|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Alepucciprato www.juzaphoto.com/p/Alepucciprato  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS Pros: Price sharpness weight Cons: Excessive external zoom travel Opinion: I bought this lens to replace in 24 70 fe zeiss f4 that, opening a parenthesis, in 2 years of work of various kinds I can say that in the price / quality ratio is one of the worst optics of all time. Having therefore had the zeiss f 4 for 2 years go to this zoom all doing was a leap in quality. The autofocus (precise even if not very fast) the image quality in general and the manual focus ring are not even comparable to the Zeiss F4. It really comes into focus here. Both on the A7S and R and on the A9 the image quality in general or excellent. Even the boken is pleasant despite the limit to f4. I noticed, also owning the 28 135 f4, that both the latest Sony lenses have in common a boken really nice despite precisely the lack of more intense openings. Is not it tropicalized? Well it costs only 1350 euros! rnVignette and distorts at the edges? Well and a 24 105 zoom and not a fixed one. Moral: you want an optics to do everything for pro photos and video use with a fair performance at a decidedly accexible? With sony mirrorless the choice is forced on this view. If you then complain about the vignetting at the edges and the deformation to 24mm well then I recommend: never buy a zoom 24 105. Compared to the more dated but emblazoned canon 24 105 f4 the yield in general and much higher but both have those flaws that each zoom of the genus ha.rnThe sony is extraordinarily silent and the stabilizer is very responsive and well balanced. The external focus zoom stroke is very pronounced and at 105 l optics it looks like a medium telephoto. And even more limited than the race of 24 70 f 2.8 Gmaster, an optics with a good lens but that frankly for the 2500 euros that costs is not worth the purchase. I'm very satisfied with this 24 105 f4 that does not betray the expectations in terms of foreseeable defects but that amazed me for the sharpness of the image and softness in the boken. Weight in the average. sent on February 24, 2018 |
 | Sony FE PZ 28-135mm f/4 G OSS Pros: Lightweight, boken, motorized zoom, price Cons: Missing focal indicator and using the zoom we never at what point we are at 50 or 85 etc, a serious carelessness towards the professionals by sony. Opinion: The first time I picked it up I was expecting a boulder instead and built with very light materials and almost 1.3 kg. It has a filter of 95mm and is 17cm long + motorized zoom then a feather.rnI shot professional videos both in daylight and with led and effects. The continuous fire is very fast and accurate if you set the right type of focus. With f8 or f11 you can use the wide focus while if you are chasing subjects in the narrow field or you make portraits, maybe at f4, better to use focus at the center or manage the focus via joystick.rnThe f4 optics are not necessarily quality optics lower, see for example the Canon 70/200 f4, and it is proved this Sony 28/135 f4. His boken is definitely comparable to a f2.8. Impressive the almost total lack of vignetting at full aperture and during the assisted zoom, an unprecedented shot that many videographers dreamed for a long time.rnL image is very stable even freehand thanks to the stabilizer that however has only 1 mode.rnThe general quality and excellent while in quality%3B of image does not exceed sharpness even if its smooth paste helps filmmakers who do not like strong contrasts. Very pleasant color rendering and dynamic range that is achieved with this lens in all light conditions (if you turn only video) fully exploiting Sony sensors of the latest generation as that of A9.rnNontheless it has passed with great determination by Canon at Sony I think Canon lenses a bit more resistant to everyday use but I consider this zoom really a gem indeed a jewel and the price is very content given the results and practicality of use in the professional field. Not recommended for: Take professional photos in the studio or still life being very incisive for the new Sony sensors. Not recommended for recreational use and for travel photography. Much more practical and economical the 24/105 f4 with which you can do both photos and videos with an excellent quality.rnI still used the 28 135 f4 also for photographic reportage and weddings and I must say that the results are really remarkable even in the photographic field . If you can take advantage of its softness in effectto or portraits with Caravaggesque lights you can take really extraordinary pictures. Having then an autofocus born for video you can shoot bursts in continuous fire without losing a beat. Fantastic the ring diaphragm. Too bad the assisted manual zoom is sometimes too slow.rn sent on September 26, 2017 |
 | Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS Pros: Accuracy, speed, image quality, boken, minimum fire distance Cons: Nobody Opinion: I say I do not like zooming and work mainly with wide-angle optics but you know: a 70/200 in the optical kit will never end up unused. After being passed from Canon to Sony, first A7 Series then A9, I hired for some photos and video work this GM zoom range. The quality of the overall picture is great, I would say almost as much as the Canon 400 2.8, and I immediately realized that I was dealing with a real-life lens at the top. In the aftermath of working days I brought this lens to all the possible extremes both in terms of fire and light conditions. Difficult if not impossible, at least with A9, blur a picture. Waiting for a bride in front of the church c was an unexpected and I was struck with a truck that did not have to be there. I'm looking for a position to get the bride in the car arriving and suddenly I realize that it was late and I had the last minute to immortalize that moment. There is no time to frame the camera point to the eye subject, without letting the eye on the viewfinder in full sunlight, and then press the buttonclick. Result? Perfect and very beautiful picture. Other sensation I was lucky to take the right time but the likelihood that the photo was slightly blurred was high. When I saw it on the PC monitor I was astonished. I realized that this optic is really superior to any other one on the market with equal features and price. Zoom does not crush the image and if you shoot at 2.8 the boken and gorgeous at any focal point, and remains beautiful and clean even zooming on a distant and small subject as a full-length person occupying a small portion of the shot. The subject is always in focus and the tridimensionality with the background and embarrassing for Canon's analogue and worse for Nikon. The stabilizer allows you to shoot free-hand video if you have a culturist arm, which is impossible with any other focal-like optics. I see there are still few reviews but many votes and the average is 8.6. I would like to know how many of the users Juza have ever had in the hands of a zoom in this price range and with such a high quality overall. To make an econ comparisonif this zoom costs 3,000 euros the Canon should cost a maximum of 1,700. Obviously it is my opinion. rn sent on September 22, 2017 |
 | Sony A9 Pros: Sensor, dynamic range, bursts, manual controls, sight, buffering, robustness, battery, joystick Cons: Missing picture profile, lack timelapse, maybe the price Opinion: Of this A9 I just bought I say only: goodbye Canon and Nikon. Sony had already surprised me with the A7 series with which I worked for two years both as a photographer and as a filmmaker. The assumptions for this A9 c were all and obviously I wanted to try it. It was enough to make 10 shots made through that viewfinder that I would dare to define a science fiction, which, moreover, does not abrupt during the shooting to make me realize it was my car. Bringing in France for a 4 day wedding service I used the A9 for photos and videos in 4k, mounting both zeiss E series optics and Canon FD optical optics. Result beyond expectations. The overall quality of the shots is not superior to other top-of-the-range reflexes but they defend themselves as equal weapons. Compared to the files of the A7R2, the chromatic quality and the ability to recover on raw files and clearly superior. This sensor has the idea of ??storing so much data to give videos a very unique pasta. Eye to strong whites and LED lights that sometimes saturate the color but in general the A9 shoots professional photos at the top. It holds the iso and the burst with electronic sparestosa. There is a risk of ending a 64 gb card in the first two hours of work. For those who like me make high-end mid-range corporate video, the video output 4: 2: 2 in 4K is present on the A7 S and R series. A business storytelling the video quality and very good and despite the lack of video profiles and s-log2 it is able to soften it well through the drs and the contrast and saturation settings.rn Its robustness and ergonomics far superior to the A7 sisters give the feeling of security And stability you are looking for in a top-of-the-range car like this. Obviously the weight is affected by the series 7 but for me it is an advantage. With autofocus The A9 does not mistake a shot even at f 2.8. Thanks to its viewfinder, never seen such a quality in a viewfinder, you can focus on a manual without needing to enlarge the image, thus reducing working times. Really a jewel this 4mpx viewfinder. Double slot with all recording combinations, command to change from afs / mf / afc and type of shutter via ring, instead of fcn menus, also this one genialaWhich greatly reduces working times. It also has customizable buttons but are well set by default. The new joystick allows you to finally select focus areas more easily. The battery compared to the 7 Series and definitely more generous. With 1 or 2 batteries you safely bring home a whole wedding from getting ready to dancing. The general feeling after testing this A9 on the field and having something unique in the hands besides the top. I am very happy with this purchase and I think I will work with Sony for a long time. I do not see anything similar in Canon and Nikon horizons. Sony has now created a fine market for itself, but in many respects ends the need to use more expensive and heavy-duty reflex cameras. The current A9 price is a bit high, in my opinion, but I also wanted to be among the first to exploit the artistic and technical potential of the A9. sent on July 07, 2017 |
