|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Anarres www.juzaphoto.com/p/Anarres  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Pros: Sharpness more than good, bright and given the angle of view I would say compact and well built Cons: Non-ergonomic cap, some aberration in case of non-optimal lights Opinion: I searched for it and finally found it after some time, it has a quality / price ratio that has no comparison, other fisheyes cost an eye, I highly recommend dedicating yourself to it and sooner or later a good deal is found. It is not a lens for everyone and everything of course, it should be used for projects or creative photos, it is bright, sharp (not excessively at the edges of course) and allows you to have shots that would otherwise be impossible. On its side it also has an enviable portability, you feel that the construction is of other times but with a really satisfactory size. As soon as I start using it properly (I've only done some tests) I'll post some pics. sent on April 09, 2024 |
 | Kenko Pro 300 DGX 2.0x Pros: value for money, doubling of focal point, construction Cons: Sharpening, autofocus not always ready, not tropicalized... Opinion: Now I use it frequently, especially in this period when I am approaching birds having a hawthorn that only reaches 200mm. Lights and shadows, the lights I would say that are greater: it is well built and reliable, the doubling of focal is very useful and in photos with good/excellent light the shots that you get are satisfactory; the shadows are partly physiological and that is the closing of at least one stop and more that means starting at least from a lens of f 2.8 if you photograph in discreet light, the problems come when the light begins to run out. If the light is inadequate everything gets complicated both for the autofocus that struggles to take the subject and the general yield that tends to dull everything a bit. The real shadow however is in general the loss of sharpness on the whole photo, which is attenuated by closing the diaphragm but only if you can (i.e. if we are in excellent light). Summing up I can say that I am satisfied if we consider that I paid 150 euros and that in some cases it becomes indispensable, that if the light there is in abundance the shots suffer very little from the drop in sharpness. Until I can afford a beautiful long native focal, I keep it tight! sent on June 18, 2020 |
 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM Pros: Quality/price ratio, brightness, lightness, AF speed Cons: Nothing (at this price) Opinion: It is a lens that for the cost it is sold has few rivals. We start from the limits that obviously there are: plastic, sharp but not too TA, manual focus is not intuitive... why not put them in the "cons"? Because the price you sell (to keep quiet of the used) in my opinion are not detectable flaws. But the pros are clearly more obvious, starting with the overall sharpness at almost all apertures beyond F4 (but already at 2.8 you can appreciate), the blurred pleasant, the warm colors, the fast AF (it is an STM), the handling seen encumbrances and weights and last but not Last for an opening (1.8) that saves you in many interior situations where there is a need for light (theatre, workshops, concerts etc.). sent on May 10, 2018 |
 | Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 Macro Pros: Sharpness Tokina, good macro, weighs the right and has a nice sfuocatorn Cons: No stabilization, it is advisable to use the lens hood Opinion: I have not used it much yet but I managed to shoot some macros and use it also for portraits and not only and I must say that so far has given satisfactions from more points of view. Meanwhile, the solidity of the construction is accompanied by a relatively modest weight (considering that I also have its big-angle brother that is a boulder:) rnTokina has a resolvency, sharpness, really excellent levels, holds very well even at TA (poor vignetting and poor deformation ), tends to cold colors like all tokina but in PP do what you want.rnFor macros I can not yet feel to review it well because I've only done some test shots but already from these first impressions I can say that he was appreciated. I will return to the review to describe this aspect with more detail and be more objective. rnFor now I can only say to be happy for the purchase, we consider that it is still an f / 2.8 and therefore does not lack brightness. sent on March 07, 2018 |
