|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Lzeppelin www.juzaphoto.com/p/Lzeppelin  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony A7 IV Pros: Excellent AF performance in both photos and videos. Real time touch tracking very convenient where there are no eyes. Current price. ISO holding in videos. At the same magnification the same iso seal of the A7 III. Battery life. Sensor with clever resolution, satisfies everyone. Complete video department. Cons: List price. The workflow of raw files must be changed if you come from a previous generation sony. IBIS inferior to the competition. Opinion: I immediately suggest disabling the automatic brightness of the viewfinder because it is very low, put instead at +1 or +2, it also gains the quality. If you come from A7 III I suggest you review your workflow to work on files, for example the camera raw settings are not good, the sharpness should be brought to zero or maximum 15 because it is already ultra sharp. Raising the sharpness here only does damage unlike the III. Another fundamental difference is that the IV works better on the highlights while the previous one works better on the shadows. This is a total hybrid machine, it is clear the direction that Sony wanted to take, the video department is very complete, the management of codecs, bitrate and color is identical to A7S III. Excellent autofocus both in video and in photos, it makes birdlife even if you are brocchi, good operating speed in general, excellent iso hold on video. Instead photo side, if these are observed on the monitor with 100% magnification you will notice about 0.5 - 0.7 stops of noise more than the A7 III, so if you are fixed with the ISO and look at the photos only on the monitor and only 100% better take the III or other machines with a 20/24 Mpixel sensor. While, as mentioned by some previously, at the same level of magnification of the photos, the noise is identical to the A7 III and gains in sharpness. And there is more margin in printing, where for the same print size the higher DPI density helps the A7 IV. For me excellent quality in general. Those who complain about the ISO tightness I think have not well understood that the signal-to-noise ratio is always the same, and a more resolute sensor is always preferable for the same sensor size and technology. Speech valid for any other brand, see Canon R6 and R5 for example. Ok let's move on, the viewfinder is good and fluid, as long as you put manual brightness, in the car it has a low brightness and indoors it is really a pity, put at +1 or +2 and that's fine. Decent monitor, a step back from Canon. Ergonomics for me good, very good, grips well, firmly, without uncomfortable angularity, I can not believe that someone is out with the ring finger, that you have the hand of polyphemus? For me, people now write the same things as always in repetition as a fashion. However, compared to Canon the shutter button does not fall ready on the index, but a small shift must be made, but even here I can not believe that people arrive in the evening with cramps. The dials instead fall more comfortable than Canon but are harder. Same thing menu, many controversies but it is only habit, it is linear, divided into macro areas, indexed and colored, everything is in its place, if you look for a function you find it where you expect it to be. Infinitely expanded customization of keys and functions. List price meaningless, evaluate well where you buy. As for the stabilizer, even this time Sony has failed to make the miracle and this is inferior to the competition, especially in videos, in photos is fine. In the videos there is the possibility of stabilizing in post production with a tool provided by sony, Catalyst, and the result is very good. PS: but those users below me who complain about everything about the machine, but bought it at random? A closed box? Without even holding it first in the store? Without inquiring about the features? Crop at 60 fps is written on the walls, before buying you have to know it, like unlit keys. You can not complain about a known feature passing it off as a defect, the defect is when a declared characteristic is not respected. Blessed are they who can afford to spend 2k at random, but then complaining does not seem correct to me. sent on December 15, 2022 |
 | Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Sonnar T* Pros: Record size and weight. Cons: Not a monster in terms of pure optical rendering. Opinion: If you are looking for a fixed bright good performance for your "itinerant" photographic set-up then this sonnar is the mandatory choice because for size and weight you can't beat it. It looks like a lens for smaller sizes, like the ones for micro 4/3. But if you are looking for a fixed luminous with the highest optical performance then better look elsewhere, not necessarily more expensive, for example the Sigma Art 50 mm. By pulling the sums of all aspects concerning optical performance, I summarize with a vote of 7.5. What you read around the Web is in good substance all true: a moderate longitudinal CA not always completely recoverable in post and a vignetting