 | Venus Laowa 15mm f/4 Macro Pros: Lightweight, robust, unique in its kind, continuous diaphragm Cons: Bad, distortion and aberration to the edges, saturated colors Opinion: I had never purchased optics that were not Canon, Zeiss, Angenuex. Given this incredible innovation in the optics industry I thought about taking it and trying to exploit it to make very large frameworks with relatively low distortion. I have to say that compared to the samyang 14mm works much better either as colors, albeit somewhat saturated, as dynamic range. Incredible as on the Sony A7II, A7S and A7RII, the Carnate and the Skin. Impossible for an optic with features like this. The macro factor on a 15mm with aperture 4.0 causes giants to make cats or ants but with aberration and distortion to sometimes sultry sides. In the center it looks like a 35mm. But if you go beyond these trivial shots this Laowa gives you really great pictures considering the very low price. Continuous diaphragm dial for video-maker and manual focus make it fast and accurate, if you have a good eye and a mirrorless. Ugly aesthetically and with a grotesque tilt focus in the set a unique and valid opt for those who like to be "wide" sent on September 09, 2016 |
 | Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS Vario Tessar T* Pros: Lightweight, compact, nuts, robustness Cons: Price, distortion, dynamic range, image quality Opinion: And senz other an optical overstated. Moreover self shooting with Sony A7 and you want a medium zoom which is not a plasticone or no cost 2500 euro and the unique perspective that you can buy. Compared to 28/70 f3.5 - 5.6 the difference in the quality of the picture and really too little, a good night sleep. Distorts, aberration, crushes, in short, it has everything that should not have a perspective of more than 1000 euro. Certainly it is well built, the rings are definitely Zeiss and tropicalization and a great advantage for those who make reports, or must be able to shoot in any situation. Frankly I am very well with optical vintage Canon fd but if you want efficient autofocus, stabilizer and not spend a fortune for a medium zoom was virtually forced to buy this light. Personally l I sought and found used on the 600 euro that is, in my opinion, almost the price it would cost new. sent on June 30, 2016 |
 | Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS Vario Tessar T* Pros: Little aberration, light, fast autofocus, construction Cons: For me no Opinion: Quest optics, which use on Sony A7m2 and A7s, does not betray the expectations. Compared to Canon 16/35 LII, although it lacks the opening 2.8, it demonstrates a quality of image and constructive in my view of the same level if not higher. The Sony Zeiss optics for native A7 are not many, for the moment, especially in the zoom category but amongst all this and the best. If you consider the focal 16/35 has very little distortion and that very little even crushes to 35, then you zoom to full speed. A 16mm distorts a bit but nothing incorrigible. A 20 is perfect. Working discreetly to f4 and is already at the top at f5.6 Having a maximum aperture of f4 does not have the boken other optics but senz more pleasant and brings out the characteristics of all the Zeiss optics. Color, detail and dynamic range are not those of Serie A which, however, in addition to need adapter ring when mounting on Sony A7, exactly double the coast. There is, in the general quality of the optics, the difference in the price there. Fast and precise autofocus makes the most of the let systemture is Sony a7 that Sony a7s. Robust and light can not be missing in the kit of who clicks with A7. sent on June 30, 2016 |
 | Canon EF 8-15mm f/4 L USM Fisheye Pros: Quality at the core, firmness, clarity and colors throughout the frame, little aberration Cons: Price Opinion: To be a fish eye senz else this light has a general quality to the top. Compact and lightweight when mounted on standard bodies 1 unbalanced a little the handle. I was Canon would use less expensive materials; This would make the optic more attractive in my view has for this reason a lower price. Usually the fish eye is used little and does not require absolute quality, better to spend less to use it when it happens. Nell used is good but the Samyang 12mm ff and to consider given that costs 1/3 and works equally well. At the center of the Canon 8-15 deforms relatively little the picture and this allows you to use it to take pictures of fun group. It has great colors and shallow aberration in relation to the focal width, of course, always keeping in mind that remains a fish eye. Beautiful, fun, but ...... Too expensive. sent on June 23, 2016 |
 | Canon A-1 Pros: Electronics, robustness, ergonomics Cons: Display Opinion: It was my first camera and I still carry with me every now and then. With this Canon I took some of the best photos of my life traveling around the world was a perfect and reliable companion. The display is not too useful because it does not set the aperture set but they are details. For the period have an electronic body at this level was fiction. Too bad that today's digital cameras are not born with the same care and research of the era. sent on June 23, 2016 |
 | Canon F-1 Pros: Materials, mechanical, reliability Cons: Price at the time Opinion: A machine that wrote the story. I still have 1 and sometimes we shot some 400 hp for the fun, or at weddings. This machine was the dream of many in the 70's and everything now has a market all its own that keeps the price not so low. With optical Fd high and a professional film strip we can all now equate the theoretical digital quality. The only one at the time with 1/2000 makes it clear that the jewel is this Canon F1 sent on June 23, 2016 |
