|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Mazzo62 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Mazzo62  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Fujifilm XF 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR Pros: Versatility, good image quality Cons: I don't find any particular negative points Opinion: The ideal optics for travel, compact and usable for most situations, respectable optical quality without particular gaps, excellent stabilizer. Of course, you can't expect either the absence of distortion at low focal lengths or the blur of super-bright. Personally, I add in the bag, which is still compact and light, a pair of 7artisans: the 12 mm to overcome the limited minimum focal length and the 35 1.2 to get the blurred backgrounds when needed. I recommend it sent on June 24, 2024 |
 | 7artisans 35mm f/1.2 II Pros: Construction, solidity, optical quality Cons: None, if you enter the order of idea of an old-fashioned optics, without AF and without communication with the camera body Opinion: I am nostalgic for the past, I love to focus by hand: finally here you can breathe the taste of classic photography, obviously you should not be in a hurry to take home the shot. Very pleasant bokeh at large openings. I own fuji fixed optics and I have not caught any noticeable quality differences. On this upgrade has been added the classic ring of jerky diaphragms. Superb price/quality ratio. Advised sent on January 16, 2022 |
 | Fujifilm XC 50-230mm f/4.5-6.7 OIS II Pros: Lightweight, exceptional value for money, quality plastic Cons: Af in low light Opinion: I admit to having been skeptical: then a friend made me try it and I began to change my mind to the point of buying it: I specify that my kit was exclusively composed of fixed bright optics so you can imagine .... Economic optics that offers enormous satisfaction and creativity, combined with the 16-50, close relative, forms a winning combination with a neglitry weight ideal for travel, you just have to be aware of the brightness limits, but it is not a big problem because the stabilizer is effective: excellent for landscapes and to take with you without major weight and bulk commitments , for those shots that are normally lost because you leave the kit at home: instead in a small bag with 900g there are the XE3, the 16-50 and the 55-230! And that quality definitely superior to the cheap equivalents of other brands sent on July 27, 2021 |
 | Fujifilm XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR Pros: quality and I add image as well Cons: I honestly didn't find any Opinion: I disagree with the criticism of the image quality of this view: in my opinion the photos it gives are clear and free from showy aberrations; the construction is also impeccable, appreciable the constant diaphragm on the whole excursion, the clutter is all in all limited even if it is dysmaced with cameras like the XE3. It is the ideal travel or excursion optics to use as a handyman to never disassemble sent on August 21, 2020 |
 | Fujifilm XC 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS II Pros: Unbeatable value for money Cons: Plastic compared to XFs, but it is already known at the time of purchase Opinion: I was wary of this optics until the moment I tested it: the files you get are excellent even at full opening. Ideal for travel and for all occasions when you want to stay light. I did home tests with easel comparing it with 14 2.8, 23 1.4 and 56 1.2 The results were surprising as well as unexpected: for the same diaphragm I did not notice particular differences, not even looking for the details to monitor Recommended. Given the results I decided to buy also the 50-230 sent on September 26, 2019 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM II Pros: Versatility, robustness, construction, optical quality Cons: Weight Opinion: Compared to the first version, those ugly dark 24 mm corners have disappeared, the optical quality I judge it more than good, not only, but to perceive differences with more ephaly ephaly opticals, such as. The 24-70 2 8 II, you have to enlarge a lot and does not always come out to the worst: the 24-70 I owned but I preferred the most compromised solution between the two. Often I find myself traveling only with that optics on the 6D2: the perceived quality of the images is definitely satisfying and even the blurred, if used at f/4 is pleasant, of course you can not expect the same bokeh of the 85 superlumbosis. Impeccable autofocus, excellent construction and excellent stabilizer. Only the weight was in favor of the old version. sent on July 06, 2019 |
 | Patona Premium LP-E6 Pros: price but not too much Cons: surrender Opinion: the purchased specimen I paid for it 1/4 compared to the original, but it is even less, uncommon time, problems with some charges (not completed and overheating effect on the charger) rnIn single-snap use does not pull after a few days of unused use it also loses its charge with the OFF switch selected on the camera: it needs to be loaded and used in the imager. It can be used to preserve the original when there are expected to be very hard outputs; this may be the discovery. some charge cycles but very far from canon sent on November 18, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM Pros: Optical quality, construction, autofocus Cons: Nobody Opinion: I had sold a specimen of this goal to buy the stabilized version II: personally I was not able to appreciate any significant differences, in the end I regained the smooth version I use for sporting events and portraits alongside a stabilized f / 4 for travel And landscapes.rnIt's not tropicalized, I used it under water during sporting events with no problem. It's amazing how such a vision so well-dated in the project can deliver such satisfying results: highly recommended! Rn sent on August 13, 2017 |
 | Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Pros: Optical quality, blurred, compactness, good construction Cons: I do not know Opinion: Excellent optics with light an equally valid blurred, ideal for portraiture, but not only, also excellent AF; focal aside, I did not find substantial differences in optical quality with 135L, much more expensive and cumbersome. I also owned the Zeiss 1.4 85, but did not totally regret Raccomandatissimo: who owns APS-C board his brother 85 1.8rn sent on March 31, 2017 |
 | Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Pros: Optical quality, AF, stabilizer Cons: Mechanical construction Opinion: I had two copies of this perspective: nothing to say about the quality of the glass, the AF and the stabilizer, but much to say about the building: rn1) the quality of the material is unsatisfactory, especially the plastic cylinder that comes out when lengthens the focalern2) for hobby I used even in the rain, and in both specimens after a period (not too long) of use in these conditions has formed the condensate below the front lens, forcing to give up shooting until all 'drying ... I asked canon and I was told that is normal, not a series L.rnPersonalmente not approve of this marketing choice: because a body of quality and performance as well as the 7D MkII can not adopt a view Basic height? rnHo solved the problem by switching to FF, although I was tempted to go down to normal use concorrenza.rnComunque recommend sent on September 20, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM Pros: excellent: sharp, autofocus, IS, construction Cons: hood sold separately at a price disproportionate, even if the price of optics demanding value for money remains high Opinion: I needed a wide-angle high quality for the FF and I am very happy with this purchase: the results are to the highest level I could not compare it to the L series, but I am sure that apart from the 2 stop less, the comparison holds. rnEccezionale also on the film: I got very similar results to the 28-mm contax zeiss used anello.rnApprezzo the fact that Canon has produced fixed lenses at this level and highly recommend it to those looking for targets of this type rn sent on February 06, 2013 |
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
