|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Pkkleopard www.juzaphoto.com/p/Pkkleopard  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Nikon SB-910 AF Speedlight Pros: Power, Flash Regularity, Reliability Cons: Size, Price Opinion: A real workhorse, with him I am calm. Law perfectly every situation and never burns in TTL (which instead the 700 tends to do, sometimes). Lampi continuous excellent. Good battery consumption. Maybe a little 'heavy, tends to unbalance the machine when mounted without BG with a lightweight like the Nikon 50 1.4 or 85 1.8. For the rest great Flash. sent on December 04, 2015 |
 | Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness CT, Construction, Price, Value for Money Cons: Inconsistent AF (also calibrated), Slow AF, Weight, Hood, Weight Opinion: Another exemplary objective of Sigma but I do not think the stratospheric levels of 35 and 50. What I have noticed in my example, apart from the excellent sharpness but not miraculous at room temperature (that become very good to F / 2.8), is the Autofocus really inconsistent especially against the light: I lost several clicks because of the slowness and imprecision of the latter. I speak to a working level, clear that for an amateur photographer can go just fine, but when it requires the utmost precision and punctuality this objective does not reflect the expectations. For the rest a good lens also seen the price significantly lower than the 24 Nikon and Canon. sent on December 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 G ED Pros: Blurred, Three-dimensionality, Sharpness to TA, Colors, Vignette Artistic, Repeatability AF, Ergonomics, Yield Backlit Cons: Price, aberrations in TA, weight, construction Opinion: Along with the 58 F / 1.4G lens my favorite home Nikon photo magnificent and magical returns that are comparable only to the 58 1.4 although not so dreamy. Compared with 35 ART costs more than double, it is true, but brings with it a crazy character and color that the Sigma dreams. In contrast, the ART is clearer to TA, but the differences are canceled by F / 2. Spectacular landscapes and portraits ambientati, prepunched is really amazing. In short, a rare gem that I hardly detach. sent on November 29, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 58mm f/1.4 G Pros: Magic of Blurry, Three-dimensionality, precision AF (once calibrated), Weight, Color, Sharpness from F / 2.8 on the whole frame, Yield Backlit, Vignette Magic Cons: Construction, size, Sharpness to F / 1.4 (if you search, because this lens is not essential), Price, aberrations in TA Opinion: Along with the 35 F / 1.4G lens my favorite home Nikon: absolutely magical, photos you do with him will recognize at a glance, in my opinion comparable to those magical 50L but 8mm longer be seen in the portrait and lead to a break even steeper and a three dimensional accentuatissima. I admit that I was rather dubious reading the reviews but decided to try it and it was never more apt choice: it is true, the sharpness is not top especially in TA, but for the first time when I look at the photos taken because I seek not really have something and beyond that I have not encountered in any other standard lens. Let me explain: the kind of blurred behind and in front of the subject is more comparable to a 100mm telephoto portrait on a normal medium telephoto but the field of view is much wider opening unexpected compositional possibilities. But these beauties come out using it for real and not measuring it on Imatest studio on a white sheet and black. The price charged by Nikon may be giustor if you know the type of lens that is, the only problem is that until you use it thoroughly and then you miss it at first seems disproportionate. However just as well, I prefer to know that there are few people who appreciate it for potermelo enjoy more! Joking aside, it really becomes sharp from F / 2.8 with beautiful colors that are perfect for landscaping; It is not his field, but do not hesitate to use it because he actually something more there too. Perhaps the only disappointment is that actually using it to TA in low light for landscapes is not the best as opposed to what Nikon says, because actually the sharpness especially at the extreme edges is not passable. Enough anyway to follow the rules and use photographic tripod and long lead times, but often we forget ... rnP.S. Single lens 35 where in the portraits I do not apply the correction target because they have a very nice vignetting that helps make every event unique carattere.rnInone of my best buys. sent on November 29, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 20mm f/1.8 G ED Pros: Sharpness of F / 2.8, contrast, rendering lights, yield Lit, Brightness, Weight, Value for Money Cons: Construction, materials, Chromatic Aberrations also to F / 8, price itself Opinion: A beautiful lens that opens new artistic horizons given the opening high. Tried with 14-24 and 21 Zeiss comes out to be on par, only problem even at F / 8 you notice aberration in the corners unlike the 14-24. In any case, in my opinion I am not a replacement, this is much lighter, open to F / 1.8 and accepts 77mm filters. They can easily coexist in a kit. Spectacular as it makes the lights and how it acts against the light, especially with the sun in the frame. Color good but not exceptional, it is a lens to have fun and thank Nikon product! The price is high in itself but just, really offers a lot and for the moment does not have a direct competitor (the Sigma 20 1.4 weighs three times as much and does not accept standard filters, then in my opinion are not comparable). Nikon Brava !!! sent on November 29, 2015 |
 | Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 Pros: Maximum levels for construction, Compactness, Sharpness Extreme from f / 2.8 to f Good / 2, Defocused from Scream, ring Focus Phenomenal As per tradition Zeiss, Zeiss Colors, 3D Zeiss, Zeiss contrast, ring diaphragms Cons: Sharpness at f / 1.4, the Generate Dependency, Lack rubber ring on the attack Bayonet, Price, Very Hard to Fire Center the TA without a slide Broken MF Opinion: It 'a pleasure to use as all Zeiss, damn nice and "cool" to the touch; It creates images that are different than all the other 85 that I have owned and used (85 Nikon 1.4D, 1.4G, 1.8G, Samyang 85 1.4) especially with regard to the overall performance. Different does not mean better, it is the 1.4G is much sharper in TA, the blurred dell'1.4D maybe it creamier, the overall yield dell'1.8G is perhaps more balanced, but those 85 that I like to more: incorporates all the features of Zeiss glass that now I fell in love madly ... As mentioned in TA is a bit 'soft, af / 2 becomes good, by f / 2.8 is perfect. I think it is one of the objectives more aesthetically beautiful. As usual the price of the new is a bit 'high but if you can find a sample used in good condition becomes an investment like any other Zeiss. In conclusion a great 85 as usual, being one Zeiss,addictive ... sent on August 12, 2015 |
 | Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 Distagon T* 21mm f/2.8 Pros: Maximum levels for construction, Compactness, Sharpness Extreme from f / 2.8, Defocused from Scream, ring Focus Phenomenal As per tradition Zeiss, Zeiss Colors, 3D Zeiss, Zeiss contrast, ring diaphragms Cons: Generates dependence, lack of rubber ring on the attack Bayonet, Price Opinion: What struck me most of this is undoubtedly the wide blurred that is easily comparable to that of 70-200 2.8: crazy how the transition from heat to both sweet and out of focus as it is dreamy blurred, clearly to be a wide-angle! And what about the sharpness to 2.8 ??? Embarrassing ... With a quick comparison with the 14-24 I have seen that is significantly sharper, and the yardstick is not a fund of bottle ... Mainly however I use it at least f / 5.6 in iperfocale, so it can not do nothing but improve and is great news for me. Is making me really think of selling the zoom, and especially for the overall yield of the image with the classic Zeiss traits: color, contrast, 3D, in short, as usual! Again I put in against the price, but also here is all about finding a good used and at that point it becomes an investment because I highly doubt that these objectives MF without frills, the build quality and mechanical unsurpassed, could losevalue over time. And again recommend to pay attention because a dependency atrocious ... sent on August 12, 2015 |
 | Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 Makro-Planar T* 100mm f/2 Pros: Maximum levels for construction, Compactness, Sharpness Extreme from f / 2.8 Excellent f / 2, Defocused from Scream, ring Focus Phenomenal As per tradition Zeiss, Zeiss Colors, 3D Zeiss, Zeiss contrast, ring diaphragms Cons: Generates dependence, Difficult Center the Fire Without a slide Broken, Lack rubber ring on the attack Bayonet, Price Opinion: In my opinion one of the best lenses in circulation together with Otus, the APO 135 and 200 f / 2 Nikkor. This, however, has an edge as it allows a reproduction ratio of 1: 2 and is very versatile, of FF you can do everything from landscape to macro push (perhaps with the addition of some extension tube). Sharpest already in TA just close one stop to reach perfection. But for those not accustomed to surrender Zeiss sharpness is definitely not the most important factor: the colors, contrast, shadows and open the feeling of diversity of images than any other lens are top category of its own. Seeing is believing. Price of the new rather high (about 1600 Gar. Italy) with devaluation of used quite marked: if you find it used in very good condition is an investment, I doubt that will lose value and never drop below 1000 ... Use with caution, generates great dependence and get used to the eye images almostperfect, unmatched by any other purpose except for other Zeiss. sent on August 12, 2015 |
 | Nikon D810 Pros: Sensor, Dynamic Range, ISO 64, AF, Buffer, Live View Great, Great Screen, Shutter Extremely quiet and vibration-free construction, Viewfinder, gusts to 7 FPS in DX with 8 AA or En-EL18, Ergonomics, First Curtain in Electronics M-Up, Noise up to ISO 3200, Complete Absence Filter AA Fund Video excellent, Yield Jpeg, Drive Pro Cons: 5 FPS FX, Monitor does not swivel, especially in the video Moire Opinion: 3B the 3D-tracking is precise and fast. Using it in DX has a great burst of 7 FPS that they're fine for any type of sport, and they still have 15 MP, almost like the D4S. The absence of the AA filter can be seen using the best optical (I use Zeiss) and comparing the images with a sensor provided with it (here I quote the D750 as the use together): Photos are sharper. In hand falls really well and is very comfortable and very tiring, much better than any other body which I used and second only to the D750 on which they made a small miracle ergonomic ... Clean up to 3200 ISO, I would not go well though up to 6400 in conditions of decent light it is fully usable at the expense of a reduced recovery of the shadows. The yield of the JPEG file is significantly improved by the new generation (D750, D810, D4S), the difference is most evident in the algorithms for noise suppression at high ISO. Unfortunately, sin for the lack of overhead monitor that is really the &# 39; egg of Columbus, on the D750 I appreciate it very much after denigrated before trying it ... Try it because it's really comfortable. The flurry of 5 FPS is not poor nor good, and that's why I put in against though it is the same as the D700 and nobody has ever complained ... We must also be careful to moire especially in video, I make very few but in those the few that I did I noticed so I guess for those who use it exclusively for that to be a problem. In conclusion: this car is fantastic, phenomenal, combined with the best lens gives the maximum and it is a pleasure to use, which ultimately is what matters. If I were to recommend buying this between the D750 and the D750 probably I recommend simply because it costs less, has a pivoting monitor and is smaller and manageable, so it's best for leisure. The D810 to work better mainly because of the arrangement of the controls Pro. If you have doubts, I refer you to meto review the D750.rnPer end I want to give a vote in this D810, and can not be more than 10! It 'really amazing ... sent on August 11, 2015 |
