|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on September 23, 2020 Pros: Very light and versatile, SILENT AF (but not USM), very good image quality already at f2 (Nikon version) Cons: It does not have the full time manual focus, maf sometimes inaccurate with artificial light Opinion: I bought it in Nikon version (aesthetically and dimensionally almost identical to 50mm 1.8 Nikkor) for less than 100 euros, and I'm satisfied with it. It must be said that the Nikon version (according to the reading around) is significantly better than the Canon version in terms of construction, however both versions use the same optical scheme of the Nikkor 35 f2, simple but effective. Constructively it is slightly inferior to the original Nikon (it lacks the dust seal around the attack, to say the same), but all in all it is built well, solid and well-finished plastics, metal attachment, very fluid focusing ring, it also has the distance window and is full frame (like the 50 1.8 af-s). The anti-reflective treatment on the lenses is barely visible, but apparently it is effective, I noticed very little flare and the images are very well contrasted, with excellent colors. On my Nikon D7200 (APS-C sensor) it performs definitely well already at f2 (even better than the Sigma 50 1.4 EX, which I own), where it shows good sharpness in the frame center. At f5.6 it is crisp and sharp from edge to edge, as only a fixed optics can do. The Bokeh is really not bad, the lens has only 7 slats but they are rounded. The autofocus is fast enough in ordinary use, and is all in all silent (you barely hear the sound of the internal moped), there are no buzzes or uncertainties, and it is quite precise. It rarely shows uncertainties when used under artificial light. The outer ring is well fried and very fluid, it does NOT rotate during focus, but it does not work when it is in autofocus (activating it in AF turns vacuum, therefore does not allow "full time" adjustment). The manual focus is comfortable and precise, nothing to report. Ultimately, it's definitely worth what it costs. |
 | sent on June 25, 2020 Pros: Price, lightness and versatility Cons: Slightly slow and noisy focus Opinion: I tried it out of curiosity given the very affordable price. I also own the Nikon 35mm DX version which costs about twice as much and which I have always loved. In addition to a minimum of slowness and noise in focus, the results are truly exceptional even in relation to price and expectations. Highly recommended for having at an affordable price a versatile optics to use on both Full Frame and APS-C. |
 | sent on October 31, 2019 Pros: price and weight Cons: quality and various problems. Opinion: Purchased for online flotion. Paid 90 euros. Used a few times and I find it interesting. The focus works discreetly in the central part... at the edges he suffers a little. It's the third one I buy because the first two gave me serious problems of closing diaphragm (they kept the lens at f2 even when the reflex sent the signal to close). In practice, in AV, he always kept F2 but, when the times lengthened because the body "thought" that it had a different opening, the photos were burned. I think the quality of the lens depends on the luck of finding a "good" match and not failed. I use this lens on a Canon 1DSmk3 and 1Dmk4. |
| sent on October 31, 2019 Pros: price and weight Cons: quality and various problems. Opinion: Purchased for online flotion. Paid 90 euros. Used a few times and I find it interesting. The focus works discreetly in the central part... at the edges he suffers a little. It's the third one I buy because the first two gave me serious problems of closing diaphragm (they kept the lens at f2 even when the reflex sent the signal to close). In practice, in AV, he always kept F2 but, when the times lengthened because the body "thought" that it had a different opening, the photos were burned. I think the quality of the lens depends on the luck of finding a "good" match and not failed. I use this lens on a Canon 1DSmk3 and 1Dmk4. |
 | sent on February 14, 2019 Pros: Price, weight, for the Nikon if version, metal bayonet Cons: AF noisy, sharpness at the margins Opinion: Hi, I repeat that the strong point of this view is undoubtedly the price. However, it should be stressed that the optics for Canon and Nikon are completely different. I bought for Nikon and I must say that the speed of autofocus is satisfactory and the fact of having the internal focus (the scale with the slide to be clear) has amazed me a lot. To the touch does not seem more plasticky than a Nikon 50 1.8, the metal bayonet me a feeling (it will be only that) of stability. It is certainly not a professional perspective, but not a bottle bottom.. I think I will bring home many interesting shots. Nice little box, I recommend for those who like me does not do weddings.. But you want to entertain the same |
