You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Pros:incredible brightness, "ridiculous" price, compactness, good optical quality, precise focus dial, lampshade included
Cons:focus on f1.1
Opinion:In many ways it follows my review of samyang 85 1.4 on FF . It is a portrait and does not disappoint in this field; obviously as long as you know how to work in manual and better manage the depth of field at f1.1 . The Maf is obviously not very easy, and you have to rely on the magnification and peacking focus on the mirrorless (I own Canon M3 ) even if helped by the very good maf dial, fluid but precise. The optics, presents for its almost paltry price, an enviable soft blur and good sharpness even f1.1 in the central area (as long as you have put it in good focus. which may sometimes not be really accurate to that diaphragm, which improves exponentially already closed slightly. Of course, sharpness is related to those portraits where you do not look for the extreme sharpness of optics that cost 6 times more and weigh more than twice as much. In fact it is a very compact and quite "light" optics, although it is evident the quality of the metal and glass that composes it. At the end of the day it's an optic irecommend to those who want to save to get great portraits on aps-c with an exaggerated blur, equal to an FF with 85mm optics f1.4 - f1.8. Of course there is better, but at that price and with these features, it is a very good optics.
Pros:price for a f 1.4 , lightness, creamy blur, good sharpness, fluid and precise dial
Cons:manual focus, f1.4 doesn't break the hair
Opinion:It is a portrait and does not disappoint in this field; obviously as long as you know how to work in manual and better manage the depth of field at f1.4 . I personally mounted the confirmation chip for Canon, spending 7 euros and with a bit of work I equipped the lens of a valid help for the Maf . Obviously it is not foolproof but I have to say that I trust more the chip than my eye, after several tests on the field. The optics, for its price, have an enviable soft blur and a good sharpness even f1.4 (as long as you have put it in good focus. which may sometimes not be really accurate to that diaphragm. Of course, sharpness is related to those portraits where you do not look for the extreme sharpness of optics that cost 5 times more and weigh more than twice as much. In fact, it is a "light" optic, which does not fatigue in the long portrait sessions and allows you to bend easily without weighing down wrists and arms. At the end of the day it's an optics that I recommend to those who want to save for great portraits. Obviously there is better, but at that price and with these features, it is a great optics.
Pros:Pro but compact body, direct controls, excellent resolution, built-in flash, good autofocus also with adaptive optics, exposure compensation in M.
Cons:Hard compensation ring, improved tilting monitor, good files but not at the level of the latest Canon sensors.
Opinion:Taken to replace the M, I finally found a well-built body, with the right grip, profusion controls, customizable buttons (although the top compensation ring is very hard). Excellent possibility to mount the optional viewfinder and be able to shoot with telephoto lenses in complete safety, as well as having the small built-in flash. The autofocus is responsive and has never disappointed me, even with adaptive optics and multiplier, something almost unbelievable. The files are good, well workable, one step ahead of the old 18 mpx sensor, although perhaps not at the height of the latest generation from 24 mpx. I'm not convinced at all the mechanism of the monitor tilting, but still very useful for creative shots, combined with the touch screen, always good and responsive. Useful the focus peacking, as well as the exposure compensation in M, which I do not find on the 6d or other Canon machines of medium high level. I would say a really complete machine, without any obvious weakness and no lack.
Pros:light, focal length, macro function, manual zoom and electric, tropical conditions and price used, 12mm
Cons:a bit 'long, just good sharpness.
Opinion:purchased as an all-purpose lens battle, does not disappoint. For the price at which it is used, and 'the ideal lens for long hikes, adverse weather conditions, wind and dust. The lens does not extend, guaranteeing a certain robustness against side impacts, at the expense of external dimensions a little 'more' bulky compared with retractable zoom. Useful the Macro function that guarantees excellent close-up with a very good quality '. Compared to other zoom with similar zoom range, stands on the side of the 12mm wide angle, which makes the difference between a classic 14-42. The quality 'and optical' "only good", but does not disappoint. I also own the 14-42 R, which is higher sharpness, but without 'having the advantages mentioned in the pros, besides the lightness .rnConsigliato to those looking for a real all-purpose sturdy.