 | Nikon D800E Pros: Sensor, Dynamic Range, Viewfinder, Construction, Buffer Cons: AF dancer, vibration shutter and camera shake, Ergonomics, Noise Shutter, Noise over 800 ISO, Screen Tending to Green, Slow General, occasional blocks, Live View cumbersome, Burst 4 FPS Opinion: No doubt a monster of sharpness, with recoveries crazy of raw files; but there are different but: first of all the problem of camera shake and there you see, which I think is due to the 36 MP but rather to the fact that the shutter is born evil and transmits the incredible vibrations to the whole body car; second is true that it has a dynamic range of crazy, but only up to 800 ISO, over suffering and a lot of respect for example the sensor D610 or D750 and that of the DF; the same goes for noise especially color, which over ISO 1600 is really annoying. The AF also according to me is one of the worst as regards precision and repeatability in the house NIkon: essentially engages better than that of D610 and Df in low light conditions but is not precise, even with the fine adjustment of ' AF. If we want to put even that sometimes it hangs out of nowhere and you have to remove and replace the battery certainly can not be said to be in the presence of a great project, indeed. This is amachine that can be good for landscapers (strictly ONLY on the stand in M-UP) and for photography in studio (always on stand ...). I have sold dejected by too many defects that led below, for which I was most photographed in peace, and it's really a shame because the sensor is truly spectacular. Then, fortunately, NIkon presented the D810 which in essence is nothing more than a D800E without all the problems described above, the fastest in the general operations, with a burst and an improved feeling really good as far as ergonomics definitely improved; In short, what it should have been the D800E but that was not ... The way I see it the D800E is a camera incomplete that does not deserve to be bought now that there is a device on the market more than perfect. sent on August 11, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF 35-70mm f/2.8 Pros: Construction, Sharpness, Defocussed, Fire, Price Cons: Opacification, Yield Lit, zoom to pump, you can not use a circular polarizing, Absence chip D, limited zoom range Opinion: A great standard zoom with excellent color rendering and a good sharpness and blur at a price competitive is an understatement to say that: a sample-free matting and in excellent condition you can find 300 Euros and worth them all. Clearly being dated perspective has several limitations, the worst of which is definitely the PESSIMA yield backlight, which loses almost completely contrary; also the lack of the chip D should be reported, as in the use with the flash exposure wrong 7 times out of 10, or in any case not constant. Built to the highest standards of the past externally, the same can not be said of the famous problem of the eye doublet that, in the long run, in fact prevents its use and must be changed to an outlay of 150 euro. In general, a lens that is worth trying but it absolutely does not replace the 28-70 nor even the 24-70 who are of a different category. sent on August 11, 2015 |
 | Nikon Df Pros: Sensor, High ISO, Aesthetics, Battery life Cons: Ergonomics, especially construction of some plasticky buttons (see BKT), Slowness of use, price, no video, AF, exposure Opinion: The first time I had it in my hands and I looked for good I thought, "Oh my what a nice !!!" and it is true, the Df is really nice. But being a camera can not only be beautiful, you must also take good pictures especially given the price of high-end ... And here we are discussing, the sensor is one of the D4 and files that are churning out the top. It looks fine, nothing wrong ... but no, because in low light AF starts ciccare the focused, also because of the fact that it has the AF-assist illuminator. And steps, because it is so beautiful ... But then you start to meet you, and would like to do more, use it more quickly without going through the rings especially regarding the ISO, but you realize that it is not possible ... But then look at it and it is so beautiful ... So let us start the first work, it is so light that you almost forget it if combined with a beautiful first light; for & ogravis; at the end of the day your right hand begs for mercy given the bad grip that forces her into an awkward position. But then you look at it, and it is so beautiful ... And yet all is forgiven. In short, it is a machine that requires certain sacrifices and can not be compared to any other FF currently available. Not going to work very well in my opinion, that's great to go around. But in the end who cares cons ... It's so beautiful ... sent on July 11, 2015 |