 | Canon 5D Mark III Pros: FF, Ergonomics, Robustness, Dynamic Range, Good ISO High Tightness, Tropicalization, Discrete Failure, Dual Slot, Versatility for All Kinds, Used Optimorn Price Cons: A little castrated video side, lacking mobile display Opinion: I went after 3 years from the 700D (which I found a more than dignified entry level) to this tank, taking advantage of a really good used wear / price.rn the transition to the FF and a Pro body as this was a leap of apparent quality , In particular for the overall quality of the Files, ISO sharpness and ISO tightness when it starts to need light where it is not. The body is robust but at the same time portable, you fit all the goals you want but it is with the PRO (L Series) that maximizes the whole system, the balance between heavy (heavy) and body (robust) creates a perfect balance , You can feel a great car in your hand.rnOnce the automatic focusing, the good dual CF card (CF + SD), the MF points (65 if I did not), the easy and intuitive menu, the joystick indispensable (not I know how I would do without) and exceptional viewfinder. Video files are not bad at all, but they do not excel in this subframe, but the options are minimal, but you must be aware that you canShoot good movies with the accessory equipment. The lack of a rotatable display (it does have the 700D that I had) seems a bit absurd because even though it is not essential it is very convenient. RnThe ISO seal is certainly a big step forward (Especially if it comes from an APSC), however, it must be taken into account that it does not do miracles ... beyond the 3200 butta male.rn definitely a great PRO car that today can be purchased between 1300 and 1600 € with a few thousand shots Or even new at about 2000/2300 €. If you do not get the budget of a IV mark this is a great choice.rn sent on August 10, 2017 |
 | Panasonic Lumix GX7 Pros: Light but consistent, construction and file quality, sensor stabilizer, tilting viewfinder, optical park, video Cons: Complex menu, battery Opinion: I just sold it, after 3 years of little use, just because it was not used as it deserved. The reason is that now I like cameras and mighty goals and I can not explain why, it is actually that I always got the 5d MK III. Anyway this pana was a great alternative, it is not a toy anyway, though it has a slight back strength. The design quality is great and in general the quality of the files is just as good, good ISO holding, good contrast and dynamic range. The plus is the video compartment, you can work well especially if you add ad hoc accessories. The ability to take advantage of vintage lens adapters (maybe very bright) is really handy. The optical park between pana and Olympus is a manna, you mount what you want, from cheap optics but more than decent to the top of the lens (and cost). Only new is the menu I find complex compared to what I'm used to in Canon, as far as I am concernedTo be a little studied I have always struggled to get used to it, but, as I wrote at the beginning, maybe because I did not use it properly; Along with the battery life (I recommend at least another pair of patona batteries). As far as the AF is concerned, it is not bad even if we are not in reflex levels. RnMoving head and sharpness / brightness of the viewfinder and swivel screen at TOP.rn sent on July 05, 2017 |
 | Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX Pros: Robustness, construction, sharpness, brightness, price Cons: Weight (actually I like it but I know that for many would be a problem), flare, initial adaptation to the AF Opinion: Finally I was able to test this wide-angle with the 5D mark III, promoted to full vote. Comparison with the canon 17-40mm L that I have been short of time is impetuous, I know that in all probability I had a particularly unlucky lens but on 3 factors there are no stories: better construction, sharpness from the center edges, distortion and vignetting at All acceptable focal lengths. The canon sprays with maximum apertures and focal lengths were embarrassing, the only thing I can say best about the canon are the typically warm and "crunchy" colors, the Tokina fights more on the cold but in PP it remedies right away. With a FF body weighs well just inserted into the body, extreme focuses, helped by a little excursion, really hold distortion, vignetting and sharpness. Obviously on a tripod you can safely close the diaphragms useful to the landscape, both urban and natural, where sharpness becomes sharp. Good color response, however, as well as general photo resolution. I must admit that you used to choose fireWith typical canon switches (but also other brands use the same) was not immediately accustomed to the Tokina method or with the advancement in the final part of the lens by carrying it forward or behind it. Finally, the big defect that few add to this lens , The flare: I can not say that I have used it in all its shades, I lack backlights, side lights and lightning, etc. And so I'm waiting to see the effects of this poor hold, but after 4 intensive days with light day / night I did not have one. It's a big corner I can recommend to those who want to start off with a PRO wide-angle lens with a unique high-quality AF lens and wide brightness. In order to stay on this good relationship, you have to move on the samyangs they talk about Well but we are on the "whole manual" without it and without it. sent on April 29, 2017 |