user157612  | sent on July 02, 2018 Pros: Price, compactness Cons: Autofocus, sharpness Opinion: The strong point of this optics is definitely the price, hard to claim more for this figure. Starting from this assumption, you can forgive a noisy autofocus and not always quick and precise and a low sharpness at the edges at F2. Personally these flaws have not been a big limitation because they are solved simply by using manual focus, closing the diaphragm of a few stops or composing the scene differently with the subject in the center. Other its value is the compactness, even if the construction to the touch makes perceive the economy of the materials with which it is built. Recommended for those who (like me) is novice and wants to experience the fixed focal without spending big digits. |
 | sent on March 19, 2018 Pros: Price, weight, sometimes very good, but only at times. Cons: Noisy AF, unacceptable CT sharpness, MAF that requires a fine fine adjustment (+12), sharpness at edges often very very poor.rnNice optics game inside the helical groove where it flows when focus that sometimes causes heavy misalignments of the lenses with consequent strong blurring of the edges and chromatic aberrations. Incontinuous performance, it passes from results of surprising quality to results to be trashed. Opinion: Honestly, apart from the weight and price, I do not find anything positive in this view.rnIn the meantime it needs a strong auto-focus compensation (+12) (CANON EOS 6D mark 1) .rn Maybe it's my sample, but I find it unusable at TA because of the lack of sharpness and chromatic aberration, things improve from f4 onwards, but it always remains a sharpness at the edges often unacceptable.rnSi then occur strange facts, for example in a landscape photo with more or less MIM to infinity and diaphragm 5.6 a subject close enough on the right side extreme results in focus, while one left almost to infinity (and therefore close to the MAF) is blurred and affected by heavy chromatic aberration, distortion and obfuscation, while the center remains quite clear and well inciso.rnA my opinion is a defect of assembly or construction in my sample that denotes a poor control post production.rnIn particular I think it is due to a considerable game of the inside of the the optic inside the helical groove along which it flows through effectuse the MAF which sometimes causes heavy misalignments of the lenses resulting in a strong blurring of the edges and unacceptable chromatic aberration situations.rnEffettuerò certainly return, however for now the judgment is extremely negative despite the very affordable price.rnNon recommend it because its use respect at a zoom should be justified by a greater clarity and consistency of result and greater brightness offered, considering that the results to f2 - f2.8 are almost always unacceptable, I really do not understand the purpose at least on FF. |
 | sent on February 25, 2018 Pros: cost weight and size Cons: soft also closed, just enough in the center if closed by 1 stop. Noisy AF. Opinion: Given the price you can not expect anything. I recommend it to those who want to test the focal length for a more expensive purchase. Distort and vignette a bit 'but if you shoot positioning the subject in the center of the frame is not evil. I used it and bought it with its clear limitations. If it falls and breaks it is not a drama. I noticed that with closer focus, say under a meter and a half away, it makes it better. |
 | sent on January 31, 2018 Pros: Price and sharpness Cons: Difficult focusing maybe for excessive game saddles. Opinion: I was surprised by the sharpness, the lenses and the pleasant blur. from its best between f 3.5 and f 16. in spite of its construction a little delicate manages to hook even in low light but the focus is not its strong point it works in the range of a few mm. slowing down the operation, especially without a tripod, there may be some problems. The lens hood is not included but the Canon one is perfect for 50 mm. ES 62. It is a very useful focal point on Aps-c. and you can make great pictures in all conditions, especially recommended for amateurs and students. For more professional use where reliability and speed also matters, it is better to rely on a more "performing" one. |
 | sent on December 03, 2017 Pros: Lightweight, economical, fun Cons: Maf noisy, slow, not precise, construction, sharpness Opinion: I bought it for fun, as I paid just over 50 euros, what can I say? a toy but I knew what I was buying, ridiculous construction, noisy and slow maf, sharpness to review, the discourage? NO! I love it, literally, I mount it on body FF, and when I do not have to make "serious" shots I use it with pleasure without expecting something, for what it costs then it's more than good, I am aware of the fact that compared to my sigma art 35mm there is no comparison but it must also be said that the sigma costs as 10 yongnuo: D |