 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness in TA, TA Contrast, Construction, Hood, PRICE, AF accuracy once calibrated, Ergonomics Cons: Size, weight, AF to be calibrated, Backlit Yield to TA, Defocused Opinion: There is little to do, Sigma found the egg of Columbus with landlines Art! This is a lens from lineage, without compromise and that costs very little for what you get (I bought on Amazon to 670 ...). The razor sharp 1.4 diaframmo just to get a wider depth of field; built to the highest standards and with the polycarbonate of Nikkor (and not just those of the poor, unfortunately even the pros ...), has ergonomics masterful, never tires even using it all day. AF really consistent but to be calibrated, my focus was on the Front-22 (tested with Reikan FOCAL): nothing incurable with Dock Sigma. Many complain of differences from specimen to specimen, but for me this is the second after the Article 35 (and soon will come the 24) and both seemed to me more than perfect, so for me there is no problem. If I have to find a mole, which in the end is more a personal taste, the colors do not satisfy me as the 50 Zeiss, where amor more especially saturated backlighting. But this is an opinion personale.rnPer the rest I can only bow to such great lens and Sigma, and I do hope that as soon as a zoom 85-135 F / 2 Art I would definitely become a fan-boy Sigma ... And maybe a 12-24 F / 2.8 OS Art;) rnrnAggiornamento after 40 days of heavy usage: it is a bomb !!! I say no more ... sent on July 11, 2015 |
 | Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 Planar T* 50mm f/1.4 Pros: Construction, Sharpness in the center of f / 2, Blurry font, color rendering, rendering shadows typical Zeiss, MF perfect ring, Hood Cons: Sharpness and aberrations in TA Opinion: I use it every day for work and unlike what you might think though MF us just the eye and you can also photograph the children as they play. Recommended still a magnifier or a slide focusing broken. As far as the construction is flawless, the yield is typical Zeiss with shadows very open, bright colors and excellent contrast; the blur is typical, neither too soft nor too hard, it's perfect if you like; besides all this add that makes the three-dimensionality of the subject in a completely unique! A TA suffers a bit 'of aberrations and is not a miracle of clarity (at least better than the Nikkor 50 f / 1.4G), but close enough to a diaphragm and out of all the magic. Like all Zeiss becomes a drug, the Board carefully nell'acquistarli ... The rest may soon become unsatisfactory, pace of the portfolios ... sent on June 22, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF Zoom-Micro 70-180mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Pros: Sharpness, Construction, Zoom Cons: Brightness, Attack Tripod, Price, Hood, slow AF, RR 1: 1.3 Opinion: A lens without a doubt well-made, built to last. Optically very good, the ability to zoom makes it much easier shots. Although the zoom is still very specialized given the low light, I think it can not replace the 70-200 f4. In this regard, with the extension tubes or a CT (or all and 2) sull'f4 you reach a RR very similar while keeping the quality, you have the VR, a clearly better AF, it has a lens with a new design and costs as well less. In my opinion this Micro Nikkor has no reason to be purchased, except for collectors. sent on June 08, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8 D Pros: Price, Value for Money, Dimensions and Weight Cons: AF, Construction, Yield Lit, Sharpness Opinion: Slightly less performance of the new G but at half the price, and we are talking about a really low price: it may be the first choice of the neophyte. Optically not exciting, go to f4 diaphragmed least to get decent edge; the yield backlit leaves to be desired, losing much contrast. Not suitable for entry level SLR not equipped with AF motor, on which loses the AF. Rather plasticky but still more than adequate for the price range in which you place. Very convenient to carry because of its lightness, not taking up space in your bag. If you need a bright lens at a low price this is definitely the first choice. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 G ED Pros: Sharpness from f4, focal range, yield Lit, AF, Ergonomics Cons: Sharpness at 24mm, f2.8 and Sharpness to the edges in general, construction, Price Opinion: A lens that I loved and that I preferred his grandfather, the 28-70 2.8. Has a great autofocus and treatment to nanocrystals does his job in the backlight where there is a clear difference from the past; the yield in the center by f4 is great, while also having the edges to a level of acceptable sharpness for this class of objectives have to diaphragm up to f8 (and is to be taken into account in landscaping). It 'very convenient to use, it holds well, but as usual, the quality is a step below than before, and it's strange because the 14-24 who came out with him is built much better. In addition to the extreme edges of 24mm are very degraded and barrel distortion really accentuated. Do not forget that it is a project of 8 years old and that the equivalent Canon LII solves a lot better throughout the frame. It needs an upgrade and still costs too much for what it offers. Rumors suggest that may come out within a year version PF VR: I look forward to! sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 105mm f/2.8 G ED VR Micro Pros: Sharpness, VR, AF, Construction Cons: Size and Weight, Price, Focus Breathing the minimum distance of focus Opinion: And a crystal-clear lens with VR phenomenal and a good autofocus; pity about the focus breathing at the minimum distance of focus that cuts the focal length and actually prevents the focus stacking, but a defect of all the IF. With the competition that's out there and the quality we offer others (see Tamron VC 90), however, the price seems a bit 'high and unjustified. