|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Makkio www.juzaphoto.com/p/Makkio  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Pros: Compactness-sharpness and colors-efficient and Silent AF Cons: Unbright and consequently blurred non-existent view of the focal-a bit of vignetting at 10mm-plastic bayonet-evident drop in sharpness at the edges Opinion: Recently bought for panoramic photos and above all to get close to the action photos. Given the value for money is a lens that in a kit should not be missing, in my opinion: the optical performance and AF are very very good. The only thing really limiting in use is the high depth of field even at full aperture, as it is obvious that it is for a 10mm f/4.5: blurry do not make it. For landscape use is irrelevant, for other uses more creative must assess well because it can be an important limit. Another point is the plastic bayonet: Given the level of espresso jars really, but really much. sent on May 13, 2019 |
 | Canon 50D Pros: Construction-Ergonomics-Reliability-High Resolution Cons: High ISO Hold-only CF slots-Autonomy-hard to tame Sensor Opinion: I have this camera for a year and a half, purchased of course used. I Think that among the APSc Canon is still today the one that offers the best build quality. The camera body is that of a professional in all and for everything, almost identical to the 5d Mk2. The menus and functions are Also almost the same. It is a machine that is satisfying even to hold it in your hand. In My opinion it is also very ergonomic and not too bulky. Defects... A few AF points, but they work fine. It also Has the correction of the Microfocus for Lens, as well as other corrections for the optics. Low Battery Autonomy. ISO Tightness rather scarce, limited dynamic range (but it is of the 2008, there is) Talking about the sensor, its value is also its worst defect: the resolution. It's a high performance sensor in these terms... But only with very high quality optics. With economic Optics Returns files rather soft, and for the same reason is very inclined to the micro-blur, which is difficult to avoid even because of the poor tightness at high ISO, which imposes longer times of modern machines in Short, requires a nice handle, in Compensation remains a very nice iron even at the distance of 11 years sent on April 20, 2019 |
| Canon 50D Pros: Construction-Ergonomics-Reliability-High Resolution Cons: High ISO Hold-only CF slots-Autonomy-hard to tame Sensor Opinion: I have this camera for a year and a half, purchased of course used. I Think that among the APSc Canon is still today the one that offers the best build quality. The camera body is that of a professional in all and for everything, almost identical to the 5d Mk2. The menus and functions are Also almost the same. It is a machine that is satisfying even to hold it in your hand. In My opinion it is also very ergonomic and not too bulky. Defects... A few AF points, but they work fine. It also Has the correction of the Microfocus for Lens, as well as other corrections for the optics. Low Battery Autonomy. ISO Tightness rather scarce, limited dynamic range (but it is of the 2008, there is) Talking about the sensor, its value is also its worst defect: the resolution. It's a very high performance sensor in these terms... But only with very high quality optics. With economic Optics Returns rather soft files, and for the same reason is very inclined to the micro-blur. Still a great car. sent on April 20, 2019 |
 | Sony E 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Pros: Build quality - full time manual - lens does not rotate during focusing Cons: to be a kit lens nobody Opinion: sometimes used on sony nex 5. I must say that to be a lens kit if they can only speak well, the other big brands should take example. The optical quality is not a miracle but it is satisfactory, the construction and functionality is light years from the lenses that we usually find on the most noble canon / nikon APSC. sent on February 18, 2015 |
 | Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Pros: Weight - Operating and af stabilizer Cons: Build quality embarrassing - a bit of vignetting too Opinion: we say that this point in my opinion is the minimum wage to have to make much of a girlfriend as beautiful foto.rnNon optical performance but overall is acceptable. Bokeh edgy and nervous. Chromatic aberrations present especially towards the edges, but not exaggerated. AF precise, rather quiet and stabilizer actually useful to compensate for low light (in low light ... otherwise I never use it) .rnLa build quality is poor (but is not superior to the old), on the other hand cluttered and weighs less than zero, and you can mistreat much as you want without fear of damaging expensive optics, so he will always work. sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Nikon Coolpix P520 Pros: Zoom huge - build quality Cons: lack raw - quality of photos and videos that does not satisfy me - complicated operation (particularly AF) Opinion: Given that the superzoom I never frowned, we say that this p520 I got exactly what I aspettavo.rnA my opinion is a car for those who have no special claims, certainly not for photography enthusiasts as equal Price takes an SLR or mirrorless APSC that is not even remotely comparable in no aspetto.rnLa image quality is too low for me ... ok have as much zoom but if the photos do not return detail ... what good? GNI 'af in continuous mode I never understood how it works. Most of the action shots are regularly out of focus. Maybe I just do not know usare.rnVideo I shot a few, are without infamy and without praise, comparable to a good second sportcam me.rnMirino digital ... useless, serves almost mai.rnIn compensation is really well crafted, as however all products nikon, from an idea of ??great robustezza.rnIn final ... better a large