JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Clarity and definition to high openings must be content to 2.8 (but it is a bell'accontentarsi). Not even looks good in comparison with optical Canon L series resistance Flare.
Cons:AF a little slow if subject movement, as a handyman does not excel in everything
Opinion:Purchased used to race when I noticed that I could not use the Sigma 18/200 3.5 / 5.6 per220 € I think that I could not wait any longer '... Optics solid, bright and well suited to landscapes, portraits with a discreet zoom range. is the classic lens which is held ever mounted for travel and any evenienza.rnNon could expect more 'for what I pagato.rn
Pros:Price, construction, sharpness and f2.8 fixed
Cons:AF, sharpness
Opinion:I bought this lens because I needed an intermediate lens on FF while racimolavo money for mutual Canon. I bought it at a very good price (190) and for what it costs I am very satisfied. For me it makes no sense to make comparisons with the Canon 24 70 2.8 L since they have a completely different price and obviously there is a reason. Having said that, I can express my opinion. Having read mixed reviews about this lens and how varied the yield from lens to lens soon as I bought it I gave to various tests. Fortunately my copy does not suffer from the front or back focus, though I must say that the AF is quite uncertain on occasion of light is not so favorable. The barrel is well done, although plastic feels solid. The sharpness instead is variable, f2.8 is soft at all focal lengths, to f4 I must say that the middle has an excellent sharpness and f8-f11 has a frame completely clear. To my opinion in f4 you can use it safely (the I paragonato with other objectives to say this as the Canon 70 200 f4 L and I must say that they are), f 2.8 would stop only on those occasions when I'd rather have a photo soft rather than move. rnOvviamente if you have money to spend I recommend the Canon 24-70 2.8 L that you can use it in any situation avedendo always good results, on the other hand if you are willing to come to some compromise I recommend it to any amateur.
Pros:price, fixed 2.8, construction, suitable for FF
Cons:weight, clarity, size
Opinion:I tried a couple of times this lens that I was interested in the price / 2.8 fixed. Other zoom Similar fact much more expensive. My advice is: better a decent f4 which the canon 24 105L that a 2.8 to f4 that is worse than the canon. The quality is poor as the Tamron 28 75 2.8. I am a lover of 2.8 indispensable for portraits, like the rest also have a lens handyman but I say NO to such a compromise, a better f4. This is a speech only for FF, of aps-c obviously makes no sense, better as a handyman (in order of value / price / performance): sigma 17 50, 17 50 tamron smooth, Tamron 17 50 vc, sigma 18 50 .
Pros:rugged construction and precise AF speed and accuracy, well contrasted and crystalline clarity over f 5.6, very bright.
Cons:for now I have not found specific defects, Unclear on the corners under f5.6 to 2.8 I find it unusable for softness and indeed wide open do not use it because I do not need!
Opinion:I bought this beautiful lens used (like new) about a couple of months ago a 250e and I'm loving it immediatamente.rnla find fantastic although before the 'purchase I had read several reviews not so exciting, maybe I was lucky with the' exemplary honestly I do not find any of the defects found by other users of this economic gem. since I use are no longer able to remove it from the D700 to try it for example on the D7100 ... the 'AF despite the' absence of 'Ultrasonic find it fast, hooks up to' instant even in backlight, images are razor sharp and well-contrasted without any particular color dominances, the costruzsione is sturdy and little plasticky, soddisfatissimo are .... well, enough to take home the little brother to the 12-24 which I will review soon as I remove the 24-70 to put it to good to whip !
Pros:robust and affidabile.il considerable weight, it makes the grip and balance with the car piacevole.ghiere more fluid to the point giustol'astuccio provided is useful and performs excellently its function
Cons:slow autofocus in comparison to the usm version, but this is cheaper. rubber ferrules tends to whiten with the passage of tempol'attacco hood might be less cumbersome
Opinion:I use it mainly for landscapes, so the speed of focus I do not interessa.rnbuona sharpness, especially diaphragms intermedi.il sizeable inspires some confidence in presarnutile as Macro, although actually it is not, but on several occasions I took advantage of this characteristic with the results of all rispetto.rnlo use intensively for 5 years, and I have never given any problems at tipo.rnio recommend its purchase to those who do not need a super-fast AF
Pros:In general: constructive solid, brightness, 'speed' AF.rnSu FF: focal range, from 40mm f4 performance over poi.rnSu in APS-C performance at all focal lengths from f4 onwards.
Cons:In general: weight, tendency to stretch by tilting the camera (a button to stop the stroke would have been useful) definition at RT. rnSu FF: 24mm edges slightly definiti.rnSu APC-C: focal range (from lens becomes almost a portrait).
Opinion:At the time it was the economical alternative to the 24-70 f2.8 L Canon. I tried for a long time both lenses on my 400D before purchasing the Sigma had seemed really less than the Canon only in color rendition. On APS-C 10MP I used it a lot and I have to say that the yield and 'really good, just a little soft at room temperature, although the crop factor takes him almost more' to be a perspective from portrait to zoom standard.rnLo I'm discovering little by little on FF 20MP (6D). The yield and 'still very good with focal lengths over 40mm up to f4, and 24mm at the edges are poorly defined also closing a lot of the diaphragm and the softness in TA and' very pronunciata.rnBuona resistance to flare, vignetting and CA decidedly minimally invasive approaches.
Cons:Weight, diameter filters for those who use them
Opinion:I have just this lens and I would say that I am pleasantly surprised, credovo was slow AF instead is a bit noisy but very fast and accurate. Sins sometimes in difficult conditions, but given the price I think is the most viable alternative to the canon to a honest price for people like me who takes pictures with a passion and not a profession. Impresses solidity. For now I would recommend this goal.
Opinion:Versatile lens for the range of focal lengths and brightness to 2.8. sto talking about the version ex dg macro, I faint and decisive goal. The focus even after adjustment for-service (center sigma Italy) imprecise. Used for a wedding in quite disappointed. Tested on canon 7d with micro del'af but the focus is still slow and inaccurate. I guess the version HSM have resolved some of these problems.
Opinion:now my travel companion for a year, much cheaper of the original canon can be considered a good alternative, a little soft ta but recovers well even with 1/2 stop, 82 mm filters are expensive and difficult to find, the noise of af is a bit above the average. I would change only the Tamron 24 -70 since stabilized.
Pros:Brightness, sharpness, price in relation to performance.
Cons:AF is not suitable for sports photography, 82mm filters
Opinion:It 'a goal-rounder with excellent performance, very solid. Despite the huge glass elements and a traditional AF micro-motor AF is fast enough but not exceptional. The yield better lens you closing the lens between f/3.5 and f/11, f/2.8 images are slightly "soft." The lens is prone to flare generate quite evident when shooting backlit.
Cons:is not precisely lowered inbattersi in a good copy lack of stabilization filters from 82mm
Opinion:is my favorite handyman. its f2, 8 fixed at all focal lengths allows to dispense with the sabilizzazione. valid alternative to the canon 24-70 ..... perhaps the most viable alternative. the lens quality is excellent, if you really want to go see the hairs .... the downside is that buying filters 82mm coast. I highly recommend it for the rest, used with a f4, 5 in a focal between 30 and 60mm gives the best of exceptional ....
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.