Opinion:I had already 35 f2 of Aps-c, and I was not at ease. The autofocus was slow and noisy, the equivalent focal length of 56 a bit too long for my taste, and that 'f2 that eventually made it as a F3.2, had prompted me to sell it, despite optically was impeccable. Once purchased the 6D and heard various opinions flattering, I decided to take the perspective that had since been discontinued. I was torn on whether to throw or try again Is the old series and so I opted for his inimitable lightness, ridiculous size, featherweight and exceptional performance on FF. Gone the hesitation on the 6D autofocus module, and 'become so quick to do more' to hear its noisy motor. Sharpness always great, also open, three dimensional '35mm, made a little old style that does so much film, in short, a' perspective to keep in close and put it in the list of those to never give up. Vignetting and other aberrations, I do not notice even having the lens correction Room Raw and come out clean on the DPP program. The only TROUBLESnte 'that you will be seen as the "poor" with a cup attached to a FF 35 .... dear, forgive them, for they know not what they say and what they're missing.
Pros:size, weight, price used, speed 'focus, quietness', good quality' general optics, almost a constant F4.
Cons:not crystal clear wide open especially to the sides and edges, chromatic aberrations.
Opinion:I replaced the 24-105 f4 L with this tiny lens handyman very economical. For those who do not need the strength, stability, and tropicalization of 105mm, this old (because 'no more' in production) replaces admirably heavy L series, which did not excel in any field. If I make a comparison, I find the most 24-85 'fast in Maf and even more' silent brother L in practice and 'really absent any noise. Its lightweight and compactness are two characteristics that now can not be found in any objective in circulation. I do not understand really why 'no manufacturer has a similar objective in the catalog. Missing stabilization but to use all-purpose, mainly diurnal, not if they miss. The overall sharpness and 'really good and once closed by at least one stop does not regret any goal. At full aperture and not 'a monster of sharpness especially at the edges, but nothing so horrible and unusable. Perhaps the 24-105 was higher at full aperture but once closed a little, fthe little bears and 'even a thread better. An obvious flaw are chromatic aberrations, always very present in the scenes with strong contrasts. Fortunately, using the program Canon DPP, miraculously disappear in a click, contributing greatly to give a 'picture more' clean. The brightness' and 'satisfactory as to almost 35mm and' still f3.5, then loses a bit 'in the side paintings where it comes to f4.5, but overall offers the same possibilities' control of the PDC of a constant f4 . In conclusion, for the price at which it is used, and 'a deal if you love the lightness and speed' focus before all else. Too bad they do not do more '.
Pros:good quality 'general optics, light and compact, very cheap (especially in' used).
Cons:poor construction, games between the lens and dials, front lens that rotates.
Opinion:I had read little positive opinions on the performance of 'optical after 200 mm, but the 6D, my copy does not denote declines evident and even 300 mm the quality' in the center and 'very good and closed at f9, the edges become fully usable. And 'light and compact. Obviously missing the hood but I recruited a few euro compatible and works well. Stabilizer and autofocus good, but maybe not at the level of the models more 'recent. The construction and 'economic activity in plastics and known games evident in rings and on the front lens. The latter unfortunately wheel and the use of the polarizer and 'a little' brigoso. Surely and 'a lens that would need modernizing. Nothing to say about render photographs, sharp images and good focus. For the price at which it is used, and 'a bargain.
Pros:light, crisp and clear open, fast autofocus, a few aberrations compared to '85 soft blur, great value
Cons:no one. we complain about missing hood ?? (Taken at 8 Euros not original)
Opinion:I changed the '85 with the 100 and use it on 6D. I noticed far fewer aberrations than the brother and increased sharpness at full aperture. I think it's really the ideal lens for portraits, the versatile American plan to close portrait. With a little 'space, including full length. Maybe 85 'more' versatile for portraits ambientati but if we go on the first floors, the 100 'to be preferred to that step back that allows you to not suffocate the subject. By activating the automatic correction of aberrations, the results are excellent, and the progress from '85 are obvious. For the price at which 'proposed, and the performance it provides in portraits (sharpen, blur, isolating the subject), I think it's a bargain.