 | Canon 1D Mark IV Pros: All Cons: Anything Opinion: For me the 1d4 and was the last really good digital camera made by Canon. We do not understand why it was taken off the market so quickly to be replaced by 1dx, full frame, which holds up better senz other high ISO but alas not stand studio pictures, web surfing, or at least not compared to the price. The 1d4, as well as having all the attributes of 1d3, greatly improves the performance and higher to ISO churning of the Madonna video. Precise autofocus and fast as lightning makes this machine a monster for all types of photography and its price, which was around 4600 Euros if I remember correctly, and derisory if you look at performance and quality. Too bad it did not last long. I never would change with a 1dx if not for the high ISO. I worked a little with 1d4 and I remember it as a dream really means. sent on June 22, 2016 |
 | Canon 1D Mark III Pros: Ergonomics, speed, reliability, double slot Cons: Nobody Opinion: Who uses bodies as this is silly if you complain of weight and price. It would be like complaining about a Ferrari because it costs too much and consume too much. These machines, like other flagships, the buy if you need otherwise be wasted money. In time, the quality of the files even beyond the ISO 3200? amazing. Speed ??and made monstrous fire, and if you use a low ISO in the study far exceeds the 1dx. 1d 3 and was in my opinion one of the best ever cars, at least in the home Canon. sent on June 22, 2016 |
 | Sony A7s Pros: High ISO, dynamic range, lightness, ergonomics, video quality, viewfinder, autofocus. Cons: 4k output only at 30P, little logical menu, ISO management in s-log2 Opinion: I work with this machine flanked by a sony a7m2 and in spite of its video nature and the sensor from only 12 mp the photographic quality is remarkable. With such a dynamic range and the ability to work at high ISO, you can take incredible photos that you could not do with any other car in the world, except for the Canon and Nikon flagships. Like a digital camera, it has a sensor so rich in details, moreover a ff, which suggests that something much more expensive is in hand. If you film in uncompressed hd at 50p with raw zeiss lenses or top-of-the-line FE, you can easily spin the Iron Throne and broadcast it on Sky. Too bad the 4k output does not support 50P. It has a lot of profiling, maybe too many, and the sony s-log2 is sometimes very good and some disappointing. Setting the picture profile in s-log2 will have details everywhere but work at a minimum ISO of 3200, a bit too much in certain lighting situations. The image is stunning and up to 12800 ISO but still more than acceptable even at 51200. Autofocus excellent thanks to the reading system that allows you to putYou were almost always in focus. Clearly for those who take pure photography or still life, the 12 mp sensor is scarce. rnOnce to strong whites and if you want to see the pure quality of this machine you have to wait for the late afternoon or always look for shade or interior areas. In full sun at ISO 100 the image quality is excellent on video but very contrasted in photos and scarsina. As soon as you climb above ISO 1600 or work in shadow or light blue areas on horseback or in the city at night, this sony a7 really does wonders. But you have to have a lot of experience as dop and manage the light well, a small error in the exposure is not forgiven by its extremely sensitive sensor. sent on June 14, 2016 |
 | Canon 1DX Pros: Sturdiness, ergonomics, autonomy Cons: Wi Fi absent Opinion: Difficult to speak ill of a top of the Canon range. I worked a few times with 1DX and other senz this machine and a gem, despite the lack of wi fi integrated already present on other models in 2012. This type of Canon sensor ensures high quality at high ISO and allows you to really take in any situation. In my view, however, lose if you work in the studio with low ISO and flash even if you are working outdoors with strong sunlight, the rest you can not have everything. The dynamic range decreases dramatically I was very useful the use of nd filters for not to go too close to the minimum ISO. The quality of the files is impeccable both Raw and JPEG. Although the video is not his forte gets along well. Needless to emphasize the shutter speed compared to the quality and file heaviness. Duration amazing battery saw the fireball that poor batteries need food. Definitely a Formula 1 cameras; Total reliability, resistant to shock, rain, dust etc ..... Obviously not suitable for those who needtravel light or not to spend "too much." sent on June 13, 2016 |
 | Canon 5D Mark III Pros: Body, autofocus, dual slot Cons: Price, RAW files Opinion: Compared to last this 5d Mark 2 focuses as you would expect from machines of this price range. For the rest if it were not for holding the high iso I not never change with a mark2. The dynamic range and poor, and both videos both RAW files have nothing better of older sister despite the digimark5, indeed .... Maybe perhaps prefer the raw sensor is the mark2. For people like me who does videography disappointing lack of 50p to fhd quality. However in general a good machine entirely tropicalized. sent on June 13, 2016 |
