|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
L'Olandese Volante www.juzaphoto.com/p/LOlandeseVolante  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Pentax DA HD 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR Pros: A particularly interesting focal range, impeccable construction, good quality of materials, WR, very fast and accurate AF, price aligned with the quality it offers. Cons: So far I have not found any. Opinion: Lens practically "welded" to the K70 for me is the ideal complement. Weight and dimensions quite "important" (but they are not a problem) immediately gives an impression of solidity and reliability . The optical yield is more than dignified: the color rendering first of all: colors rightly saturated as I particularly appreciate, it is a good optic even at maximum aperture, reaching the optimum, as often happens, at intermediate diaphragms. I did not have to resort to microregulation of fire and I did not detect flare phenomena; Effective and well-made hood supplied as standard. sent on November 08, 2022 |
 | Pentax HD DA 15mm f/4 ED AL Limited Pros: Aesthetically beautiful, especially the "silver" version I took; impeccable construction: an aluminum jewel reminiscent of the objectives of the past, a very practical lampshed; even the package reserves a pleasant surprise with the leather-like bag that maybe we will never use but it is very nice. Of the cap (which I did not even notice) I can not care less as in front of the front lens I immediately put, as always, a UV filter. Tiny and light, mounted on the K50, for which I took it, it constitutes an agile and very compact combination. Cons: Perhaps it is precisely the small size, which makes it a little difficult to assemble and disassemble offering a very small grip surface and then the inconvenience, which do not lose at Pentax and is one of the many incomprehensible choices, the red alignment dot for assembly (which was once even a ball, red or white , embossed and on the outside of the barrel!) well hidden on the inner face of the graft flange, difficult to detect and that forces you to rotate the lens in your hand until you spot it, a real stupidity ! The fact that, again incomprehensibly, it is not tropicalized, it has already been said. Opinion: In addition to the two macros, it is the only fixed lens I have, since I am a convinced zoom user. It is a lens That I took especially for the K50, to be used in pairs with the 18-270, and it was a bit of a must, not offering Pentax a compact wide zoom, low cost and not fish and wanting me to be able to go below 18 mm. Here too, my opinion is in principle, not purely technical or particularly in-depth from an optical point of view but simple considerations or surveys made "de visu". The objective optically I like: it does not present particular criticalities (flare, excessive perspective deformation) and since in general such a lens is used to intermediate diaphragms, it is forgiven a very slight optical decay at the edges at full opening. The MAF is fast and does not seem particularly noisy to me (but I have used it outdoors so far); the detail offered by this lens is excellent and so the colors and ultimately, with these peculiarities, I could not ask for more. It's not particularly cheap (paid in store more than 500€!) but considering optical yield, materials and construction, all in all it can stay there. sent on June 10, 2021 |
 | Pentax SMC DA 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 ED SDM Pros: Of course, the versatility that guarantees such an optics; the construction accuracy that I have now learned to appreciate in Pentax: at the maximum focal point, the lens stretches a lot but there is not the slightest play between the sections, the bayonet is made of metal and the graft is precise and firm; plastic abounds but of good quality and the impression of the robustness of the lens, compact enough, is perceptible; the lampshon is included in the package; there is the lock to avoid stretching the lens when you bring it facing down, which is not the case anyway. Cons: The main thing I can move is that it is not a WR and this is a serious and incomprehensible lack: it is WR the plastics in kits and it is not an optics like this so multipurpose and also quite expensive: pentax oddities, often difficult to understand; the lampshed is a real crap : difficult to place for the next fixing, it has the very hard graft when mounted backwards in the rest position, so much so that at first I thought it was defective, and in any case I do not block it until the shot because I fear efforts too, also does not have the window for the rotation of a possible polarizer . Opinion: I immediately start that, as in my other reviews, this is also an opinion in principle, it is not and does not want to be a technical and meticulous analysis of the exquisitely optical characteristics, which beyond my abilities, but a personal and overall opinion. I have always had sympathy for wide excursion zooms, which I find fun and practical and that I consider particularly functional to digital photography, fast, instinctive, redundant unlike the analog one, understandably more shrewd and meditated, especially for the cost of films. Moreover, nowadays, thanks to advances in lens design, these goals have achieved unthinkable performance until a few years ago and generally more than acceptable at reasonable costs. When I was in Canon, I had the Tamron 16-300, a goal, at least the copy in my possession, very valid and that gave me good satisfaction and excellent self-proof ; unfortunately, it does not exist in attack K and I therefore took this original 18-270, which is intended for the "forklift" K 50. I say straight away that I have a great time and I see that lately for this reason I am using a lot of the K 50 to which it is dedicated and all in all I really cannot complain: first of all, contrary to what is written in the characteristics reported on the Forum, the focus is not piloted by the machine but the lens has the focus engine and this , remember that it works on the K 50, an entry level, is sufficiently fast (not only in one shot) and, after making the fine adjustment to + 6, precise . Of course, such a lens should be used with knowledge of the facts and without asking for performance that it cannot give, especially in combination with a machine like the K 50, excellent in its scope and perhaps better than some of its competitors but still rather obsolete , so both give their best in good light conditions and without requiring too "speedy" AF performance , which are the conditions under which I usually operate. Let us say that overall and on average the overall optical yield is dignified at all focal points: at 18 the distortion is more than acceptable, with the increase in the focal point there are no major surprises and even at 270 one cannot complain, especially if, as I repeat, one can operate with intermediate diaphragms and low ISOs which are the conditions under which this objective gives its best; of course, let's forget the brightness, the bokeh and the definition of fixed optics but who, like me, buys this kind of lenses already knows it from the start. Finally, the price : I bought it on Amazon (not FOWA anyway) and paid it what was reported on the Reviews more shipping costs (saving almost a hundred euros compared to the store) and all in all this price seems quite centered , especially considering the large amount of focals covered. In conclusion, it is a lens that I would recommend to lovers of this kind of optics and that, used with knowledge of the facts, can be very fun and comfortable and, why not, also give some satisfaction . One last note: absolutely ungenerous (and suspect) the vote of seven and two totaled by the goal: such a lens certainly drops to some compromise but I find that, all in all, at least an eight and a half would be fairer. sent on March 07, 2021 |
 | Pentax SMC DA* 60-250mm f/4.0 ED (IF) SDM Pros: Assembly and materials, like all the Pentax material I've purchased so far, without exception. Overall optical yield and ma3F speed, tropicalization. Cons: On some occasions I was wrong to focus, although I do not rule out a "guilty contest" on my part; in the last part of the zoommateta the dial hardens quite: it is a peculiarity of the optics but not very pleasant; the price, especially considering that it is a fairly dated optics, could be a little more contained. Opinion: I use it in automatic crop on the K1 and for my needs it's fine so; detail and micro-contract in the norm, pleasant blurred, I did not detect flare; the colors are vivid and bright; at t.a., however, the edges do not fully satisfy me and, as I wrote, despite being the MAF quite quick (one shot, the MAF chase is not my necessity), on some occasions it did not satisfy me as precision although I do not exclude some error on my part. It is an obettive that is willingly handled, given the feeling of robustness it gives and on FF does not disappoint: the detail it knows how to return is up to the FF sensor even if the price, also considering the age of the project, is perhaps a little too high. In conclusion, I cannot say: "highly recommended" (talking about its use on FF, I emphasize), considering above all the cost; it can be a viable alternative to the much more expensive, bulky and heavy 70-200 2.8 offering also a wider range of focals and a very high overall yield. Update - After some time (not a lens that I use much) I have to make an adjustment: realize that on the MAF there was something wrong, I carried out the fine calibration in the lens machine (I always use it on the same K1); conclusion: carried out the calibration (6 if I remember correctly) the yield of the lens has greatly improved and now I can promote it with flying colors, even on FF! sent on April 01, 2019 |
 | Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Pros: Firstly, the price: paid new on Amazon less than €140 (Pentax attack) I think I bought well: light and compact, occupies little place in the backpack and the optical yield is more than enough, even if understandably declining (albeit not dramatic) to increase of the focal; Good invoice (no games between the sections of the zoom and the front does not stretch if brought down) and materials (plastics of course), excellent attack that offers the right resistance to the assembly, MAF fast enough and above all Precise, without B/f focus. Cons: Nothing that is not abundantly compensated by the "pros": As mentioned, over 200 mm The yield falls, though not too blatantly; The MAF in pursuit is definitely not his forte: better not ask him what he can not give! The brightness is what it is but I already knew before buying it. Opinion: The zoom 70-300 is a lens for me very interesting that unfortunately is missing in the Pentax catalog that's why I bought it on Amazon, especially comforted by the possibility of returning if not satisfied; I must say instead that the article is beyond my most optimistic expectations: the plastic abounds, of course, but it seems of good quality and is particularly pleasant to the touch; The construction is unexceptionable and it doesn't matter if it's not stabilized because the Pentax have the sensor stabilization. Another nice surprise the MAF: fast and precise, albeit not silent, is much more comfortable in one shot; The one in pursuit, especially if quick, better not to ask it even if some hit can put it to sign! There is no lack of macro function (a bit ' cumbersome in reality) but I do not care, preferring in these cases a dedicated goal. The overall optical yield, as mentioned, is more than acceptable up to 200 mm, after... After you have to settle a little, but... Not even that much! I can not express myself with regard to chromatic aberrations because they are corrected in the car, while I have not detected any particular flare phenomena. The lens is supplied with a hood. In conclusion, it is a lens that all in all I would recommend when not available as a proprietary optics or when you do not want to spend much in a perspective that we know that we will do little; In my opinion, it has a very good price/quality ratio and can give more than some satisfaction to those who use it with knowledge of the cause. sent on February 26, 2019 |
 | Lowepro Flipside 300 Pros: Internal/external dimensions, constructive goodness and materials, good endowment of internal partitions, absence of metal sliders of the internal zippers, excellent accessibility to the material/optical change thanks to the ventral belt that allows to rotate it in front To itself and operate with a superior comfort to that of the traditional bags Cons: Shortage of external pockets, lack of elastics with Velcro inside to guarantee a better anchoring of the material, delicacy of the inner lining, presence of the rain cover but sewn to the backpack and not free Opinion: It's an excellent backpack, also from the aesthetic point of view (I took the version "Mimetic"): For an Aps-C and related lenses (not too bulky) space is more than enough; The only real "flaws" in my opinion are the anti-rain cap (in my there) sewn to the base of the backpack (I would have preferred free, easier to fit) and the delicacy of the interior lining of the backrest: after only a few exits, the edge of a Lens has slightly uneaten the lining, problem easily solvable by adjusting the lens with the rear cap facing the same coating. sent on August 23, 2018 |