Cons:zoom ring uncomfortable, heavy, distortion at 24mm, resistance to flare poor, some aberration too
Opinion:I use this lens on 6D, and it 'a true all-rounder. It 's the ideal lens for when you want to go out with one lens in trips, excursions and whenever you do not want or you can not' change lenses. Allows you to shoot from landscapes to portraits in the foreground, great picture quality 'and stabilizer in many cases and' really useful, more 'than a 2.8. By the opinions I had read, did not appear to be a very sharp lens but I have noted a 'good sharpness at all focal lengths, either open or closed to f4. In this important parameter me favorably stupito.rnLa building and 'good, massicccio, well-built and therefore also heavy for my taste, but d' other hand a f4 with the focal length and stabilized, you can not 'expect more . The zoom ring me instead negatively impressed, and 'too small and placed at the bottom with your fingers and you bump into the camera body, really badly designed. The distortion at 24mm was widely expected and I would say pretty normal for a lens with this excursion and almost all fixable in PP. The resistance to flarecould be better but I have found only in the shots with the lens pointing almost towards the sun and then in the limit cases enough but could be better, so 'as aberrations. But even in this case, are noticed in cases indeed the limit, such as branches of trees in strong contrast. In the end, a lens that I would recommend as a handyman quality 'but like any multi-objective has some weaknesses.
Pros:weight, size, decent quality ', stabilized, fast autofocus, and' a 12mm.
Cons:focal length, brightness ', it lacks manual focus adjustment, price a little' higher end.
Opinion:and 'the only option in the landscape m4 / 3 lens a really small with the side to 12 mm wide (24 mm ff). The dimensions are quite negligible and the quality 'of the overall' Optical pretty good, although I was expecting a little bit better, because the price a little 'alto.rnPortabilita' and speed 'are truly remarkable and I think they are his best qualities. As a handyman and 'a bit' limited zoom in and not 'even brighter. The stabilization and 'instead very effective. The only serious shortcoming and 'the ring for manual focus, absent. If on Panasonic bodies, I think we can intervene inside the car, on Olympus ones do not, and in any case, and 'a direct function of that on' objective is to be had. I thought I would do without it, but I sold it because of that. If you have no requirements fires manual (eg. Landscapes and night) and 'recommended, but if the manual focus and immediate' a priority ', switch to another lens (but that' not be 'so small and will not have' the 12mm ).
Pros:low price, light weight, grade 'very good optics.
Cons:zoom ring is not very smooth, non-stabilized, economic construction.
Opinion:the first 3 values ??expressed in the Pro are the reason why you should buy this context, unspoiled shots very sharp at f5.6 and the 150mm f8. Chance 'to make discrete portraits with aperture open, good resistance to flare, and' small, lightweight .... I do not know what to expect more 'from a lens from 100 € (used). If it were stable, it would be better on Olympus bodies, and if the ring was a bit 'more' smooth and free you would use in a more 'easy. I recommend it to those who appreciate above all the pros and needs no brightness 'to 2.8 or quality' high without compromise.
Pros:quality 'excellent optics, autofocus fast, light as tele 2.8 on aps-c' a 320mm f2.8.
Cons:on aps-c feels the lack of stabilizer, maybe 2.8 is not 'sharp as the last 70-200 2.8 is II.
Opinion:I purchased this light for indoor sports photos and I would say that 'the ideal goal, if you want lightness, brightness', fast autofocus and quality' optic without compromise. They say that 2.8 is not 'the top as the 70-200 2.8 is II, but in any case we are talking of a very high level and that will not disappoint anyone. Closed to 5.6 and 'almost embarrassing detail that returns throughout the frame. I think that used on the 500 euro, it can not be better to have.
Pros:Extremely Lightweight and compact, quiet and accurate autofocus, sharpness at longer focal lengths significantly improved from the old series, finally continuous manual focus instantly.
Cons:not including lens hood, speed 'record-breaking autofocus.
Opinion:I come from the old series and I must say that this new redesigned lens has made great strides. The thing that 'jump to' eye and 'sharpness that gained at all focal lengths, but especially to those extremes. A 200-250 mm 'and as impressive as' improved. If storcevo before the nose to the more 'small crop, now there is a fine detail incredible. And finally 'was equipped with instant manual focus on' auto-focus, which is useful for distant subjects and partially covered or overlapped. It remains a lens made of plastic and unpretentious materials, but the construction and 'still dignified and free of play and inaccuracies. Obviously missing the hood but this time the original costs a little more 'than 14 € ... It appreciates the' lightness and compactness of everything on the stand and is balanced perfectly to the body without the need for adapter rings. New costs 260 Euros, it's worth it? I say absolutely yes, especially in light of the extreme sharpness it has acquired.