 | Canon 700D Pros: APS-C, rotatable display, video, good range and good seal up to ISO 800 Cons: noticeable noise after 800 ISO, audio room so so, missing rings Opinion: I state that in my opinion it's a good APS-C machine, churning out good files with appreciable general resolution (18 megapixel are more than good), has a good video industry for those who want to challenge themselves, intuitive menu and excellent display if you think that there are bodies far more expensive and PRO still fixed display. Acesssoriabile, plasticky but not lightweight, and therefore able to compensate for the weight of targets large enough (maybe we tell the limit). We say that the real limit of this canon is the ISO seal which deteriorates the images as soon as the light is less and you are forced to alzarne sensitivity, holds blow (in post production) up to max 800 but besides not recover almost nothing. This does not mean that we can work around the problem in part with lights in the studio and outside, and whereas, however, in the hours daily the problem is irrelevant. Having been my first SLR I can not fault it, he gave me the desire to photograph and get back to learn techniques and expressive researches photo / video that has long no longer considered.rnA I think the first real entry level canon for quality, now enhanced with 750. Compared unbeatable quality / price, either by buying it new finding is used at a very paltry. If you are looking for a way to enter the world of photography and video cameras you will have fun for sure. sent on September 30, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Pros: Blurred dazzling, general sharpness, color and strength Cons: Weight and lack stabilization (sometimes) Opinion: This is a really good lens, the zoom range is perfect, does not crush and maintains a quality of almost any length. The correction in post production (cartoon and distortion) are always minimum demonstrating that works to his already at optimum levels. Has full color and warm, I have never encountered significant flaws even in backlight. If you own weight, for those not used to it takes a bit 'to get us out and handle it, especially if it is used for concerts and events where you hold it attached to the body for a long time should get him the limits I would say. Because of this feature is a lens suitable for massive bodies that they know how to compensate for at least part of the weight, the transition from the 700D to 5D mk III for me was significant in terms of portability. Finally the lack of stabilization, especially the more extreme lengths, can create some discomfort but I must say that the hang of learn to manage it and understand that on the stand can give moltissimo.rnPer the digit youlocated in used really worth all the expense. Ah, the autofocus does not miss a beat! sent on September 30, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Pros: Handyman Quality, held on almost the entire zoom range, sharpness, price stabilization Cons: distortion at extreme excursions, vignetting wide angle Opinion: It 'was my first L-series lens, first used on an APS-C, the general quantum leap was evident on all fronts. It 's really a travel handyman, if you decide to enjoy a light you can carry it attached to the body and do a damn report. Obviously, like all the thrusts quite focal excursions (24-105) has limits at the ends, in the specific case the wide angle is affected in a manner not irrelevant of vignetting and distortion, almost completely correctable in post production. The longer extreme, from 90 to 105mm, the sharpness decreases but without scandal. Ruggedness, versatility, especially when used with major bodies, allow for excellent portability and balance, so that the weight is a vantaggio.rnIl having a stabilized lens and tropical conditions concludes the fortune of this L-series lens that deserves the fame he has Whereas it used you can bring home between 450 and 550 € depending on the occasion. rnDiciamo that turning a bit 'the diaphragm and taking to a lengthfocal average you get results really good thanks to a return of color and three-dimensionality typical of these Canon products. however they are lenses that have their years, someone might turn up their nose to the decline at the edges but it's flaws in my opinion negligible compared to the overall benefits. sent on September 30, 2016 |
 | Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/4-5.6 R Pros: Price, sharpness (not absolute), leggerorn Cons: Plasticky, a bit 'dark, very little zooming fluid Opinion: I have a pana GX7 as the second body having a mirrorless for outputs without backpacks and heaviness SLR was one of the goals I had. Happy with the choice made as a body I needed a minimum profit objectives according to different situations. This canvases, doubled in M43, it becomes a 300mm teased me especially having a few more solid to spend. I finally gave in to the price, however, are amazed from usability of this lens: the sharpness is generally good, few defects both aberrations both flare, of course, is not exactly bright (but it must be said that I'm used to the other two coming to 1.7 and 1.8 for which they are not hurt:) rnUnico pretty obvious flaw is the lack of fluidity of the zoom mechanism, the friction is also quite annoying if the perception decreases with time and the rest uso.rnPer very light because plasticosissimo (then of one advantage it is offset by the disadvantage of appearance) in valuePrice then my final judgment is more than good. If you want to go pro lenses clearly switching to another world for prices and yields. sent on June 12, 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