 | Pentax KP Pros: Build quality, compactness, ability to choose the handle, dynamic range (characteristic of the Sony sensors that equip the Pentax and that in this case seems to me further improved), ergonomics. Cons: Battery life: The shots declared possible are 400 but I have big doubts... better to have a spare; The command for the LV is not a convenient button like on the other Pentax but a collar (quite uncomfortable) coaxial to the upper secondary ring; The display is orientable but not laterally (as on the K70 for instance). Opinion: The first thing I have to say for this Pentax is the incredible feeling that can transmit me, fruit in most of the excellent appeal or ergonomics that you want, due to many factors: the compactness (I do not have particularly large hands so For me it is a merit and not a flaw) characteristic of the Pentax still from the time of film, the possibility (clever!) to be able to choose the handle: Three are supplied, I put the deepest (particular important: once you close the Screw Stationary, it is very strong and makes a unique body with the machine), this, combined with the generous rear prominence behind which goes to settle the thumb, gives the machine a "grip" that I have never encountered, even with the other Pentax. The weight is adequate to the characteristics of the machine. The shot, though audible, seems to me the most silent among those of the other Pentax in my possession; The speed of MAF, I work almost uniquely one shot, for my needs is much more than enough and I did not have to make the fine adjustment on any lens; On the noise I can not say much: I set 6400 maximum ISO, I do not go further, and to this sensitivity no problem. Adequate performance of the small built-in flash and excellent HDR in the car, which provides natural and balanced shots; The colors rendered by the sensor are vivid and brilliant, characteristic that I particularly appreciate. Last "Surprise", the price: at the exit, the KP cost 1300 euros, a price almost out of market; Now in the store, thanks to cash back fowa at the cashier, I paid 950 euros, price that I think is adequate to the characteristics of the machine. What about, in conclusion? Another excellent realization Ricoh/Pentax that seems to demonstrate a vitality and a willingness to remain on the market far from the nefarious prophecies of those who periodically predict the disappearance! sent on August 21, 2018 |
 | Pentax HD FA 15-30mm f/2.8 ED SDM WR Pros: Impeccable construction, speed and precision MAF, detail, outstanding chromatic yield Cons: The lens is somewhat cumbersome and, due to the considerable camber of the frontal lens, does not allow the use of normal polarizers to be screwed in front; Yield to 2.8 good but not great Opinion: It is perhaps the best Pentax lens in my possession and all in all I don't find it excessive the price, considering the quality; Constructively absolutely flawless, it has a capacity of exceptional detail, although it is better to close at least one stop to appreciate it at best, including edges, which is normal for this kind of optics. Another strong point of this lens is the chromatic rendition: As traditional Pentax colors are brilliant, vivid, bold; It is a lens, of course, dedicated to street (although penalized by the fact of not going through unnoticed!) and especially landscape, where it will give the best of itself; Ultimately, a recommended lens for Pentax FF landscapers. sent on June 19, 2018 |
 | Pentax SMC DA 12-24mm f/4 ED AL Pros: Constructive accuracy, as usual Pentax; speed and precision MAF, despite the objective being driven by the machine; optical rendering: spectacular for the detail it offers, as well as the colors it knows how to give back: this is a characteristic that I have already noted on all Pentax lenses in my possession and which reaches very high levels in this objective and in 50 macro . The lens is equipped with an excellent lens hood and I have not detected flare or ac phenomena; despite the wide angle of view the distortion appears to be quite correct. Cons: First of all, the price: considering that it has no internal MAF engine or stabilizer, it is really a bit too high; purchased in store (I prefer to have FOWA warranty, incentivized by the fact that I do not live too far from the office and I can directly bring any defective items) to more than nine hundred euros, I think that the right price should amount to about 100/150 euros less (store price / FOWA guarantee); it is not a WR and this must be taken into account in the use in not optimal weather conditions; the zoom ring offers the right resistance, sweet and fluid, while the ring of MAF could offer an extra bit of resistance but it is still in the average of the AF lenses; while the lens offers high-level performance on almost the entire framed field, yields something to the edges, nothing dramatic but detectable especially at medium high magnifications. Opinion: Despite some inevitable "against" is really a goal of high / high level, exceptional in the rendering of detail and colors, talche 'the polarizer, if used to enhance the color rendition, it becomes almost useless (still requires a "slim" pola to avoid the risk of vignetting); a goal, obviously, born for landscape and street, not very bright but already good at ta, improving, not very much, using it to diaphragms a bit 'more closed, as is normal with these objectives; as mentioned, the lens gives something to the edges (I will have to check whether it depends on the sample in my possession or is a common feature, perhaps due to the considerable convexity of the front lens) but the thing still seems quite negligible, especially when compared , I repeat, to the overall yield. In conclusion, an excellent and certainly interesting goal for landscape designers and lovers of the "street" that hasits only weak point in the price certainly not popular.rn sent on February 12, 2018 |