Pros:very light, very sharp even at wide apertures, fast autofocus, really minimal distortion.
Cons:usually missing hood (took it apart and never used it ...), some aberration in the side of too strong contrasts, does not go on FF ...
Opinion:Bought used at a good price and 'optics that I use the most. From landscapes, to street, to portraiture, and 'a' optics which could not more 'help it. It 'amazing how not lead to distortions evident at 10mm, sometimes not even need to correct in post. Aps-c, and 'l' optical recommend with eyes closed. The lens hood that is not 'understand, I retrieved from other suppliers at reasonable prices is not original but honestly I've never used it. Never really felt the need. You can mount filters slim and I have never seen vignetting, ensuring pure fun in the landscapes.
Opinion:It 'a lens to have in each kit m4 / 3. The quality 'and' sorrpendente also to F1.7. And a blurry good 'excellent isolation of the subject. It 'a universal focal length that is used everywhere and for any subject. The focus manually without scale and without limit and 'uncomfortable and not very usable in low light. Perfect for Street.
Cons:Autofocus is not precise, sharpness at f1.4-1.6, severe softness at the sides and edges up to f4 - f5.
Opinion:I do not particularly love this lens, for the 'autofocus is not always accurate and the total lack of sharpness at the edges at wide apertures, and I speak not only under the f2 (which could also be understandable), but also closing at 2.8, the sides remain scarce. It 'a lens when used outdoors, the subject has to be centered, and then gives great blurry and good sharpness central, but to have a clear frame is laterally closed a lot. There 'to say that f5 and' really a knife and fears no comparison with anyone. Pero 'remains a lens lame in my opinion.
Cons:focus unreliable, especially with regard not optimal.
Opinion:I see this judgment, in view of a use of FF. My example and 'crisp and clear 1.4 accettabilissimi levels and optical efficiency and overall' truly remarkable. And 'a' good goal from bright really low cost and light weight and portability 'inimitable. In good light, the autofocus and 'reliable diaphragm also very open on the central but little on the side. Strangely are more 'reliable long lateral extremes that those around the center, mah ... Just cove light or the subject is not' perfectly illuminated and contrasted, taking up to F2 you lose reliability 'on the Maf, also on the panel. We must pay close attention and do more 'shots with various tests of focus or manual focus go to the aid of a slide mat. It could be better ? but surely to 250 Euros and used with this lightweight, no. I would change with the new 1.8 STM? absolutely not, shoot at f1.4 and 'another story.
Cons:a bit 'of chromatic aberration in stark contrasts.
Opinion:It 'a special lens, any surprises for the blurry photo, pastel colors, sharpness. A must have, considering the price. On Aps-c 'sa bit longish, but for close-ups portraits, concerts and sporting events and' a must. And comuqnue on every occasion where you want to get a blurred creamy and warm colors. Donate photos really magical, perhaps one of the best lenses at low price Canon, of which you can not 'do without.
Cons:shorter focal length macro for "Serious", autofocus slow.
Opinion:It 's an optical suited to those who often makes macro freehand, because of the extreme lightness and short throw. Enables faster shutter speeds longer 'lens of a 100 and a' good portability 'and lightness. E 'shown in the output in which a macro is not' the need 'absolute and you can' use as canvases for portrait and landscape views (on APSC). But if 'the macro and' understood as activities 'primary tripod and very small insects, then it's not' recommended, a better 90-100.
Pros:lightness, exceptional clarity in almost all focal lengths and apertures.
Cons:distortion at 17mm, very soft to 2.8 40 to 50 mm (improves already '3.2 - 3.5), lightning-fast autofocus.
Opinion:my copy and 'stra-sharp from 17 to 40 mm, and already' from 2.8. Falls from 40 to 50 mm at room temperature, but just a hair close and recovers fine, but 'optimal under 40mm. I took it for use in intermediate focal, a mo 'Normal and great satisfaction already' to 2.8. If you find a perfect specimen even at 50 mm 2.8, and 'a lens to have, but do not always take the right one and often varies from machine to machine. For its cost and 'recommended if you want a 2.8 with good-excellent performance opened, but always with the uncertainty of not finding a perfect copy.