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 300mm f/2.8 G ED VR II Pros: Sharpness, color rendering, Yield Lit, behavior with CT, contrast and micro-contrast, Defocused Cons: Price, Weight, VR Opinion: My review refers to the first version VR: a beautiful lens comparable to the 200 f2, with an impressive clarity at every aperture and at any distance, in my opinion it is at its best between 7:15 m. Perfect with any TC, with any type of light, contrast and microcontrast top. Weight and price are not a problem for those who decide to buy it because he knows what they are getting (and indeed for this version VRI are excellent used at good prices). The only drawback (of VRI) the same VR, not up to the new. More than reading reviews you must look at the pictures made with it: a picture is worth a 1000 words ... sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G ED VR Pros: Sharpness, Blurry, price of used, AF, NO Focus Breathing Cons: Vignette, VR, Weight, Yield Backlit Opinion: I prefer to VRII mainly because it cuts the focal length of the minimum distance of focus that I think is very important; vignetting that has marked there and it shows to f2.8, but not as serious as many indicate, even in the portrait is not at all (maybe by the sample depends, my will to stop 1.5 extreme edges and it is not so different from a raw portrait for example). And 'crystal clear since 2.8 and diaphragmed reach excellent levels, the AF is lightning as the new but defends himself more than admirably, and not a small thing are excellent for use on the 1000 euro or less. The VR instead is not at the level of the new, in fact, is the same as the VR 300 2.8 that was not much: below this point of view wins the VRII. I have not tried with the TC so I can not pass judgment, but I think that digest at least 1.4x. Clearly we are always talking about a lens big and heavy, but asUsually who buys it knows what they are getting. Between this and the f4 VR I would feel to advise the latter especially for the stabilization and yield much better against the much sharper. It remains one of my favorite lenses but you have to accept the flaws in order to appreciate the advantages. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 200mm f/2 G ED VR II Pros: Sharpness, VR, Yield Lit, contrast and micro-contrast, construction, AF, Defocused Cons: Weight, Price Opinion: The lens of the record, if you do not try you do not believe: jaw-dropping regardless of diaphragm which used! You can not find fault even if you want, unless of course the price and weight, but those who buy quet'obiettivo knows what they are getting so has no flaws. Built on top, lightning and precise AF, nanocrystals that do the best in their work against the light, micro-contrast high. I have not tried with the TC but they say that they can withstand quite well. Another thing for the fuzzy spectacular, scream, there are no words to describe it. The only way to get a review of this lens is to look at the pictures taken with it and in taking new turn. The words say very little ... sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.8 G Special Edition Pros: Price, Size and Weight, Sharpness after f4, Yield Backlit Cons: Sharpness between f1.8 and f2.8, yield mixed, blurred hard Opinion: A good fifty to begin with, is cheap. I think offers the right, is absolutely not a stellar lens. I've had two and have never failed to delight me know about them: I find I've made a pretty mixed and I would not know how to explain this statement; in every picture taken with this objective there is always a but, never fully satisfying. It has many pros, first of all yield excellent backlight and sharpness after f4 great, but I would advise against it, as well as his older brother f1.4, especially for the yield of the blur, really hard and, in my opinion, bad from behold. Than normal this SE adds an aesthetic retro style and is altogether more beautiful, but taste, it does not change. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.8 G Pros: Sharpness, Price, Value for Money, Colour Rendering, Dimensions and Weight Cons: Building Opinion: A good compromise has pure clarity but fuzzy not extraordinary, the right coast and offers the right. As usual we are facing the usual plasticaccia Nikon, but at least it does not cost 2000 euro ... And 'tropical conditions and weighs little, a great travel partner. Ultimately certainly recommended, except that with a couple of hundred bucks more we bring home the wonder of 85, the 1.4D. Between the two there is no race if not in terms of sharpness at the edges: here always depends on how you will use the 85; to use more generic recommend this 1.8G, for portraiture extreme the 1.4D. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 24mm f/1.4 G ED Pros: Sharpness, Three-dimensionality, Brightness, Defocussed, Backlit Yield Cons: Price, Construction Opinion: One of the funniest in optical trade, opens the door to lots of interpretation of reality. I especially enjoyed his three-dimensionality in making the subject into focus with respect to the out of focus and its extreme sharpness especially from f2.8 on throughout the frame; spectacular night shots and astrophotography. After trying the 24 ART also I can tell you that these are of a Nikkor inarrivato any Sigma ART though they cost 3 times as much and are less sharp at RT. Shall be tested and understood, certainly at first glance they may seem out of the market but have an extra something that can be appreciated only on the field and not on Imatest. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Samyang 85mm f/1.4 Aspherical IF Pros: Blurred, Price Cons: Construction (especially the lens hood and cap), Sharpness not excellent, MF ring not very accurate, Sharpness to infinity bad Opinion: If you search for a 85mm 1.4 cheap this is the answer. Unfortunately it is not crystal clear either prepunched, infinity is not for nothing, the ring of focus is soft but not very accurate; has a great blurred but not comparable to the Nikon 85 1.4D. Sincerely few hundred bucks more we take home the aforementioned wonder Nikon albeit used, and 50 euro more you buy the outstanding 85 1.8G import. Both equipped with AF which is not little for this focal length. I had this Samy a bit 'of years ago and we've also made some beautiful pictures, but honestly the game not worth the candle. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Manfrotto 410 Pros: Accuracy, Stability, Release System Cons: Weight, Size, Dimensions Plate Attack, Limited Turn to High Opinion: Excellent head, well built. He plays the best of his work, very good for macro and landscapes. A bit 'slow in the operations and the release of fine-tuning is a bit' raw besides itself inaccurate. Shame about the limited run of vertical adjustment (30 degrees) that make it not in fact suitable for night photography and astrophotography. Very bulky and heavy but definitely will hold the thousands of Euros that you will support us over, as long as it has itself sustained a good tripod. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon D750 Pros: Ergonomics, ISO speed, Swivel Screen, Possibility of customization buttons, screen definition, LV, Size and Weight, Construction Cons: Max 1 / 4000s, only about a Screen Adjustable Axis screen lights up when changing ISO, Top shade smaller and with less information, Noise Shutter Opinion: The perfect car, excellent dynamic range in low ISO and very good signal / noise ratio at high ISO, comparable to the D4 no need to resize. I got used to the stress and D700, D800E, Df, D610, but this is something else, it is not remotely relative of the D610 and hence of which (in theory) share the sensor. Has perfect ergonomics, do not get tired of holding it and also with heavy optics is well balanced; He feels it is built very well, I tested at -25 degrees and did not bat an eyelid. The mirror does not produce vibrations whatsoever, only the D810, between the FF has a snap softer; the new management of the LV is spectacular and the orientation features is the egg of Columbus: finally to landscapers and macro shooters did the back pain! The only drawback, if you really want to find a nit, is that the screen rotates on only one axis, in case of vertical picture on the easel was back to square one, but perhaps come into play the physical limits to maintain a costruzion high level. As usual Nikon buttons are fully customizable, so I find myself having the REC videos as ISO management and can handle all the parameters with the right hand only. Unfortunately every time you change the ISO comes on the rear screen and you can not turn off. This stems from the fact that they have narrowed the top screen now displays less information: they had to do to make the grip more comfortable then that is fine, you can not have definitive tutto.rnIn undoubtedly the best SLR FF commercially. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8 D ED Pros: Sharpness, Construction, AF, Price dell'usato Cons: Size and Weight, Yield Lit, Ergonomics Opinion: It 's my favorite zoom normal, I've had two: the first I replaced it with the 24-70, the second 24-70 and replaced it became my lens of choice. Compared to 24-70 I will especially appreciate the contrast less marked and more open shadows, besides rendering pastellosa common to all D and which I personally prefer. The only things that I preferred the 24-70 are the 24mm (albeit of poor quality), the yield backlight and ergonomics significantly better. Returning to 28-70 has a superior sharpness at the best fixed (I did several tests with Zeiss 35mm 1.4 and Sigma and Nikon 50mm 1.8 and 1.4) and an autofocus ultra performance; also it has built exceptionally as usual Nikon (and not as the new Pro series G). Finally the price of second is very tempting, it takes home a lens that will give great satisfaction. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF 85mm f/1.4 D Pros: Blurred, construction, Size Cons: Sharpen the edges, AF Opinion: There is a reason his nom de guerre is The Creamy Machine: has a blurry one that leaves open mouth and makes you dream; Unfortunately, the physical forces of the diaphragm to get PDC sought, you can always use to f1.4, and is a heresy! E 'built in the best Old Style, to last a lifetime, and it is quite compact for a 1.4. The sharpness at the edges leaves something 'to be desired, say that in its scope goes well, leaving it shows obvious limits (the 1.4G has absolutely); AF works well in good light conditions, not just entering ombra.rnE 'a lens that must be loved, you have to accept the flaws to be able to fully enjoy its magical qualities, but if you succeed you will have found the perfect portrait .. . sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.4 G Pros: Sharpness in TA, Sharpness General, Colour Rendering, Defocused, AF, Yield Backlit Cons: Construction, Price Opinion: Here we are on another planet, the planet sharpness: the first time that you cut (and tare properly AF) is really scary, to f4 is sharp as the 200 f2 (f2 in though, the 200 still has, It's a lot...). A f1.4é outrageous, with a full contrast and backlight also still alive. The blur is of exceptional levels although personally I prefer the extremely soft as its predecessor. The AF does its dirty work even in dim light and is never in trouble unlike the previous 1.4D. But not everything that glitters is gold: for what the coast has a very poor construction; of course, what matters is the picture, but when you pay out so much money even the sight and touch takes its part: it's like buying a car with the same performance of a Ferrari but built polycarbonate ... The name is high-sounding but always plastic're talking ... rnVale upgrade dall'1.4D? It depends on the field of use, if you take more than 1.4 and try the best fuzzy no, if the diaphragm and is also used for portraits ambientati yes. Worth buying? Used definitely yes, new opportunities are often found on the Nikon 1300 (NOC ...). The official price Nikon in my opinion is out of the market unless you have a VAT number and download the cost. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Pros: Sharpness, Construction, Price, Value for Money Cons: F / B Focus, Focus Shifting Weight, Lack Weather Sealing Opinion: In my opinion one of the sharpest lenses at f1.4, second only to the Nikkor 85 1.4G. Has a value monstrous, is constructed flawlessly (except for the lack of the rubber ring that does not put the water and dirt between the lens and the camera), from f2 has a sharpness breathtaking. ..a show! The only problem, I do not know if only on a production lot or all, my had a little ', is suffering from plenty of shifting focus, and if you want to have the perfection we must lose the days to settle it by the sigma dock. Not impossible to correct then, but definitely annoying. It is also not a featherweight, you have to be aware of having a 35mm that weighs almost as 24-70 ... If you accept these limitations is surely one of the best on the market first. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Samyang 35mm f/1.4 AS UMC Pros: Sharpness, Blurry, Price Cons: Construction, MF ring not very accurate, F / B Focus Opinion: An excellent goal, has nothing to envy to the most noble optically Sigma, Nikon and Zeiss. F2 by a knife, a very sharp 1.4 with a blurred exciting ... As long as you manage to focus! Unfortunately the general construction and especially the ring of focus leaves something 'to be desired, has a little' game and feels, it's certainly not as fluid as the Zeiss. Also my original (and many others apparently) suffered heavily front focus, even with the correction to +20 resulted not perfect, if I wanted to center the fire had to necessarily use the LV. We say that with the money that has now reached the Sigma 35 Art not recommend buying this Samyang in favor of Sigma, certainly better in every respect besides autofocus. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8 D ED Pros: Construction, Excellent Sharpness from f4, Filters 77mm, Colour Rendering, Focal Range Cons: Sharpness at f2.8 and at the edges up to f5.6, Weakness AF Opinion: I replaced it with the 14-24 which is objectively superior especially in 2.8 where the 17-35 leaves something 'to be desired, but in some ways I miss: has a contrast much softer and more open shadows, reminiscent 'surrender of Zeiss Distagon T. The rest is built like a rock, mounts 77mm filters instead of plates abnormal, is more compact than the 14-24, reaches 35mm and does it with style. In short, apart from the absence of all AF-S before the series that had the AF which tended to merge after a few years, a lens that I really liked and I prefer to 16-35 today. And who will buy maybe, who knows ... sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 50mm f/1.8 G Pros: Price, Size and Weight, Sharpness after f4, Yield Backlit Cons: Sharpness between f1.8 and f2.8, yield mixed, blurred hard Opinion: A good fifty to begin with, is cheap. I think offers the right, is absolutely not a stellar lens. I've had two and have never failed to delight me know about them: I find I've made a pretty mixed and I would not know how to explain this statement; in every picture taken with this objective there is always a but, never fully satisfying. It has many pros, first of all yield excellent backlight and sharpness after f4 great, but I would advise against it, as well as his older brother f1.4, especially for the yield of the blur, really hard and, in my opinion, bad from behold. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4 G ED VR Pros: Sharpness, stabilization, Weight & Size, Minimum Focusing Distance Cons: Building Opinion: A lens with the uppercase O, in my opinion gives the tracks to 2.8 VRII: the sharpness is the same, the color rendering is the same, the blur is the same (with the advantage that it does not cut the focal length of the minimum focusing distance focus and focheggia much closer). With the addition of a TC20EIII becomes a macro lens with a quality more than passable. Weighs little, it takes up little space, has a stabilizer fantastic. In my opinion the best in the house Zoom Nikon after 14-24. The only flaw is that it is built to the highest levels, where the 2.8 is better, but we're talking about small differences, is no longer a plasticky 24 1.4G or 1.4G 85 so let's say that it's okay for today's standards brand ... rnih conclusion, in my opinion, a must have. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF 135mm f/2 D DC Pros: Blurred, Defocus Control and artistic possibilities, Colour Rendering, Construction Cons: Purple Fringing, AF, Sharpness to F2, loss of contrast backlight Opinion: One of the best portrait lenses Nikon at home, a masterpiece of yesteryear. From this I want to go: to the shield that carries deserve an upgrade, if only to give it the nanocrystals and improve the behavior backlight. In addition to f2 it is not razor sharp and suffers heavily from purple fringing: do not tell me to shut 1 or 2 stop, if you buy a fast lens is to use it to TA. I finished the complaints, now the magic: the photos are unique creating this masterpiece, the DC should be used and tested because it is a pleasant diversion from the monotony of the other objectives, always equal in their yield of blurry. Moreover, not a small thing, it is built to last, with quality materials, besides being a very beautiful object. In short, a lens to use: you do not like it very difficult, difficult not to fall in love. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC Aspherical Pros: Price, Value for Money, Sharpness, weight, dimensions Cons: Distortion, Construction, Installation impossibility Filters Opinion: A superb lens to a ridiculously low price: you could not ask for more. It 'was my first ultra wide-angle and literally made me fall in love like that. Very sharp, working quietly with the MF in iperfocale, has made a very uneven and similar to Nikon 14-24. Unfortunately has a bias really disturbing and difficult to correct the most, besides not being built perfectly. Besides landscapers thirsty water "silky" must take into account the cost of another Samy 14 for the purchase of dedicated filter holder and the plate big stopper. A great lens in any case, very portable and quality as Samyang has accustomed us, no frills, but with a lot of substance. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 G ED Pros: Extreme sharpness, Construction Cons: Hood plascicoso, Weight Opinion: And here I am to review my favorite lens. We begin by defects weighs 1 kg and you can hear everything, especially on the road. And if we get a system of filters or Lee Lucroit the balance comes to 1.3 kg, not far from a 70-200 2.8. Also not cheap. And the hood is soft as butter, just a really microscopic blow for incrinarlo or romperne a piece. For the rest, however, is built really well, the rings are smooth and precise, the big front window is a joy to behold. Because here there is so much quality and feels just take it in your hand; after that start to give us some pictures, and started really asentirti embarrassed: 2.8 is sharp as the Samyang 14 to 5.6, and the Samy is really neat ... Located 5.6 close to perfection on D810 and I think will hold up very well the next generation sensor 50 + MP. Unfortunately I have not got to try the 15 Zeiss, but apart from the usual yield Zeiss do not think it can be better, or even if it does not think you would see the difference. In this case the price does not seem so high for what it offers. To close, I can only recommend their purchase specially used: a lens is of excellent quality and opens significant horizons, you just have to accept compromises in performance. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Zeiss ZE/ZF.2 Distagon T* 35mm f/1.4 Pros: Construction, Defocused, Magic brings Cons: Weight, dimensions, Vignette to TA Opinion: It 's my first lens Zeiss after long possessed and tried every Nikon lens catalog, besides my fourth 35mm f / 1.4 G after Nikon, Sigma and Samyang Art. I will not repeat the happiness at finding herself in his hands a lens finally built to last, which does not give the impression of having to break at any moment, that is worth all the money it costs every cent, which once mounted on the machine not staccheresti more. But its merits obviously come out when you start to photograph them: though less etched TA of the other three mentioned above by f2 on I did not find differences in sharpness even with the much praised Sigma Art that should be the best of the 4. There a huge difference as regards the overall performance of the scene, with shadows much more open and slightly higher contrast to other (always talking about RAW file). Returning to the chapter TA that is ultimately the reason why you buy a lens like this I find it magical albeit not incisissimo and veryvignetting is perhaps the first time that I do not put the tick to the correction lens and almost not touch sliders on LR. The weight and size can be a counter, but given the level constructive accettabili.rnPurtroppo are addictive and once tried Zeiss everything else is true plasticaccia: be careful ... sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro VC USD Pros: Sharpness, Price, Price-quality ratio, weight, dimensions Contained, Fluidity ring Focus Cons: Large Focus Breathing while in 1: 1, AF did not live in conditions of imperfect light, Construction, VC is not perfect Opinion: I bought to replace the Nikon 105G that was too big and heavy to carry around as a specialist lens Tamron and I must say this is not all bad: definitely worth the money it costs, especially when purchased used. Sharp as the 105, costs half, weighs less, is smaller and it is a joy to use. Unfortunately I understand it very difficult if not impossible to make the focus stacking due to marcatissimo focus breathing that near 1: 1 so it changes the focal length of a few mm while varying the focus; I know it is a common failing of IF but I think here is very marked. Also when you exit from the sunlight filled the AF starts to go back and forth despite the limiters, and the VC is certainly not to the levels of NIkon VR: I have detected more than 1.5 stops compensation and have a steady hand . For the rest, apart from a building a bit 'creaky which happens to be one step below the already plasticky Nikon Professional, it is a must have soprattutto for value for money. A final praise goes to the fluidity of the ring focus, basically the use now always in MF because it's really a pleasure to focus manually. sent on June 02, 2015 |
 | Nikon D700 Pros: Ergonomics, lightweight files (compared to D610, and D800), robustness, CF, pop-up flash master (compared to D3 and D4), fast AF, 8 fps with BG + EN-EL4 Cons: mono-CF slot, viewfinder 95%, shortness video Opinion: A great machine, construction unmatched by D800, endured 50 degrees of Death Valley in August and -20 of Cervinia in January (on the slopes mean ...) without batting an eyelid. As construction is precisely comparable to D3 and D4 to more than D610 and D800. Churns out squeaky clean files up to 1600 ISO, and most are light seen 12 MP, which in the end they're fine for 60x40 print quality. BG with a little 'big and heavy and less ergonomic than D3, but just let us hand; is the price to pay for having a gust to 8 fps more than excellent. For me the only limit is that the viewfinder to 95% on a pro out of place, everything else is stellar. sent on May 20, 2014 |
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
