|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Danilo1974 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Danilo1974  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF 500mm f/4 L IS II USM Pros: Sharpness, blur, weight, build quality, AF speed, image stabilization. Cons: Price Opinion: Can not find a fault with this model of 500mm that enables you to work more and freehand view the impressive lightness and excellent stabilization. The sharpness is outstanding at every aperture, and also from the graphs mtf seems that this is the best ever created in house Canon optics. The autofocus is also a splinter multipliers fitted (I speak of the series III) and rarely miss a shot even in low light. I preferred the 600mm f / 4 for lightweight portability, the largest field of view (much to the limit, there are multipliers). rnL'ho preferred the 400mm f/2.8 for greater focus and why having a 300/2.8 I already had almost a duplicate and above all I would have been "discovered" in case I needed a very long focal length. I preferred to 200-400 f/4-5.6 for greater brightness to 500mm but mostly because I use it often coupled to the 300/2.8 so I do not feel the need. sent on November 03, 2013 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Pros: A tank L series, sealed, sufficiently crisp and clear aperture wide open, stabilization by 2 stops, as heavy as needed to balance a body 1D/1DS. Practically did not know what chromatic aberration and flare. AF fast and accurate. Cons: The cost, the model series II beats it on all fronts. Opinion: I bought this light back in 2004 (for 1820 € in that Garlasco) and I was almost disappointed because on paper it was the worst of the other 70-200. It seemed to throw away some money, but I took it anyway because it also promised top performance and I thought that I would have preferred a shot less sharp than a blurred picture (in those days was the maximum attainable 1600iso). I have never regretted the purchase and I never noticed some loss of quality, especially if diaphragmed a little. Honestly, I see the limits only now, after having sold in exchange for the Series II which is a bomb in every way. Another positive note is the low-down that allowed me to recover two-thirds of the total, in practice I have spent on this wonderful lens less than the cost of a simple coffee + brioche every Sunday morning for 8 years. And I assure you that the emotions have been many, but many more. sent on March 12, 2012 |
 | Sigma 800mm f/5.6 EX DG HSM Pros: Focal length really extreme, excessive weight, good speed AF, costs less than half of the brother canon, the possibility of keeping multiply the AF can also be used freehand (very light). Cons: Angle of very small, unsuitable for hunting traveling, lack of stabilization. Opinion: After careful thought and a lot of calculations I decided to purchase the aforementioned super telephoto, also saw the really great price for a super telephoto that scale (just over € 4,000). If you are not equipped with a good tripod and its head rocker is really difficult to use, especially in the absence of such light as suffering terribly shake and is not stabilized as the canon cousin. But with time 1/500 sec can also shoot handheld (it weighs less than the old 600mm f / 4) and paths are not too long taking it without great effort. The autofocus is fast and accurate, plus this is also the limiter (from 7 to 15 meters and 15 meters to infinity) will surely be slower than the canon but if we talk about a few tenths of a second. The af loses a bit 'brilliance but remains good even with the 1.4X multiplier with which it reaches the focal length of 1120mm (be careful because only the canon series 1 maintain the autofocus when the minimum aperture is f / 8) . In capannI in stakeouts fixed allows to better fill the frame with the subject but due to the reduced angle of field is problematic when used in pursuit of a subject is too close, in that case better to bundle it with a 300mm telephoto type. The minimum focusing distance is 7 meters but some perches can be closer, another good reason to join him for a view type 300mm. About the low brightness of the lens (something I've thought a lot) you have to think that with a 800mm f/5.6 to 10 meters and there are about 4 cm Total depth of field, then having diaphragm to obtain a minimum depth of field disappears the problem of poor brightness. For now I am very happy, I can not complain about the sharpness, below two links where you can see a shot at 800mm and 1120mm placed one in photoshop but without adding sharpness in post (and I think even by car): http :/ / www.danilovigni.com/temp/800mm.jpg http://www.danilovigni.com/temp/ 1120mm.jpg Unfortunately, they are made to ISO 1600 with a 1DSmk2 (an old car that barely supports them) later present other documentation ;-) sent on December 11, 2011 |
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
