|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Lino Freelance www.juzaphoto.com/p/LinoFreelance  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM Pros: All! Cons: Nothing! Opinion: First of all, I want to congratulate DiegoD and give him all my understanding of his choice. I immediately get to the bottom of it: I own the IS version, but I also had the non-IS, used on Ds MIII and on 7D, it's a lens that has never let me down in all situations and in any light condition that has been good , less good or poor; to say the least stratospheric the focus that remains truly lightning fast and never uncertain... Never! The stabilization is extremely effective and allows you to take pictures, (at least I managed great), taking home great shots, with times of 1/15, 1/8 and even 1/4 of a second, as for some shots that I have in the gallery fireworks with the 24-105, so much the stabilizer is as effective in the same way. The creaminess of the blur in the portraits, remains on very high levels and its progressiveness is on par with optics that cost twice its price and dedicated specifically for portraits! Obviously, used at 200mm and at some distance with f4. On the contrary, brightness apart from some of these optics see 1.4, 1.2 or 2, and costing over 2000 euros, in the field, have very little, to say nothing to teach the 70-200 about AC and sharpness at full opening! If at medium closures type 5.6-8 remains a scalpel, well I can definitely say that at f4 already remains a razor and without compromise of sorts, and moreover over the whole range of focals; the colors it returns and the three-dimensionality of the images is nothing short of stunning! Then going through the focus and the change of internal focal?! Spectacular. What else to add: stabilizer a little noisy? paralights a little cumbersome and unplastic? (plastic in the sense of graceful compared to optics) lack in kit of the ring for tripod? F4 maximum opening? Minimum focus distance of 1.5mt? Sorry but when you evaluate a lens, as in this case, you should evaluate what you bought or what you would like to buy? Do we know at the outset certain shortcomings, if we want to call them limits? And I'd like to see!!! I honestly prefer not to put them, to be consistent in the cons; the lack of the ring for statil, when I bought it already I knew that I would have to buy it separately! But do we really want to make a judgment on what we're feeling or do we want the moon? Well if we want that, let's book with the first ticket for the next 5 years, among the first to land on it for tourist purposes and spend on the 150 thousand euros round trip... and we'll touch it with our hands! I rate this optic10 and praise without reservation, stabilized or not! The new stabilized f4 kit has the ring for the tripod, given the price 1300 th now give it. But the difference always makes the photo taken and not the accessory. Good light to all and a special "thank you" goes to the maintainers of the site, which allow us to discuss a hobby, work, which remains among the most beautiful and engaging that there can be. sent on August 27, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 L USM II Pros: Only the mechanics of a series "L" for the price to which it is proposed. Cons: High amount of CA at the edges; The protrusion of the lens, compared to competitors, is more prone to carry with if ghosting; From F 8 We can have a sufficient sharpness even at the edges. Opinion: I was looking for, and given the test done in the field, not satisfactory, I still try a fixed L series of canon; Thanks to a very dear friend who lent me a weekend to test its validity I decided to move on. As the possessor of the excellent Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 Fixed on the entire focal length, I can certainly affirm that it remains more competitive in terms of overall yield, while being a zoom and costing only 1/4 of the Canon 14mm. Test done on the field also with the Canon 8-15 F4, it remains more performing on the whole focal length and above all with greater homogeneity, having also, for those who look for it, a very funny and captivating perspective for certain particular conditions of shooting. Here the price of the lens remains absolutely unfeasible compared to the overall performance, both because L series and because of fixed optics! If in the production following the first step of 2007 have brought some improvement, you should try the goodness of the last pieces produced to have a certain term and final comparison. sent on August 01, 2018 |
 | Canon Speedlite 430EX II Pros: A pro for all purposes while being compact. Cons: They could put the diffuser panel. Opinion: Highly recommended. Used for ceremonies as well as public openings, has never let me down. Superb white balance, never out of tune ... ever! For the missing panel, directing the light out of range, the speaker masterfully manages to sopperirne lack. Then, the prepared cameras can control the flash directly from their menus and manual settings vary in steps of 1/3 stop. Moreover, the sensor detects the size (full size, APS-C or APS-H) and the zoom position is then automatically adjusted, optimizing flash coverage and the amount of charge needed for each shot and automatically compensates any small fluctuations in the flash lamp voltage and brightness transmitting color information from the flash to the camera. Simply monstrous if we look first to the fiction that must svolgere.rnManca the master function is true, but it would have paid this figure (then about 250 €), missing the most current rt radio function ... so what? But acquits innanzitverything the function for which it is born? Then all we need and advance ... as Toto said. sent on October 18, 2016 |
 | Canon 1Ds Mark III Pros: World charm both the camera body and for the "prints"! Sturdiness, ergonomics, extraordinary autofocus even in low light, dynamic range, excellent battery life. Cons: For a product to be "STUDIO" no! Opinion: It should be noted first that comes mainly as a body to "study." RNLA 1ds Eos mark III, it is simply monstrous to the amount of pixels that captures; consequently the detail that it detects, and will let you do just about just about anything. rnNello still-life, food, fashion, architecture, there are those who pulled out the work otherwise executable only with medium format on the three-dimensional image that returns; some bodies from 24 or 36 MPs did not allow more current to achieve the same result! Test carried out on the field! RnMa while being dedicated to the study, one should not underestimate that allows gusts to 5 fps, then a real advantage that delivers the medium format, that can only fantasize about having a pro so relevant! Rnal comparison with medium format, I remember seeing on the network, the test with a Hasselblad H4D 50 MPs, in a still-life, that left me literally speechless! rnPer regards the "noise" at high ISO, especially in thefrom 1600, all of us, we should not forget that, with the film as early as the 800 ISO, the "grain", it was pretty obvious, but appreciated and often desired especially in black and white to appear more fascinating of ' final image, especially with magnification more spinti.rnLa Eos 1 Ds Mark III, returns without a doubt, at high ISO, not an image "dirty", but just with a grain "charming" of the past, typical of old films ! rnOggi you're used to flaunt feeling dizzy, type a few million as the new Nikon D5, but we should not underestimate that beauty typical of a portrait with good light, and perhaps with a bit of grit, especially in the "press" and not on the monitor, still gives emotions typical of true photography! If it comes to photography ovviamente.rnrnBuona light at all. sent on January 19, 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