 | sent on February 18, 2017 Pros: Lightweight, compact, nice focus, perfect price quality. Cons: Noisy, autofocus not entirely accurate. Opinion: Overall not a lens to throw away. Does its job especially considering its very low cost, so obviously do not expect perfection. If you do not have problems with the manual focus, it can become a bell'obiettivo to use in different situations. Personally I use it a lot in the report and its maximum aperture is very useful for a few photographs with ridotta.rnConsigliato light. |
  | sent on February 18, 2017 Pros: Compact, light, construction, aesthetics, MF ring, blurred to TA, sharpness at the corners to f8 / 11, contrast, color, resistance to flare and ghost backlit ... but above all ... the price !! Cons: No doubt the scandalous autofocus and the high variability of yield between specimens, indicating a nonexistent quality control, but poor is also the sharpness of the edges at RT. Opinion: My original Nikon has a flawless construction, no internal noise caused by the game components, the ring of focus is much more fluid and precise than that of Nikon G, really nice to use in the manual. Optically it is surprising, to f8 is far better in the corners of all fixed D had so far, the resolution is consistent throughout the frame, does not stand in the center. The soft contrast, the colors and the opening of the shadows are spectacular. Than fixed G gives a lot to TA but in return has a blurred far better. So far a small masterpiece. The problem is (I always speak my example) autofocus, embarrassing ... does not suffer from front / back, did not need calibration and is accurate at all points of the AF module of the D750, also is also fairly quiet, but .... damn hard to keep up, so that in less than optimal lighting conditions with little contrast you have to change to manual ... with respect to the performance of the Nikon G and D lenses, Sigma and Tamron currently Produzione seems to prehistoric times, however, when then engages rarely wrong fire. Overall, however, I consider it satisfied me, the aesthetic is rewarding (a lot like Nikon 50mm 1.8G) and also considered the incredible price and compactness have preferred to 35mm 1.8G FX, sold a few weeks ago. |
 | sent on February 10, 2017 Pros: Brightness, cost, overall yield Cons: AF slow, construction below average. Opinion: I had both the Canon EF35 f / 2 Original this Youngnuo YN35 f / 2.rnnel comparing the two I noticed an improvement in blur and sharpness at full aperture of this new clone.rnChiudendo the diaphragm recovers the canon and clarity that the youngnuo not equalized mai.rnNel AF module did not notice differences both speed precisione.rnPer as regards the construction, both are plasticky, but the canon is definitely built with migliori.rnAlberto.rnrnEDIT materials: (After a short period of use, the objective is mechanically broken confirming the low quality of materials). |
 | sent on February 03, 2017 Pros: Cheap, light and small Cons: Quality is an internal batch, sharpness at the edges, autofocus, noisy, lack hood Opinion: The first copy was received completely misaligned lenses which made the left edge unwatchable. I asked for the return and the second copy received has also shown the misaligned lenses with loss of quality in the right frame. It requires at least 2/3 closing stop to be used. In addition, the autofocus has required considerable adjustment (-20) to be acceptable. Shaking the lens feels considerable noise, significant symptom backlash between the elements. I read of specimens that still go well and so I think that having a relatively vague quality control, is a matter of luck if it happens the good (rare specimen?) Or less. For the rest, the optic is made of plastic and therefore lightweight, but with the metal insert. Although engages the hood 50 1.8G, as expected, it can not be used as a TA sticker (to be good). |
 | sent on January 28, 2017 Pros: cheap (it really is a "pro"?); well correctable in LR with the profile lens 35 AF-D Cons: Sharpness never adequate, unreliable autofocus, built in "excellent" Chinese plastic Opinion: Nikon has a plastic body of the AF-S 50 1.8G and about the same physical characteristics. Bought, tried to use it, and resold. Used on FX, my opinion is quite negative, maybe I'll be unfortunate I think after reading so many good reviews I found myself a goal: RNA) as opposed to what has been written by others, it has no sharpness at all comparable to 50G, or f / 2 or f / 5.6. Always soft. It would seem a sharpness comparable to the old Nikkor counterpart, from what I see in some tests, but I do not know because I've never used it, and frankly ... it dubito.rnB) is plastic on plastic, metal bayonet makes it more seriously but it remains a plasticone, indeed a "plastichetto" given the size, I think even the lenses are plastica.rnC) has a dancer autofocus, never focuses twice in the same place even on cavalletto.rnIn substance: OK to be used for hobbies and for those who want to approach and study the focal of 35mm, but for any serious purpose must definitely go to other modelli.rnPS: missing to orra a lens hood to match, having copied the mopeds has the bayonet mount compatible with HB-47, but -perlomeno of FX- is unusable, it appears in the frame! |
