|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Ianni74 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Ianni74  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Yashica ML 50mm f/1.7 Pros: Optical quality, build quality, resolution, price, compactness Cons: I wouldn't know maybe the vignetting at f 1.7 Opinion: It's exactly like the Contax Zeiss 50 F1, 7. Exactly means exactly. Only the non-reflective T * treatment is missing. After 44 years (mine is 1975!) The focus is still smooth and accurate exactly like the aperture shots. Once it was said "engraving" today perhaps it is more correct to talk about solving or more simply of sharpness. A F1, 7 is just so sharp. It is a pleasure to touch and the photos that churns you can compare only to lenses of mid-high range. Incredible if you think that is a kit lens like most of the 50ini of those years. The vignette Tora a TA is present, certainly it is a defect compensated by a distortion almost absent. What about Still, if the manual focus does not scare you try it without fear: you will be thrilled! sent on June 30, 2018 |
 | Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 L USM Pros: Sharpness, engraving, blurry Cons: Weighs, precise but slow autofocus. Opinion: It is a dream optics to compare in the Canon house only with the 50 F1 of which shares the barrel (for out are identical). Glass and metal that give a good feeling of strength and professionalism. It is more than good already at TA, as soon as it closes a little becomes superlative. There you do portraits to people posing, hard to imagine it for other uses. Street and sports are virtually excluded because of the weight and AF really little fast. In exchange for the images that it produces, if you want, you don't even have to touch them: they are good already. There is a certain three-dimensionality typical only of the highest level optics. Compared to the Mk2 version has nothing to envy except the AF. For an unprofessional use is therefore very interesting because you can buy it at more competitive prices. sent on May 21, 2018 |
 | Sigma 24-35mm f/2.0 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness, fast and accurate af, f2, hardly any distortion, price Cons: no weather sealing, heavy, no stabilizer Opinion: In spite of the technical characteristics is not a zoom. The zoom range between 24 and 35 mm is really a small thing: you miss it the first time you turn the focus ring. Start from 24 mm and ends shortly thereafter. I would consider it a fixed from 24 mm which closes a bit. The limit is a 35 mm that opens a few degrees. Optically behaves like a fixed remaining constant at all focal lengths. Really very good sharpness already at room temperature. If you think about it for a moment with a 24 mm f/1.4 and a good sensor that allows some crop do more while saving nearly 300 Gr. But with only 500/600 euros a 24/35 used practically new is impossible to beat its great value/weight unless you buy, Canon at home, a 24 f 28 f 1.8 and 2.8 is a 35 f2 is that though, all together used, over 900 euros spent three separate objectives and with all the inconvenience. Highly recommended for landscape and architecture in 35 mm many consider it good for street. With the aps-h 1.3 multiplication factor becomes almost a normal really interesting. Is a strange perspective must really like that focal range otherwise better think of a 16-35 or anything like that. sent on May 03, 2018 |
 | Canon 1D Mark III Pros: Fast and accurate AF, burst, battery life, tropicalization, color rendition, dual slot Cons: display only for exposure, weight, iso than 1600 Opinion: I say at once that the 10mpx for me are actually an advantage because the files are lightweight and do not require large computer to be processed. Crops are not that much, that's all. It performs well in every situation with both natural and artificial light but it is a machine designed to do sports and birds: of course also works in other contexts, but in fact it is not so convenient. The ISOs are his weak point when compared with the current machines: but then, who knows why, we photograph all under 800 iso (see statistics juza) and then you can feel comfortable even the old 1 d mk3 behaves very well indeed. The multiplication factor apsh 1.3 as I see it is only an advantage because the mm at certain moments are never enough. Bought around 500 euro is certainly an excellent value, remember that the shutter of this machine is tested to 300,000 shots. The battery is capable of lasting 1500 shots without problems. If you're old enough to have your bones with film and slides you'll quickly realize that with this machine the real limit is the photographer. sent on April 19, 2018 |
 | Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Pros: Price, sharpness, stabilizer Cons: it is not tropicalized Opinion: A 200mm TA has a good sharpness that from f4 to F8 becomes excellent. At other focal lengths things improve slightly from TA to F11. Only at f32 seemed to me too unclear, but I have not invested much time in studying the diaphragm yield so closed. The quality step between f2.8 and f4 is good, but in absolute terms at f2.8 the images that it produces are already very good. The mtf tests confirm what I found on the field. The homologue Canon ef 70-200 f2.8 is IIL has an extra point to f11 for the rest is hard to distinguish them. The stabilizer allows you to shoot freehand at 200mm even at 1/15 of a second, at least this applies to me. In practice on the used market the only alternative canon attack comparable to this Tamron is the 70-200 f2.8 L smooth as the is II costs at least twice. The weight is in line with its category, which means that the materials used are similar. The color Black makes it less noisy than the biancone and, although not decisive, it is an aspect that I appreciate. In sintesi: excellent compromise thanks to a great price and a truly professional quality. sent on March 23, 2018 |
 | Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: Lightweight, economical, compact, image quality Cons: it is not stabilized Opinion: It simply makes good pictures. Sharp and colorful. The af works well. After years of use there is no dust between the internal lenses. Convenient because light and compact. On the vignette ff but it is clear enough already at full aperture. Good boken. Missing IS, for some perhaps a real limit. For me no. On all entry level 100 times better than 18-55 of the kit. sent on February 11, 2018 |
 | Canon 1Ds Mark II Pros: Reliable, robust, good file up to 400 iso, great battery life, spot reading and multi-spot Cons: Heavy, useful display only peer to see if the show can go, old-fashioned navigation. Opinion: I started photographing after years of stopping buying a retired professional kit. I was thinking of reselling the body now to replace it with something more modern. But for now I keep this car. Making a confrontation with today's car bodies is a useless pastime because it loses almost all the fronts, at least the most important ones. But in the end, beneath the 400 iso, it sparks really beautiful images, serene prints up to 30X40, which remind me very much of the film. The aF is good and the super meter. The controls are exactly where you are expecting them and after a few minutes of practice you are already running smoothly. I would not buy it for sports or photographic hunting, but for portraits it's really ok! To start with the FF, attacking a 50th, with even less than 500 euros, you have something in your hand that allows you to make 90% of the photographs that you would scatter with the most modern machines at a good level. The Double Slot (cf / sd) is a mere laugh for backup maniacs. rn sent on June 03, 2017 |
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