 | Pentax SMC D-FA 50mm f/2.8 Macro Pros: Compact and lightweight, it returns an impressive detail and magnificent colors; optimally assembled, the MAF, despite being driven by the engine of the car, is very fast (as much as it can be used in macro!) and above all, much more important, accurate; becomes an excellent "normal" on FF, on which it is perfectly usable; another not negligible positive aspect: in manual, the ring of MAF offers the right resistance for an easy and accurate regulation.rn Cons: If you want to be fussy, it is not an AW, which will have to be taken into account in case of use in adverse weather conditions. Opinion: Purchased to use it exclusively on Aps-c, it is a highly recommended lens: I was struck, in addition to superb detail and microcontrast, the color rendering, I think I can say one of the best of all Pentax lenses in my possession; good already in ta (not superlative at the edges but there can be, considering the use), it becomes excellent at intermediate diaphragms and guarantees excellent results; I find, however, misleading and I do not understand why, the average vote attributed in the review (8.8) and that makes me doubt the actual reliability: in my humble opinion is a goal that deserves, if not the maximum score, a vote much higher than allocated to him. sent on January 08, 2018 |
 | Pentax K-50 Pros: The typical compactness of Pentax machines, construction accuracy despite being an entry level, with well-assembled controls and the right response, numerous options offered, more than acceptable the autonomy guaranteed by the battery, AF reasonably fast and very accurate even with designed designed by the machine, flow rate and power of the pop up flash, price, general feeling of solidity strengthened even by the weight not small , tropicalized, good color rendering and high ISOs. Cons: Fixed display, which I particularly dislike, few external commands and need to switch to the info screen or enter the menu to vary certain shooting parameters, HDR and digital filters on camera are not saved in RAW and therefore it is necessary to switch to JPEG, white balance not always up to scratch. Opinion: It is a gift and "a caval donato does not look in the mouth", however, all in all, considering how much it has been paid (bought in kits with 18-55 and 50-200) gives a lot and has an excellent price /quality ratio, as in general is pentax tradition; the sensor gives on average good self-proof and, in conditions not at the limit, returns excellent colors, a good dynamic range (in my humble opinion not quite equal to the "big sisters" K1 and K70 but can stay there) and a good high ISO response, although better not to go beyond 6400; the mpx are only 16, normally more than enough even if today's digitals have now accustomed us to much more and some difference, to the greater magnifications, logically you can see ... it must be said that so far I have tried it only with the optics in the kit, it will be interesting to make the comparison with more performing optics. The AF, cross and delight of pentaxians: as mentioned, so far I have only used it with the objectives in kits, controlled by the engine of the car but I must say that I feared worse: for my needs, the speed of the AF is abundantly sufficient even if I wanted to test it: I carried out a few bursts on rather fast cyclists approaching and moving away and I must say that the percentage of the photos in focus was comforting, with the only limits given by the solution of optics and sensor. In live view, nothing special to report except that, understandably, does not excel in low light; under normal conditions, nothing to complain about The optics in the kit: they are not the same as those sold separately: although I can not make comparisons, I know for a fact that non-kit optics have metal attachment and these plastic ones but... they have a rubberized flange around the graft and so they are WR; even for optics you can make the speech made for the machine: reasonably well assembled, with no games between the rings that offer the right resistance (even that of the MAF) even if, logically, plastic is the master; the yield is quite surprising, given the evident economy of the whole, with definition and colors of respect and a MAF, as mentioned, precise, without front/back focus phenomena. In essence, a more than dignified entry level, or, optionally, a valid "forklift" able to face even non-optimal climatic conditions, a machine that, logically while, will give its best in light conditions not at the limit and not to require a lightning and infallible MAF but that, used for what it is able to give and perhaps with more performing optics, can give unexpected satisfactions. EDIT: a few years later, I noticed a curious phenomenon: the K50 (at least my specimen) is somewhat "picky" as far as SD is concerned: I practically always used it with the same SD (it is said that it is better to use SDs always on the same machine) a few days ago I put another one and, after giving me "card error" the machine literally "nailed" ! He didn't answer the controls anymore and I couldn't even turn it off! After removing the battery, it started normally except then, always with the same board, present the same problem, even if I could turn it off without removing the battery. Put back the card I've always used, it's back to normal. sent on October 17, 2017 |
 | Pentax DA HD 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR Pros: Assembly, compact, weather sealing, optical performance at all focal lengths, fast AF Cons: Apart from the low light, however note, I have not detected it Opinion: It is a born goal for APS-C but it can be safely used on FF with a small accorgimento.rnSu Aps-c (in particular with the K70) obviously gives the best: made more than decent at all focal lengths, very quickly in the MAF, both single and continuous, in my humble opinion, and for me quite up, good color rendering, exposure consistency in all diaframmi.rnCome said, of FF is perfectly usable, either automatically crop is in FF mode by cutting the 'unavoidable vignetting in pp and with more valid results but, again, with a trick: the exposure is correct up to f / 8, after each closing must stop underexpose by a diaphragm (the thing has been verified with FOWA) ; the latest update for K1, however, should fix the small problema.rnLa great talent of this lens version is, as mentioned, the compactness, but also the performance is impressive rispettor: I have not detected the flare phenomena nor ac (though the latter can be eliminated in pp) and the yield is generally good at all focal lengths, without qualitative collapses even at maximum focal; All this, combined with a relatively low cost, make it a goal to definitely take into account, where you do not want to invest an excessive amount, and you want a view versatile and not too heavy, very suitable for hiking and excursions. sent on March 10, 2017 |
