|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Checofuli www.juzaphoto.com/p/Checofuli  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Panasonic Lumix S 50mm f/1.8 Pros: Weight and size, optically excellent, tropicalized, economical. Cons: Nobody Opinion: Panasonic has finally pulled out its nails, with this new series of 1.8 lenses is offering L-Mount users excellent optics at very low prices. As soon as it was purchased it was immediately love, mounted on the S1 you almost do not realize that you have attacked it from how small and light it is. Optically you could not ask for more, already at TA the sharpness is very high, closing by a stop or two becomes a blade. Soft and very pleasant blurred thanks to the diaphragm composed of 9 rounded slats, excellent microcontrasto and definition, very fast af. Solid construction and with excellent materials as Panasonic has now accustomed us is even resistant to dust and splashes of water. All this at a price under 500 euros! My personal opinion vote 10 as I do not know what more you could ask for! sent on September 12, 2021 |
 | Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro OIS Pros: Image quality, soft blurry, sharpness already at TA, stabilized, tropicalized, no focus breathing, parafocal zoom optics, great flexibility of use. Cons: Big and heavy for a f4. Opinion: I've owned it for almost a year, so I think I've framed it well. Optical to have absolutely in the kit for its great flexibility of use, it brings with it features that give it to the top of the category compared to the competing brands. Stabilized, tropicalized, solid construction and excellent materials. It is also free from the problem of focus breathing and above all it is perhaps the only zoom lens 24-105 f4 "from kit" parafocal (in a nutshell the optics keeps the subject in focus even when the focal length is changed), characteristic this very valuable especially for video makers. In my opinion its features definitely make it the best 24-105 f4 zoom on the market. sent on March 22, 2020 |
 | Fujifilm GFX 50R Pros: Sensor yield, tropicalized body, featherweight, Fuji color profiles, body price. Cons: Price of optics, autofocus slightly underlie, burst virtually non-existent. Opinion: Very attentive to the needs of our country I felt compelled to give my contribution to the economy by putting hand to the piggy bank and buying the last delivery of mother Fuji. I have already previously possessed with great satisfaction two Fuji bodies both in rangefinder style (initially the XE1 then years after the X-PRO 2) and I know the feeling that they can return and especially the joy of shooting using the color profiles Fuji. I loved them to madness but my mania for greatness made me narrow the APSC sensor without any particular reason. Since I came to know that Fuji would have brought out a new camera body but this time with medium sensor formed by the price a little ' more accessible than the 50s I did not think twice to take it home. Needless to be so much to dwell on the quality of Raw, the sensor (a Bayer matrix) combined with the optics Fuji can return images almost disarming as sharp and rich in details. Dynamic range, micro-contrast, resolution, high ISO yield all really excellent. The body, in magnesium alloy, looks like a fairly square and massive brick, but taking a hand remains stone for how light it is! Construction as of excellent Fuji home practice, and guaranteed against dust and atmospheric agents as well as optics. The downside to all this well of God is unfortunately the price of optics, medium enough high. Another aspect to take into consideration is the propensity of this machine for a certain type of photography and the absolute inadequacy for other types of photography!. The AF is not really lightning (it proves absolutly precise) and the burst virtually non-existent (about 3fps) is to be avoided as the plague for the geeks of the gusts. Portraits, panoramas, still-life and street are his death!! Fuji as usual has been able to give us another gem capable of making photography a real pleasure. sent on March 11, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L II USM Pros: Blurred, color rendition, lens character Cons: Slow AF, delicate construction, no tropicalization. Opinion: The optics that made legend. He always intrigued me and has always been in my most dirtiest desires then finally I managed to find it used at an honest price. What about... taken in hand you see that has many years on the shoulders, construction a little ' delicate, thin and raw plastics, front element that comes out. Then the mountains and you take two shots then the story changes. You immediately realize why he made a legend. A TA has a blurred never seen before, a deadlift of plans and an absurd three-dimensionality and finally a color rendition to make the various Sigma art Tamron and Nikon Pale. It is not true that at 1.2 has a yield too soft, already at 1.2 has all the resolution and micro-contrast that serves. If you close a couple of stops it becomes a blade. Pity only for the AF that although very precise is really but really slow. Is this a problem? Lol It is a portrait lens, to be used calmly. If your use is a handyman be absolutely away! sent on February 04, 2019 |
 | Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G ED Pros: All you need to have an optics: blurred color rendering and sharpness at the top. Aesthetic. Cons: The lens hood is a little crude and pure plastic with no inner lining. Maybe a little weight. Opinion: Sigma or Nikon? That is the question that everyone is asking. I have always used the Sigma art for their sharpness and very low price. Nice lenses But the whole thing ended there. They gave no other, zero character. I always admired the sharpness however I always had the impression that something was missing. Then I wanted to take off the whim and try the Nikon 35 1.4. There is little to turn around. This lens on the sigma if it eats it all over. Maybe it does not have the surgical yield of the Sigma to TA but however there is no comparison. Terrific color rendition. It manages to capture shades of color that the Sigmas fail. Blurry wonderful, creamy and with a deadlift of plans that even here Sigma fails. In short, the expense is important, costs more than double the Sigma but the one that can give you is the best that Nikon can offer. Obviously I do not express myself comparing it to optics like the Otus as they go far beyond my possibilities. Among the pros I put the aesthetics. To me the Nikon professional optics aesthetically like a lot, much more than the Canon optics. sent on August 08, 2018 |
 | Pentax D FA 24-70mm f/2.8 ED SDM WR HD Pros: Construction, not excessive weight, blurry, flare resistance and general rendering. Cons: Not the utmost of clarity. The price too high the performance ratio. Opinion: Alongside the K1, it is immediately felt that they are designed to work together. Robustness of the system in general is almost insurmountable even with the professional reflexes of other brands. It's okay but nothing remarkable. At maximum aperture the blur is very pleasant to be a zoom but the images are quite soft. By closing a couple of stops, things will improve visibly but without getting to top levels. Last but not least the price. Considering the performance, in my opinion the selling price is too high. A good compromise would have been on 950/1000 euros. sent on July 10, 2017 |
 | Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC USD Pros: Sharpness, very low distortion, stabilizer. Cons: Size, the absence of the ring for filters, Sigma 24 35. Opinion: already possessed Sigma ART 24 35 but an opportunity has almost forced me to buy also this lens. With the two lenses available was inevitable comparazione.rnInizio with the build quality of a good standard for the Tamron but higher than that of the Sigma! The Sigma gives a feeling of strength far better than the Tamron (and in my opinion also the Nikon counterpart), also in the sigmoid rubber rings are better. Run so much smoother to the touch and the rubber quality migliore.rnCon seems a bit 'of disappointment I found the rings of the Tamron "jerky" not fluid, ditto for the tires that seem a little coarse quality' considered too low the lente.rnA performance category instead if they play almost at par, the Tamron has from its very low distortion even at the lowest focal, very natural colors and excellent contrast. Sharpness good TA that becomes excellent closing as soon as the diaphragm. rnIl sigma wins instead for a slightly better sharpness for 'entire zoom range already in TA but suffers a bit 'distortion to the lowest focal. rnDimensioni: Sigma average size but stocky Tamron mammoth. Weight: Sigma being slightly more content is strongest weight. The Tamron paradoxically "big" being distributes the weight better. I have tried them both on the D5 that perfectly balances the weight of the body machine so I believe the weight and size were not absolutely a problem for both lenti.rnMeglio Sigma or Tamron? In my opinion if you put in first place the practicality and look for a lens that allows you to have one of the most comfortable ever focal excursions for lovers of landscapes and architecture without a doubt the Tamron. rnSe however you can not help but use the filters on the lives and seek the highest possible quality by sacrificing a bit 'of focal length Sigma without thinking twice (maybe to stand alongside the 20 1.4 ART)! rnrn sent on February 19, 2017 |
 | Nikon D5 Pros: Ruggedness, image quality, speed, battery life. Cons: Weight and dimensions that can intimidate (but need not necessarily be a defect), high price. Opinion: This machine is like a hit man. precise and ruthless fast at high ISO! rnCi want the handle to hold it in your hand as it is big and heavy, but I would not put it in those terms. Rather the mighty, indestructible call! Holding it in your hand you have an extreme sense of security, it has the immediate certainty of being able to lead to taking any further climatica.rnMettiamo condition immediately get one thing straight. If you want images to be thousands and thousands of megapixel with unmatched dynamic range at low iso then buy yourself a D810! RnQuesta machine was created to give the best of themselves at high ISO and cabbage if it does it well! You realize you can raise the ISO to ignorance and keen to push at levels never felt before without incurring grain and related degradation of the images. The autofocus then hardly wrong to hook the subject, even in tough lighting conditions. Personally I do not mind sports photography but I've been experimenting a bit 'with the barrage. Simply awful, just look (and listen to) one of the many videos on youtuband to realize how fast! rnHo read a bit 'of everything about the poor dynamic range and overall image quality that leaves something' to be desired, rumors born of "experiments" made by individuals with dubious skills and then disclosed as absolute truth ... well I have personally had the opportunity to work with the raw (or rather the nef) of nikon D810 and compare them to those of D5, in my opinion for a "normal" use without going to extremes as recoveries from 5 stop (which I wonder who has ever made recoveries of shadows from 5 stop!?!?) and I can guarantee that even with this camera the results are eccellenti.rnCerto, the body only weighs around 1.4 kg and combining it to nikon 24-70 weight starts to become important ... especially for long photo sessions as it can be a wedding. The ergonomics of the SLR, however, comes to our aid being able to balance the weight in order to have a much less heavy feeling than they really è.rnInsomma you pay much but fromlthough much. RNLA maximum Nikon expression with respect to the SLR professionali.rnrn sent on October 11, 2016 |
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
