|
| sent on 22 Dicembre 2023
Pros: Unrivalled photographic versatility (but with results very dependent on modes and conditions - see cons). Overall excellent in the rest as well.
Cons: Extremely fluctuating photographic results, depending on the mode of use (it has quite a few, including Raw, Expert Raw, stock camera and full 108 mpx) and light conditions. It takes time to master them all and choose the best one. They can range from stunning medium-format results to mediocre photos full of artifacts and only suitable for social context. Unbelievable waste of the "Expert Raw" mode, which would be great if it didn't produce bad NR artifacts.
Opinion: (Over a year of intensive use - I've taken more pictures with him, who is always with me, than with all the other cameras put together in the last good four years). First of all, it's literally like having in your pocket something ranging from 16 to 230 mm FF equivalent, but with a limit: you have to use the basic lenses of the individual cams, because the intermediate results are interpolated and with considerable deterioration of the image. So we have, 16 (0.6x), 23 (base), 69 (3x) and 230 (10x, and also decently bright, f4.9). The normal 12 mpx stock cam produces results that can range from very good to very bad (artifacts, excess sharpening, "oily" areas from excess NR), but it does a beautiful HDR that is very natural and has great colors, especially when using the "hot" filter. The 108 mpx mode often gives results that are out of this world, and it feels like having a medium format in your pocket! It is imperative to use the "detail improvement" and, equally, to stay at the 23 mm base: forcing it to 2x or higher, does nothing but crop and enlarge it, with results in strong deterioration (but given the size, I have a 50 cm print mistakenly made from 3x rows and it is practically perfect). Ordinary Raw, dng, allows you to change WB, ISO, shutter speed, etc. before shooting, and gives excellent results using a common editor such as Camera Raw, although it is quite noisy and difficult to use in low light (dynamic range is what it is, and it doesn't use multiple photos to make an HDR or a stacking that eliminates noise). The "Expert Raw" mode, sensational on paper, is an absurd waste! It's very bad! In many photos it produces horrendous "oily" artifacts due to overlapping errors and excess denoise that cannot be eliminated. And also excessive sharpening halos, even those that cannot be eliminated. I've saved a few photos using that, I avoid it now. Basically, you have to understand WELL what is best to do, or take several shots with various modes and then choose the best one. But when it's good, try to make 50 or even 70 cm prints, and then you'll be amazed, unable to distinguish them from those made of the same subject with a Reflex. Indeed... Sometimes they were even better than those of the cell phone :-D My rating is : 9. If the Expert Raw mode had been perfect, we would have been at 14 :-D |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