 | Pentax D FA 24-70mm f/2.8 ED SDM WR HD Pros: Construction accuracy, materials, tropicalization and, of course, optical yield Cons: Difficult to find the cons in a view of the genre, meaning on the contrary some unexpected characteristics; weight and size are not indifferent, as is the front lens diameter, so a polarizer, for example, is quite expensive; the price is certainly not popular and perhaps a little excessive. Opinion: Bought almost on impulse, to have a high level optics to support the K1; and the 24-70 f / 2.8 Pentax is really a professional level optics: brightness, detail, absence of chromatic aberrations, made more than acceptable at f / 2.8, blurred, what is expected in short, from a glass of this stature but ... costs, perhaps too much, above all, attention, in comparison with the other standard zoom for FF that is 28-105 Pentax, smaller and lighter, even if less luminous, which costs less than half but whose results are very respectable and have little to envy to 24-70.rnA classic, in short, the standard high-level professional zoom that each brand must have and dedicated to those who may have to work there, to those who prefer brightness ... or who wants to take away an expensive whim! rnThe MAF is up to par: precise and fast enough (engine inside the lens) and free from f / b focus phenomena. sent on February 02, 2017 |
 | Pentax HD FA 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6 ED DC WR Pros: Optical performance, compactness, assembly Cons: I would have preferred to depart from 24mm and it should cost something less Opinion: Firstly, the optical yield: excellent in the center, the edges are not less and it is at the sensor of the K1; The definition is therefore far more than satisfactory and the chromatic rendering is also of a good standard; I have not detected any significant AC or flare phenomena; The single MAF on the outside is, in my humble opinion, comparable to what I used before moving to Pentax, in low light is not as fast but the situations in this case can be extremely variable and therefore to be assessed on a case by case basis. No front/Back focus phenomena. On the materials nothing particular to say: talking about "plastic" is, more than reductive, unappealing and does not seem the case: it is anyway of components of excellent quality (very pleasant the central band in rubber worked "diamond" very old fashion) and, Especially, assembled in an excellent way; Even the resistance offered to the focal variation is centered; The lens of course is WR. It is ultimately a more valid alternative to the more demanding 24-70 f/2.8; A little too high the cost, a hundred euros less and the price/performance ratio would be really optimal. One final consideration: the average vote obtained from the optics of 7.2 is truly ungenerous and indeserved and raises strong doubts about the reliability. sent on January 24, 2017 |
 | Pentax SMC DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 ED AL (IF) DC WR Pros: Construction, compactness, versatility, overall yield. Cons: At the maximum focal softness at the edges Opinion: Purchased in a kit with the K70, it is an honest zoom that does its job; I did not detect flare or chromatic aberrations and, especially in wide angle, the yield is more than satisfactory, including the absence of distortion; paintings on the side, the situation is different and there is a certain softness to the edges; as already said, The AF is very fast and precise, the height of the best competitors. sent on January 17, 2017 |
 | Pentax SMC D-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR Pros: Even just looking at it, a small and perfect masterpiece of mechanical: very compact, all-metal, the first impression one has is of extreme robustness and efficiency; small but not lightweight, fits in every bag and, valuable not to be forgotten, is a WR: with its wheel flange is perfectly adapted to the traditional qualities of tropicalizzazionerndelle Pentax cameras. Cons: As expected, given the presence of the "PTO", autofocus, controlled by the machine and therefore not quick and peremptory as that of optical with internal AF motor; But beware: even if it takes a fraction of a second longer when hooks does it with surgical precision, without wishing to be considered, however, that often, in macro, the focus is done manually, and perhaps with the machine on the stand; attention also to the ring MAF: AF is switched off and must be careful not to hinder the movement with his hand, something relatively simple because the same ring has moved far forward, so close to the front lens. Opinion: Focus aside, it is a superb goal, that if the play on par with the best counterparts of competition: the constructive accuracy beyond (I open a parenthesis, important for me: I have not yet happened, with Pentax, the find a lens less than perfect in terms of construction: no games between the rings, the focus rings shaky, zoom too hard or too "loose", that move independently of lengthening or shortening depending on the location of the machine), the ' lens is dry and sharp as you would expect from a glass you can say "specialist" and, though this model allows it, also ideal for portrait, facilitated in this by the generous aperture of f / 2.8. sent on November 29, 2016 |
