|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Daniele_86 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Daniele_86  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Tamron SP 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Pros: Sharpness, stabilization, RELIABILITY AF Cons: Slow AF engine, noisy stabilizer, short-focused dial race. Opinion: I've had it for three years and it was the winner between sigma (f/B focus problems) and Canon (I didn't want a vacuum cleaner), despite being of the original religion on originals. It's sharp at all focal points from f4, a little less to f2.8, especially at 50 mm. I don't think it's a big deal, f2.8 to 50 mm I usually use it for a portrait. The stabilizer works very well, even if it is noisy. However, it is necessary to give it time to get into operation (a fraction of a second), at the risk of micromox. The most important thing is that it does not suffer from f/b focus; in fact, the AF is very reliable. It has no problems with filters of any kind, a testament to the consistency of the AF. Built well, it even has the lock to block the stretching of the barrel. Negatives: Slow AF and the focus ring is very short. For manual focus (e.g. on tripod) it could be a problem. Unfortunately for the price at which it is sold you can not complain. Very recommended, I do not agree with many reviews that are read online about it; personally I printed with excellent detail photos in A2 with 18 megapixels and the aforementioned lens. I hypothesize that much spents are blamed on the lens faults that instead are of photographer or camera. sent on April 19, 2020 |
 | Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Pros: Weight, construction, color rendering and contrast, hiking, AF, very low distortion, exceptional flare resistance, sharp. Cons: The edges are mainly 10 mm thick, bulky bulky (but very effective). Opinion: For APSC Canon is still the best ultrawide that exists. The hike allows you to keep it full days without forcing you to use it for special shots. The AF is a missile and although it's ultrawide you appreciate it. It's very light and anyone who uses it in the mountains will appreciate it. The color rendering is excellent, very contrasting and gives shots ready. The flare resistance is exaggerated: I tried to snap with the sun in front of the center of the diaphragm and there was only a miserable dot. Distorce little (though something more than 10 mm, as is obvious) but has no strange folds. Probabimente is not the clearest lens in history, but overall sharpness does not lack, though not all over the frame. 10 mm actually loses a bit on the edges, but are secondary areas compared to the subject and I do not consider it a great problem. RnThank you very much because it's fun and useful for daytime landscapes or monuments / architecture photos. I spent months thinking about itSamyang, Tokina, but overall Canon is much more balanced. Who distorts those who do not have AF without giving great quality (and in 2017, in short ...), those who suffer from flare, those who suffer from F / B ... With this you will have fun.rnDefetto: new cost so much and the hood is cumbersome. But effectiveness is guaranteed. sent on November 25, 2017 |
 | Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC OS HSM Macro C Pros: Size, construction, excursion, colors, price. Cons: Less bright than what you might think, F/B focus problems, poor optically wide-angle side. Opinion: Very sharp from 24 onwards, low to 17 mm especially at the edges. Loses 2.8 to 21 mm and 50 mm is already f/4: It is less bright than what you think. Mounted on Canon I had to get it calibrated. The barrel tends to lengthen. Very compact in size, is built well and is lightweight, this allows you to carry it around without any problems. The focal excursion is great for landscape photos and the sharpness at the bottom is not lacking. Compared to the kit lens the color rendition is less cold and more realistic. The macro function is nice, even though we're far from a real macro. The minimum focusing distance is however very good. The AF is fast and also allows some sporty shots. Overall recommended, although optically it is less than the Brother 17-50 F/2.8. sent on November 25, 2017 |
 | Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II Pros: Crisp, light. Cons: Autofocus slow and noisy, focus ring indecent fire, distortion Opinion: And 'better than you might think. The sharpness is obviously not in top levels, but it is better than what is said. As evidenced by the tests easily available online. Obviously not expect exaggerated performance, but if you knew how to use soddisfazioni.E gives 'light, even if this results in a bit' too much plastica.Lo stabilizer is good. Bad points: the focusing ring Manual focus is virtually unusable and the brightness decreases rapidly with focal. The focus motor focus makes a lot of noise and it's slow. Distorts both 18 mm. The best yield, as in several objectives, is closing the 1-2 position with respect to the maximum aperture. Valid for landscapes and pictures of "family", while portraits there is indeed much better. Overall good: often they give faults that do not deserve it and who may be attributed to the photographer. It gives a hard time to the most famous goals. Perfect start and to understand better what you need later. sent on February 13, 2016 |
 | Canon 1200D Pros: Light weight, ease of use, price, sensor Cons: Viewfinder dark and small, poor autofocus in low light, lack of spot metering. Opinion: Taken almost a year ago, now I think I have clear ideas. It 'good to start, but do not you think that after a year become obsolete, or you are fed up. The plastics may give a feeling of poor quality, but it has never given me problems and still carry substantial weight. It 'easy to use and the sensor is better than you might think. Produces images more than good up to ISO 800, noise is visible to 1600 but it is perfectly recoverable PP, it gets annoying to 3200 and 6400. The unusable There are all functions, is complete and it's fine to learn and above all have fun. Already compared to a compact (or worse, unoi smartphone) the quality difference is huge. From this point of view it gives satisfaction. Bad points: the viewfinder is small it is dark, but considering it is a machine bought by those coming from a compact (in 99% of cases) is not a problem, at least until you try something superior. The autofocus struggling a lot in conditions low light, putting a lot of time to connect with the subject and the end often wrong. The same applies to the autofocus in live view, which turns out to be slower than that in the viewfinder. I do not consider a problem the No. autofocus points: For the average user is more than enough. It did not calculate the exposure spots, which can become a disadvantage in certain lighting conditions. No trust the picture style, can create artifacts. Better to dedicate calmly to PP personally. I can not judge the burst, almost never used. The battery has never given me problems. Highly recommended overall to those who are undecided: at this price I do not think there is anything better, considering quality and versatility. sent on February 13, 2016 |
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