sensor that a zoom great. sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Canon 400D Pros: Indestructible - compact - performance still appreciable Cons: Does not have the liveview - viewfinder dark - small display - very high noise above 400 iso - cf slot mechanism a little fragile Opinion: I have it for 9 years and I never risparmiata.rnAi time was satisfactory in all, now it shows the weakness of the lack of liveview that combined with the classic sights of mediocre entrylevel does not allow to easily use manual lenses. Even the noise at high ISO is very high when compared to the models most recenti.rnLa construction but I always seemed superior to his heirs, the brainchild of robustness that has been confirmed by my numerous "crash test" .rnIl display a little small, not the maximum in review photos. The 10 megapixel sensor alone has the advantage of bringing out light files to be processed even if you do not have a super computer. I never felt the need to have more megapixel.rnManca spot metering but ... installing the software on the CF 400plus you can easily add, and it works well! sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Jupiter-37A 135mm f/3.5 Pros: Sharpness-Bokeh-Content-Robustness-Lens hood supplied Cons: My specimen had the MAF retainer at infinity positioned too early-"Soviet" finishes-suffers the backlight Opinion: I have for some time this excellent tele, in the version AM (multicoated). Basically copied from the well-known Sonnar 135/3.5. It is Not a prestigious perspective, let alone very bright. But I think it's really balanced. Sharp (It also performs well on Eos50D, notoriously "difficult"), with slightly cold colors and with a blurry fear. A bit difficult to use due to the little demultiplied MAF ring nut and the aperture ring without clicks. With Four money, however, you bring home a lens that guarantees significant results. My specimen was not in infinity, the ring retainer was positioned too early. I disassembled and I simply Elimianato, the ideal would be to move it by a degree, taking advantage also to clean and lubricate with modern grease... The maintenance is really simple. The construction is typically "Soviet old school": only and exclusively metal, but some finishes not top (like the lubricant inside the barrel). The weight I think is average, the dimensions are rather contained. Given The price I would say it is a ' must have '. Ah then... I haven't got to try (I don't have Nikon and I don't feel like it) but I think this is one of the few M42 lenses that via a small reversible modification can focus on infinity without additional lens on Nikon and similar, since it is possible to vary by 2-3mm the S-draw The MAF group with respect to the optical assembly is easily shifted by some threads. sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 (1987 version) Pros: Optical performance - size - construction Cons: AF noisy Opinion: There is little to say about this lens, since the optical yield is equal to the current 50ino 1.8, then ottima.rnPer else is better in everything, aesthetics, construction, practicality. rnEssendo a lens old you can run into some problems with the calibration of the MAF but you can act with a bit of trade on the contact area of ??the PCB that allows a certain range of microtaratura (an operation is within the reach of anyone who is accustomed to using a soldering iron , and completely reversible as well as specified on the service manual) .rnSicuramente a purchase that will last over time to a lens of APSC intramontabile.rnPS personally do not like the 50mm focal ... you know, is neither fish nor fowl. sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Pros: Compact size - solid construction - af fast and quiet - bokeh - optical performance general Cons: not a handyman (on APSC) - game barrel - APSC on some specimens may suffer from front / back focus, to keep in mind if the room does not have AF micro adjustment. Opinion: I am angry with canon, you, why not produce more optical medium range of the genre and this is a BAD! RnL'ho had for a while on my 400d. What about ... on APSC has excellent optical performance across the range, not cartoon and does not distort appreciably, a little soft at room temperature but improves as it closes. The usm works fine (but you know). The 7-blade diaphragm guarantees excellent bokeh. The color tone is returned is pleasant, slightly tending to hot. For action shots so far is the best lens I've used it, does not restrict movement, not in the eye and is easy to maneuver on panning. Moreover, even a possible filter is not a problem, as the diameter is 58mm lens kit, and then cost a sciocchezza.rnL'unico real limit of this perspective is that being old some specimens (like what I had to example) can suffer from front / back focus. You can not send it to calibration since the cost of that is enormous. Obviously no problebut if you have a camera body with micro af, otherwise it is better to try it on your machine before purchasing. After taking account of this can not recommend it 100%, in combination with a wide-angle lens can be definitive. sent on February 17, 2015 |
 | Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II Pros: Lightweight - range of focal appreciable Cons: construction embarrassing - ko diaphragm after 30,000 shots - poor optical performance at all focal lengths and aperture Opinion: goal had in kit with the 400d back in 2006 and used for years as a unique optical: absolutely not up to even the modest sensor of my camera, either for lack of clarity, you want to distortion and vignetting still present, especially at 18mm. AF precise but a bit slow and noisy, even compared to 18-55 is.rnDa change absolutely least with the most recent version of the IS, which is the minimum wage! sent on February 17, 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