 | Pentax K-70 Pros: As per tradition Pentax construction accuracy, quality of materials and, above all, compactness; with dimensions comparable to a "bridge" and perhaps just a little higher than an ML, easily transportable, with another optics, in a practical photographic pouch, the K70 encloses in itself many of the features of the "big sister" K1 to little more than a third of the price; the controls, dialers and keys, are well assembled and made and the response is decisive and free of uncertainty and confirms the impression of solidity and constructive accuracy of the K70; the two opposing areas, also present on the K1, are as easy to use and the operation is quick and intuitive even for those who come from other brands; For almost all shooting options you do not need to go in or scroll the menu: a special screen immediately callable allows you to make the settings; the rear display, which shows all the shooting parameters, is orientable, a function for me essential, even if the hub does not have the sophistication of that of the K1; it can be illuminated in red, a measure that should make it easier to see at night. Cons: For some, it may be smallness that is a problem; For me that I have normal sized hands, the handling of the machine is unparalleled and particularly welcome; a small drawback, to be fussy, is the poor visibility of the visible focus bright spots in the viewfinder, which can also be excluded: framing a particularly illuminated scene, the LEDs, red in color, are not but it's a venial sin: they can be seen anyway and just "make our eye". Some occasional uncertainty in the automatic white balance in suboptimal light conditions, pop-up flash control not always up to par with the need to adjust its emission. Sometimes difficult focus in LV in low light. Understandably, given the price, the machine does not have the double slot and not even the top display but the latter particular for me has no relevance: I have never looked at it! Opinion: The "heart" of the machine is Sony's excellent 24 mpx sensor, with a dynamic range that is perhaps among the best on the market; the images, thanks also to the proprietary program Silkypix (the only flaw is to be very slow!) you can work with extreme ease and the possibilities of recovering "difficult" shots are many; the high ISO estate: in my humble opinion, higher than that of the K1, being able to easily get to 9000 ISO: better not to go further. I took it in kit with the 18-135, an extraordinarily compact "all-rounder" with amazing yield, given the wide excursion; the MAF is very fast and precise (I refer to the single one, for the type of photo that I take just and advances!) and fully up to the competition, of the one with which I can compare, at least. The machine does not have the AA filter, insertable, and this, combined with the excellent sensor, allows a wealth of detail remarkable, which is particularly appreciated with the fixed optics, numerous and excellent in the Pentax house; It is not necessary to remember that to date Pentax has perhaps the most supplied optical park for Aps-c. I am not able or even would like to make comparisons but I believe that the K70 is one of the best Aps-c on the market today, especially considering the price-performance ratio, as already happens, in the FF field, for K1 and that, as the "big sister" is a candidate in its own right as a fearsome competitor in today's photographic market. sent on November 29, 2016 |
 | Pentax K-1 Pros: Cons: In my opinion, only one, but justified by the density of the sensor: better not to exceed 9000 ISO and if you manage to stay below, even better; let's say it would be good not to exceed 6400. On some rare occasions and in special light conditions I happened to have to intervene on the balance of the white that I regularly keep on cars and in almost all cases is fine so. Opinion: It is never nice, in my opinion, to make comparisons and therefore I will abstain carefully, for reasons that are easily understood; I have landed at Pentax and K1 disappointed by previous experiences, say, and that's fine (I stress: so far and making debts and repeated scongiuri!!!); To this day, I can only be more than satisfied with k1 in all and I emphasize all, the points of view; I use for most of my photos the excellent 28-105 Pentax for FF, which I consider a good goal; also the autofocus sector of the K1, criticized by many (perhaps just by hearsay!) for my needs is absolutely up to its task, both in one shot and continuously and, above all, in LV is reliable and fast, even in low light; even in the use with the flash (I took the Pentax mod. 360) the results are extremely satisfactory and, with fresh batteries, the charging of the flash is of an amazing speed; the machine, of a compactness to which I was absolutely not accustomed, with its not indifferent weight, gives a feeling of robustness very rewarding; I do not go into the merits of tropicalization as I have not yet had the opportunity to test it in difficult conditions, I can only remember that, at the presentation in Fowa, I saw her completely immersed in the water without any problem! The ability to use the lenses for Aps-c is a very important plus: in automatic crop, a wide light frame demarcates the framed field and is very comfortable in use; It may seem counterintuitive to use Aps-c targets on FF but, always in my opinion, so it is not: I use the new 55-300 with the K1 and the yield, as far as I'm concerned, is absolutely more than dignified; you can of course use that lens not in crop and then correct the inevitable PP vignette. In conclusion, I can only be satisfied with the machine and goals and certainly, in time, I will not fail to expand my Pentax kit. sent on November 18, 2016 |
 | Canon 5D Mark III Pros: First of all the build quality, truly worthy of a "pro": right or wrong, for me it is important that the camera I have in my hands gives the feeling of being reliable and it really is; Then, of course, what it produces it has to be up with the Mk III there is no doubt that it is, in all respects and not so I will not repeat all the positives already expressed by my predecessor. Cons: Hard to find: I would not mind the swiveling display but it seems that Canon did not get along with the "professional"; otherwise nothing to say. Opinion: I purchased selling the 5 D MK II, great car, but it was beginning to Starmie "close" to the noise at higher sensitivities and lack car's ISO (automatic setting would stop at ISO 400, evidently to the electronic noise problems) and 6D, which I gave away willingly having never had this feeling with machine-related problems both performance- and (at least in the sample in my possession) to a building and a laughable components, which me They made her use malvolentieri.rnOvviamente with the 5D Mk III completely different music and ... anything but money, sure, but just as certainly a completely different car! rn sent on January 21, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Pros: Not too heavy, well built, MAF swift, efficient stabilizer, optical performance more than satisfactory and almost equal to the "big brother" L series Cons: As does his duty very well, nothing you did not already know before you buy Opinion: Bought for use "battle", especially in the mountains, even under the weight slightly lower than the L series; It had been offered the counterpart Sigma, which seems to be excellent, but I preferred to stay at home Canon, price and lightness. The optical performance is respectable, comparable to the L series, the careful construction and good quality materials, the original in my possession does not seem to be afflicted with particular problems: in a word, recommended. sent on December 01, 2015 |
 | Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD Pros: Many: price, build quality, image quality at all focal lengths, perfect interaction with the camera, speed MAF equal if not superior to the originals, efficiency stabilizer, chromatic aberration virtually nonexistent. Cons: Given that the brightness does not interest me, nobody. Opinion: Purchased even after reading the reviews on Juza and strong excellent results obtained with the Tamron 16-300 and 28-300, I must say, in this case, to be fully soddisfatto.rnLa image quality it seems to be even higher than that of Canon 70-300 DO, with a cost equal to a fifth though! The bokeh is more than acceptable, not exceptional considering the opening; TA I did not detect vignetting. Not very compact but if you do not have a shortage of space does not matter; the weight is in line with the type of lens and the construction is truly accurate; the five-year warranty, although not valid for any subsequent purchaser, is a plus more than welcome. Ultimately, a goal certainly advisable, exceptional price / quality ratio. sent on October 29, 2015 |
 | Canon 1DX Pros: First, of course, strength, and then ... everything else! dynamic range, held at high ISO, AF speed, exposure, burst, possibility of intervention "in the car", double slot, ability to work comfortably both horizontally and vertically. Cons: Difficult to find "against" in a car in this class: exclude suffered weight and price when I bought it I knew what acquistavo and if I were not well these two parameters, let lose; so true for Wi-Fi and GPS: I can absolutely not care less (I have no need to "geolocalize" images: they are still able to remember where I made them!); actual settings are not simple (even so complicated though) but it is assumed that those who come to such a machine then knows how to manage it. Opinion: C that already at the beginning the car had an abnormal battery consumption, therefore detectable already at the factory during the testing phase, of which, however, had given fault to the fact, as reported in the instruction booklet, that the raggungeva battery full power after a few cycles of ricarica.rnNe comes, then, in my opinion, the Canon quality controls, as i said on another occasion, are low and / or there is inconsistency in the quality used electronic components. sent on October 23, 2015 |
 | Lowepro Magnum 200 AW Pros: Excellent materials and construction, equipment of interior partitions. Cons: The price and the fact that it has too few centimeters in height. Opinion: It is really a great bag and you pay for; There is good availability of internal divisions and is not difficult to configure it as necessary; I still used (and is in excellent condition after many years of service) the previous version that I find somewhat more "centered" in height: the new version to consider myself a bit 'too high; surely it is better to stay in vertical bulky telephoto lenses. sent on July 27, 2015 |
 | Canon Speedlite 270EX II Pros: Compact, powerful, well built, short recharge, locking system on the sled and easily. Cons: Yes it can only orient the head upward. Opinion: Purchased for its compactness, it does absolutely regret flashes Canon's most powerful; fast charging in, on occasion need to give him an extra stop pressing the camera's menu, but not a big problem; You can also use the flash bounce; the only real limit is not being able to rotate horizontally. sent on July 27, 2015 |
 | Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Pros: accurate construction, weather sealing, stabilizer, excellent performance at all focal lengths, including edges, low distortion Cons: The price, of course, and the size a bit 'too "generous", otherwise nothing to say. Opinion: I think it's one of the most successful of Canon optics and one of the best ever of its kind: color rendering, sharpness, uniformity of exposure, excessive distortion to 16 mm, are at the highest level and, although they can not make direct comparisons, I think this objective (brightness separately, but it is an ultra-wide is not a problem) does not regret the fixed lenses: I could not be more satisfied! sent on June 20, 2015 |
 | Canon 6D Pros: Discrete rendered to high ISO (nothing at all), File Cleanup, HDR (not particularly exciting), Multiple Exposures and RAW Development in the Machine. Cons: Mean autofocus even in light not particularly low, assembly, materials and components of poor quality, no exposure, Wi-Fi and GPS for me absolutely useless. Opinion: Taken to side up the 5 D Mk II, which, despite the years, is still a lady machine and of a much higher level, above all in the constructive aspect. The 6D autofocus, at least that in my possession, is far from being lightning-light as it is said, even in light not particularly low, and in my view the display presents disconcerting disparity; assembly and materials then give the idea of ??having a fragile and mischievous machine in the hands, absolutely not worth the money it costs ... and I regret bitterly having spent it! I am increasingly convinced that Canon has tremendous problems of quality constancy and is far from resolving them. It's a car I do not think I'll keep for a long time! sent on March 25, 2015 |
 | Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD Pros: impeccable construction, compactness and therefore very contained weight, wide range of focal lengths that make it in fact an "all in one", optical performance of all respect at least up to 200 mm, efficient stabilizer, focus (even in relatively low light) very fast, seamless interaction with the Canon 5D Mk II; oddly, the 1DX the MAF on occasion is a bit distressed and not just in low light and, although rarely, must "give a little help" manual; not detected the presence of significant chromatic aberrations nor of particular phenomena of "flare". A correction of the details on the card, the goal is a full time AF. Cons: Price not exactly "popular" (paid in the store about 750 euro), understandably to 300 mm, the yield falls, though not dramatically, the absence of true macro capability. Opinion: Always been an admirer of the wide-range zoom that in my personal view well matched to digital photography for many reasons and having particularly enjoyed the more than good results of the Tamron 16-300 for APS-C I decided "gut" purchasing the latest Tamron 28-300 f / 3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD (being impossible for me the Canon original). Sin'ora I not regretted it: a practical and a "portability" unmatched (important qualities that can sometimes mean being able to bring home the picture) combines optical qualities generally and moderately respectable no details and / or showy qualitative collapses in any parameter. Recommended for amateurs of practicality and compactness lovers! sent on July 21, 2014 |
 | Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Pros: Objective lightweight (for me it is a merit!), Careful construction (absolute absence of games of the rings), excellent detail rendition even at the edges, excellent color rendition with rich, saturated colors even in a day is not very bright, I have not detected aberration chromatic significant (but will leave that to more targeted testing), low distortion, perfect uniformity of exposure to various pairs shutter speed / aperture, lightning-fast autofocus, stabilizer really efficient. Cons: Understandable (and obvious) light fall on the edges at full aperture (close enough to a stop and remedied), bayonet plastic (but knew it, and not for use in exasperation that I do not think I will create problems). Opinion: Retired now, at a price slightly higher than that reported in the card; nothing particular to add to what was said above: the first though perhaps not too extensive tests done, I'm very happy with the purchase and I believe that this lens will not make me regret the original Canon 10-22 (which incidentally I still have and is not said he should sell it); I bought the 10-18 IS, needless to say, because of the stabilizer, which are a firm believer that more and not so much the fact of being able to take pictures in low light freehand but because, I am loving the exaggerated perspectives, I I often take pictures with the camera a few inches from the ground, often in awkward positions and precarious, and this does not help to maintain a steady hand! For me, it is absolutely yes! sent on July 10, 2014 |
 | Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: Good detail rendition, rich, saturated colors, low distortion. Cons: Chromatic aberration and construction too "light" game with eye-catching dial's focus. Reading the altrernrecensioni discussing "careful construction," I have the impression that the Canon having problems with consistent quality, which was once complained to the universal goals. Opinion: Optically it is certainly a good goal, that is what counts; the construction seems a bit 'hit and miss with RNLA ring focus "dancer" which, while not creating any problem, gives an unpleasant impression of fragilità.rnPenso which will have a formidable competitor in the new Canon 10-18, which seems if they speak well, less expensive and rnsopratutto stabilized; however you think, the stabilizer actually gives a higher gear, even on obiettivirngrandangolari. sent on June 24, 2014 |
 | Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro Pros: Amazingly versatile, dignified rendering of detail, perfect interaction with the camera (Canon EOS 60D), rapiditàrnnella focus equal to the original objectives, excellent manufacturing accuracy and quality of the materials that fannornpresupporre robustness and reliability, the lock to prevent accidental lengthening of 'optic is virtually inu-rntile because, at least in the sample in my possession, the barrel does not slide individually rather provides a fair resistance to change focal length, the complete absence of games of the rings of variation of focal and MAF (games sometimes instead present on the original optical!) surprisingly, then the minimum distance of focus which makes it, in addition, a macro from more than acceptable definition; in contrast to what reported in the data sheet I would like to add that the manual focus is continuous possibile.rn Cons: Some uncertainty in the focus at the maximum focal length in low light (but it happens sometimes with obiettivirnoriginali), maybe a tad less bright colors of the original 18-200 with whom I made the comparison, a stabilizer po'rnin difficult to focus maximum (but perfect up to 200 mm), slight but understandable decrease in the maximum focal definition, price is not cheap but certainly justified by the focal range covered and the build quality. Opinion: I've always been a staunch supporter of the superiority of the original optical compared to the universal but this lens (which I bought because, I admit, I have a soft spot for the zoom on wide!) Made me re-rncredere both for its perfect compatibility with my Canon 60D (quick focus, with the understandable exception of the MAF to the maximum focal length in low light) than for the more than decent performance at all focal lengths: rnun real wild card handyman practical and versatile, compact, lightweight and looking truly robust and reliable; is true, RNLA image quality will not be excellent, but I've always been of the opinion that not seize the fleeting moment if seirnindaffarato to change the optics! sent on June 03, 2014 |
 | Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Pros: Dimensions and weight very contained, making it a target for hunting irreplaceable photographic rambling, hiking and all those situations where weight and / or size is crucial; reduced diameter filters, stabilizer exceptionally effective, quick focus, very sturdy construction, excellent even if not amazing sharpness, good detail rendition and pleasing bokeh. Cons: Price indeed high, in particular light conditions the colors can be a bit '"cold". Opinion: The real Achilles' heel of this lens is the price, definitely determined, as well as the accuracy of construction and the materials used, its specific design, I have not found the phenomena of "flare" neither particular problems for what concerns the internal reflections . rnih Ultimately, in my opinion, if you do not have big budget problems and you prefer the compact lenses is definitely worth considering. sent on March 13, 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