user69293 | sent on November 16, 2016 Pros: Crisp, economical, af fast, small and lightweight Cons: noisy AF, no coupling lens hood Opinion: Bought a few days for my 6D, I wanted to try the focal of 35mm, so I preferred to take this cheap toy. The lens is very small and light, the construction was done with the feet, all plastic with a protruding lens that staggers here and there, if you are not careful with your fingernails you can erase the writing on the barrel, but in compensation has the metal hook. The optical quality is still good, crisp as 50 1.8 .stm, edges a little softer only TA, af very noisy, but fast enough in engaging, even in low light, also good bokeh. But one thing that I really appreciated in his miserable building, which being very light lets you shoot blur-free even at 1/10 sec. I swear it seems stabilized. I think I'll keep it for a long time attached to my car is great fun to use. If you want to experience this focus, for € 80 I recommend this toy. EXCELLENT. |
 | sent on November 10, 2016 Pros: First of all, the value for money, certainly the best for a focus of this focus. Lightness. Sharpness. Silent, fast and accurate AF. Cons: Very slight edge distortion on FF, correctable already in the camera. Lack of hood (unavailable). Opinion: Buying new online on a German site, with Nikon attack, it was a delightful surprise, perhaps because I had ordered it with a good deal of skepticism. The assembly and materials are of discrete quality, in line with the non-professional optics of Nikon, plus the metal engagement, I believe aluminum. I used it on the D750 with excellent results and rendered to the high ISO (also 12800) that is superimposed to that of Nikkor 50mm AF-S 1.8 and Nikkor AF-S 35mm Dx 1.8. Good sharpness even at maximum aperture, with a gentle blur that makes it suitable even for any portraits that are set. Compared with the Nikkor 35mm Dx 1.8, with shots under the same conditions, using Nikon D750 and D7100 bodies, even in large enlargements, I can not see any noticeable differences with the naked eye, but with the advantage of being able to use, without cropping, also on full size. I signaled the irresponsibility of the dedicated hood; the Nikon HB-47 and compatible mounts with a brush, but with vignetting on FX. Consigliatissimo.rn |
 | sent on September 18, 2016 Pros: Price, quality / price ratio, size and weight, brightness, af sufficiently fast and very accurate, sharpness also central to TA. Cons: Sharpness at extreme angles (of aps-c), af quite noisy. Opinion: I took it without being pretentious given the cost, to experience the focal, but I was pleasantly surprised! The yield in the center is comparable to the Canon 50 1.8 .stm, loses a little bit at extreme angles (tested on aps-c: Canon 60d), also by stopping never fully resolve. The af is very accurate and fast enough, maybe a little 'too noisy. Obviously, the construction is very economical, but at least it has weights and smaller dimensions. I recommend it to amateurs who want to experience the focal 35mm without spending too much, but especially for ambientati portraits. |
 | sent on May 07, 2016 Pros: Cost, quality / price ratio, weight, 7-blade Cons: autofocus, sharpness at the corners Opinion: Good lens, in relation to the price ... I wanted to try the fixed focal length 35mm without spending too much and this is right for me. Not much used for now (alas, there is no time), but attached to 6d is perfect, lightweight and not bulky. Outputs for quiet, okay, if used 5.6 af the quality is really good. Mine has a few problems with the exif that are not always recorded. Having paid € 113 on ebay I'm not complaining, though I took the availability Sigma art, but I'm happy. Recommended for those who want to try hard and see if a 35 is congenial as the focus. Find the absolute quality and speed should of course seek elsewhere! |
 | sent on December 24, 2015 Pros: Optical quality (in relation to the price), price, weight, 7 Strips, Sharpness to TA at the center, to be used in extreme cases TA Cons: Sharpen the edges to be reviewed on full frame, Sharpness to TA is not at the highest levels but not as demonic as they say, reselling on second, a brand that is still unknown about the objectives. Opinion: 3B picture is very good, not great or perfect but totally usable by f4, f2 from 2.8 to excellent in the center but if you want to shoot something at the edges have to settle for a vote 9 compromesso.rnDo as it based on the fact that there are only been improvements over the old canon 35 f2, such as the introduction of 7-blade, and weight. The materials have remained the same and the price is a third of the canon, the canon so if I would give him 8 to this at least one more vote. rnOvviamente not know how the control of the copies made by Yongnuo but my surprised me, seeing test in Internet photos that seemed to just under 50 8/1 II full aperture with a piece of cellophane in front, so it may be that mine is an exemplary lucky. rnProvato Canon 5D |
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