 | Canon 6D Pros: Price to be a ff Cons: B quality, video quality, body Opinion: I'm a photographer and videographer I joined a few times this machine to the 5D Mark II and 5D Mark III the quality of RAW files is certainly not that of the higher-level machines not to mention the video quality which I think is very bad; It is equal if not lower than that of the 70D. 6d has a good resistance to high iso and this helps but it remains a by amateur machine away from the body and from the building. The only reason to buy it and spend little and have a full frame sensor, but also for those who use APS-C sensors of this price range and well above the Nikon D7200 sent on June 13, 2016 |
 | Canon 5D Mark II Pros: Sensor, construction, jpeg quality Cons: embarrassing autofocus, missing video output pro hdmi Opinion: I worked with 5DII both for photography and for videography. In the 3 years that I have used the two bodies I bought in January 2012 I was working in dim light and environmental contexts of all kinds, making the reportage to AD. Neither 5DII has never missed a beat even under water, frost or 45 degrees to the shade. The sensor of this machine still remains in 2016, in my opinion, one of the best ever seen on the market. Due to the modest Digimarc 4 produces very good quality of the sensor file, if not amazing when shooting in JPEG. The video codec is a H.264 emblazoned 4: 2: 0 50 mbit which is fine if you do not use extreme cg. Magic lantern I shot commercials and corporate in rawvideo and the quality is amazing, I would say the film industry. Pity not to have the 50p and the ability to record to external devices via HDMI. Autofocus almost non-existent, if you hope to make us sports photos, even using optical as the 70/200 f2.8 or f2.8 300. I'm not a fan of the ISO low, but this machine is suffering a bit already by ISO 3200, although? accettabilis. In the video, if you want quality, you can not exceed ISO 1250. Council to use it with multiple ISO 160, being the actual ISO noise decreases slightly. Obviously ? a 2008 project, and when you consider the 8 years of age remains a great car, a reference of the digital age. L I adored and even, sometimes, I miss him despite my Sony A7 kit and A7S with Zeiss optics. sent on June 13, 2016 |
 | Canon FD 35mm f/2 S.S.C II Pros: Lightweight, exceptional boken, detail even at full aperture Cons: Slight vignetting at the edges though limited when you consider that it is a perspective that is 40 years old Opinion: I use this lens with Sony A7 ii. Remarkably enhances the sony sensor and makes my mirrorless a very compact object, as well as aesthetically very valuable for those who love the vintage look. Its overall quality and higher still to the current EF 35 f2.0. Thanks to Sony stabilized sensor use 35 also for video and extraordinary yields on US plans and panoramic wide shots. Canon instead of analog I doing black white only and the yield of this perspective on Ilford XP4 and 5 embarrassing how perfect if you compare to optical ef. Without another one of the best goals ever seen in history. sent on February 21, 2016 |
 | Sony A7 II Pros: Lightweight, durable, compact, aesthetic delicious, personalized color profile, video quality, viewfinder, price Cons: Poor quality jpeg, RAW 14-bit lower than the competition, clicking noise, slow processor. Opinion: I am a photographer and filmmaker. As for video and cinema I used everything but the photos only ever Canon since I bought my first A1 used in 1993. I have to agree that they video on the A7 ii does not betray the expectations of people like me who knows right from Sony U -matic. His Xavcs combined with FF exceeds the quality of Canon C-100.rnPer As for the photos, if you put in comparison with other mirrorless Fuji as costing less, you immediately notice the quality of the sensor and the softness of the FF despite 24 megapixels is not just devoid of noise. I did not expect the files to a 1DX but if the plays quietly with the 5D Mark III. I do not think however that it is a machine made for those who seek absolute quality but rather for those who make street or reportage. If you learn how best the various possibilities of profiling being careful to noise in shadows and dark areas more you can get excellent results in post. The thing that still makes me unique and facilitates control of the fire and of exposure thanks to an exceptional viewfinder. It becomes almost impossible to miss a shot even using optical vintage beats completely manuali.rnLaria does not last long, about 350 shots max no wifi, but it is a price worth paying to have a lens of this level. The display, adjustable, is within the standard sony.rnNonostante noise shooting her look with vintage lenses and compactness make it relatively discreet for those who do not want to give too much disappointment in occhio.rnPiccola processor. With sd cards midrange goes busy after a few consecutive shots, even in manual, and the quality of JPEG files and poor. The Raw lower than the competition, but I think this depends more from Sony that the car. Quality price senz another one of the best machines on the market. sent on December 17, 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