a little ' greater than other fixed 1.8, while recovering votes for the absence of other defects such as astigmatism and The lateral CA. AF silent and fast enough. Precise too, but it depends mainly on the machine. The sharpness is great in the middle and falls to the edges. How much? Here it seems that there is a problem because you read everything and the opposite of everything. On the edges of this 55 one reads that "They are pity" or that "they are good". At this point it is thought that there is or existed a manufacturing problem. My specimen however did not suffer from particular problems, I do not know how to quantify the difference between center and edges, I say that you only notice to monitor 100% but nothing that makes think of a flaw. I've seen worse in more expensive lenses. Even the benchmarks of the newspapers disagree on the edges. However, as well as the mathematical measures, the lens is good, but not stratospheric as someone wants to believe. For me it is in line with the other 50 1.8 coupons, and so this Zeiss being sold between 800 and 1000 euros, I would say it costs too much. However if you look for comfort there are no alternatives. I changed it for the Sigma 50 Art because I do not use this type of lens to walk and therefore I can sacrifice handling and portability but gaining a little something in terms of pure optical performance. PS: I do not know why they consider it a sonnar, if you look at the original optical patterns, it seems to me there is little in common. sent on November 04, 2018 |
 | Nikon 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S Pros: A Series A lens, not only in a Nikon kit but also in a Mirrorless kit Cons: In some shots you notice the UV permeability Opinion: These 105 2.5 are still professional tools. The AIs and the first AISs are the most sophisticated (very high resolution and most closely controlled LCAs) and the MC treatment is already excellent and perhaps more neutral as the new color (from 1985 onwards introduced the SIC treatment) but which is a bit 'More saturated. Well I fell in love with this lens, I finally found a goal that TA is already very generous and I do not have to worry about diaphragm ... then ok, af / 2.8 there is a leap of quality, the resolution increases by at least 1.5 x To TA and maximum for this optic. At f / 4 the resolution begins to fall, the optimum should be between 3.2 and 3.5 overall. RnIn expert network, they consider it to be one of the best targets with Nikon, if not the best, Schneider Gauss optical design, with the Zeiss ZF and ZM, Leica Summicron 90 ASPH, Elmarit 90 2.8, Summarit 90 and Zeiss ZF 100 -Xenotar, with only 5 perfWell-treated to break down the flare, very high resolution (already at TA fixes over 60 lp / mm eaf / 2.8 passes the abundant hundred making it perfect for astronomical use) Great contrast macro, perhaps the best media half 1.5 m media brightness , And the only "esoteric" Nikkor canvas in European school. Great for portraits where the progressive transition between the focus plane and the blur part is masterful (the bokeh of this lens reaches the maximum between f / 2.8 ef / 4.5, where aberrations are now infinitesima and the PDC is still Reduced), but also in landscapes and astronomy, where it also returns point points to the edges of the frame (at f2.8 it has no coma). The fact is that the 105 / 2.5 primates together as a solution, macrocontrasto, flare / transparency, distortion and side CA and has coma and astigmatism susceptible to ALL Nikon, benefiting from lower brightness than 1.8, symmetry and German design Schneider style / Leica, it's oneOf the most perfect lenses ever built in history, along with the Micro 55 / 2.8 AIS, Elmarit / Summarit 90, and the ZF 100.rn The modern alternative is the Zeiss ZF.2 100/2, but you know what it costs. This lens is also great to match Sony's or Olympus-powered mirror adapters (which cost 10 euros on amazon) and are great for super-pixel-type D810, A7R machines that need super-resolved lenses, in fact, on a dense sensor Is even sharper than on a seldom (on NEx 5n goes in full aliasing). The same happens with the 55 / 2.8 Micro Nikkor. This is QUALITY.rn sent on October 28, 2016 |
 | Nikon 105mm f/2.8 AF Micro Pros: Macro 1: 1 perfect. All of metal. Great on other camera bodies through adapter rings. Cons: With infinity focus not excel like other prime lenses. Opinion: 26egrave; Guaranteed. The new version is more stable versatile use as generic portraits and walking, it benefited stabilizer that allows you to take even at 1/20, but in the field of macrofotofrafia if they play the same because the use of VR in close quarters is ambiguous . In addition the presence of the aperture ring in the old model makes it suitable to be adapted to other brands using adapter rings. The use of sony a6000 and D750 with a lot of satisfaction. This lens is always in my backpack. By virtue of the price of the new model VR, 700 Euros import more than 800 if Nikon, so you can spend even € 350 for an exemplary excellently maintained without many thoughts. sent on October 16, 2015 |
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
