics. Bought, tried to use it, and resold. Used on FX, my opinion is quite negative, maybe I'll be unfortunate I think after reading so many good reviews I found myself a goal: RNA) as opposed to what has been written by others, it has no sharpness at all comparable to 50G, or f / 2 or f / 5.6. Always soft. It would seem a sharpness comparable to the old Nikkor counterpart, from what I see in some tests, but I do not know because I've never used it, and frankly ... it dubito.rnB) is plastic on plastic, metal bayonet makes it more seriously but it remains a plasticone, indeed a "plastichetto" given the size, I think even the lenses are plastica.rnC) has a dancer autofocus, never focuses twice in the same place even on cavalletto.rnIn substance: OK to be used for hobbies and for those who want to approach and study the focal of 35mm, but for any serious purpose must definitely go to other modelli.rnPS: missing to orra a lens hood to match, having copied the mopeds has the bayonet mount compatible with HB-47, but -perlomeno of FX- is unusable, it appears in the frame! sent on January 28, 2017 |
 | Tokina AT-X PRO 28-70mm f/2.8 Pros: Robustness and elegance; good colors Cons: Too soft (unusable) to 2.8; excessive vignetting and barrel distortion on the wide-angle side and open diaphragms Opinion: I had the AT-X PRO I version for the Japanese domestic market, the one marked 2.8 instead of 2.6-2.8.rnrnBought in August and resold in December ... The vignetting and softness to f / 2.8 were too excessive for my taste ... was usable by f / 4 or better f / 5.6 ... Not to mention the distortion barrel on the wide angle ... if not the front focus, always on the wide angle.rnrnInsomma super very cool very elegant to see each other ... a ' emotion when I arrived and I took it in my hands ... but then in the use that I did it and for my standards there were too many faults. sent on January 01, 2017 |
 | AmazonBasics - Borsa grande per fotocamera e accessori Pros: Economic, durable, roomy, customizable, rich pockets Cons: Cigola damn in the joints of the shoulder Opinion: Excellent for those with a basic kit: in my there are a D3200 with 50 mm mounted, the 18-55, the 70-300, a flash. But nothing more, and I had to ingegnarmi a good half hour to match the joints giusti.rnSe though you wanted to put a nice 70-200 space begins to be close .... in short, is good, as mentioned, only for kits lenses piccole.rnLe pockets are really great and we are all, it took me the blower to dust, chargers, filters, caps etc ... rnIl against more is the fact that the hooks for the belt, plastic against plastic, squeak at a level that does not go unnoticed ... sent on July 16, 2015 |
 | Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG Macro Pros: Economical, reliable Cons: AF noise, construction with autofocus excursion, not stabilized (?), Sharpness (?) Opinion: I bought it because it's the cheapest 70-300 on the market, and it's still a Sigma lens. The fact that it is not bright I do not think it is a negative value, in the sense that you know that you buy a f / 4-5.6 so it is useless to complain that it is not like a f / 2.8 .... rnNon is stabilized but it does not give me any problems because I use it in sport and anyway I have a steady hand. rnAutofocus makes an infernal noise, and also does not have a fixed barrel but extends forward rotating, so you can not support it and you have to resort to the ugly all-round lens hood. The autofocus, however, responds quite well although it is not ultrasonic, even if sometimes you lose and start to go back and forth.rnThe macro is not a true macro, stops at 1: 2, but I do not even use it.rnInfinely, in very first shots I did after buying it I was quite disappointed because it seemed to me that it had a very bad sharpness on the long focal lengths; but then it seems to me that this problem has failed, maybe I'm used to it or maybe it's not that bad. In any case I recommend it for anyone who wants a 70-300 medium invoice without spending a lot. sent on June 02, 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
