|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Marioconsole www.juzaphoto.com/p/Marioconsole  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Pros: As old as am I and the lens too, I appreciate it very much: autofocus, IS, colors, sharpness, all of them are pretty good. I have this lens again, and I am without breath with it: Try once and You'll never abandon it. I am no pro. I'm old enough to afford anybody on this field. See the photos I've shot with this lens, they are on my web-site www.marioconsole.it etc. Cons: None Opinion: Great, Creative. I see that it's expensive too (on Amazon). The use on a Canon 6d, in many situations of light and movement. In particular I like to photograph the night sky, because I love to see and try to recognize and name the stars, the galaxies, the planets, from my balcony facing south. I would say that performs its task well. sent on July 14, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Pros: Fast autofocus, stabilizer very effective, very good image quality. Aesthetically efficace.rnHa the catch-zoom. Cons: Nothing against, is pesantino but it is consistent with its optical and mechanical qualities. It does not pass inosservato.rnL'anello tripod is expensive but it is an object of high quality and stabilità.rn Opinion: I came to this goal by the excellent starting phenomenal 70-200 f / 4 L IS, but I wanted to have a longer focal length, not to have to put on and remove the multiplier Kenko 1.4.rn (This multiplier also works with the 70-300 f / 4-5.6 L IS, maintaining autofocus and stabilization.) rnPrima to take it, making a change with my 70-200, did some hundreds of photos with both lenses and saw that the quality of the images taken with the 70-300 are very similar to those taken with the 70-200, never less, equal contrast and sharpening equal, and I have to say a little more vivid and brighter (all things be improved in Camera Raw Photoshop) .rnll reason for my change is therefore, I repeat, the Most focal length, + 50%. ', and the evidence of not sacrificing the quality of foto.rnPosso therefore refute the opinions fairly generalized not benevolent around this goal. Why, what the defect found? Rnih many cases the criticism is ridiculous, like "Ring treppiede is not included ", the hood is bulky, but no word on the picture quality. Photozone.de also did laboratory tests, which do not say anything. Instead I saw on the Web against the 'Juza' that is made of 100 clippings rni % in various focal and various stop; this kind of evaluation has also some gaps, perhaps too technicist but better of abstract discourses on chromatic aberration, barrel effect and the like, which remain on paper and do not provide evidence to human sight. sent on January 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
