|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on March 08, 2019 Pros: Light, economical, bright. Good optical quality. Hood and semi-rigid bag in outfit. What more do you want? Cons: The smooth barrel will be nice to see, but to handle the lens is really very uncomfortable: slips from the hand. It doesn't have the focus scale. Opinion: The Sigma DN's have a good reputation, in my opinion fully deserved. I use it on an Olympus OM-D and-M-10 II and on a Panasonic GF-5, both Micro 4/3, which is equivalent to a 120 mm used on full-frame. It is a focal length that I like very much, suitable for both the portrait with the foreground of the face and attention to the focus on the eyes of the subject, that to a certain type of landscape (for example farmhouse on a hill, mountain pastures). After years of zooming, also complicit with the offer of Sigma, I rediscovered the pleasure of fixed focal lengths: The result pays off, especially on the small Olympus that has the stabilization on the sensor. It is however a perspective that, in my opinion, requires a certain commitment to use: If you want, often gives you the pleasure of discovery. I put it often in the camera bag, next to a zoom 14-150: I do not weigh at all, also due to the system micro 4/3 |
 | sent on October 22, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, lightweight and compact, good quality construction. Cons: Only f2.8, no stabilization. Opinion: Bought for the a6000, I needed a portrait with autofocus (to photograph the kids) and wanted a 85-90mm equivalent focal length, so I discarded the sony 50mm. I waited a few months before trying to write something about this goal, and even now I do it with some "shame," because I just think it's necessary to learn how to use these goals before getting an idea. RnI start from the end: when you hit the picture with Sigma 60, the latter is really beautiful, crystal clear in sharpness. However, it's not so easy to always get the picture, and I happen to miss much more than it does with shorter goals. Obviously, it will be said to me, well, now I understand it too. This is especially true in the closed; you need to use 1/100 or shorter times, otherwise it's easy to have micromasses (at least with my hands), and in combination with the maximum aperture of 2.8 you can easily reach 3200 ISO. THE'%3Bautofocus is fast but not fast, and in AF-C uses only the center of the frame, so the goal is not very suitable to follow the children's games. The blur is pleasing, in some cases with a slight swirl effect; if you pay attention to the subject / background distance, you can get very pleasant effects. The colors are beautiful, with a slight tendency (my impression) to the cool tones. The surgical sharpness of the lens means that in portraits, especially women, it is necessary to work in PP to slightly soften the face skin. Thus, with a relatively small expense, a compact and light canvas is bought, very suitable for philosophy of the a6000 and of the mirrorless in general, capable of obtaining high quality shots; in combination with the a6500, equipped with room stabilization, I guess its use is even more profitable. |
 | sent on June 11, 2017 Pros: Lightweight, good construction, beautiful colors, very clear, very focal length. Cons: AF not fast (but absolutely forgivable to a lens at this price). Opinion: I'm reviewing the Micro 4/3 version. Aim for the exceptional value for money, much better in my opinion than the 19mm ART brothers (which I also reviewed). Like this, it includes hood, it's a good and futuristic construction, and pleasing to the touch. Compared to this, it seems clearer, AF is similarly quicker but more reliable: it rarely completely blames the desired focal point. For reliability and accuracy (not unfortunately, for speed) it is comparable to me for the excellent M. Zuiko 45mm f1.8. The optical quality is remarkable, nothing relevant to criticize. I use the LF 60mm (which becomes 120mm on a full frame), it takes detailed scenes but without the perspective too compressed, as I think it seems 75mm with M. Zuiko , Even 5 times more expensive. In my opinion the lens is a great companion for the lightweight and versatile 19mm ART traveling. Like this, it has an internal floating element, so you do not have to worry when it sNoticed by the machine, it shows noises as something moving inside. |
 | sent on November 05, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, size and weight, price Cons: Ring MF smooth for me uncomfortable; lens not really that great Opinion: Goal that is unrivaled for quality / price ratio, I made a comparison between this and the Zuiko 75mm 1.8 and ... well, you could not see big differences to the same openings, something that left me stunned. Obviously it is not made out of metal, and does not have great finishes, but as for glasses, is exceptional: crystal clear, even at room temperature, gives good images, absolutely great for a lens that costs less than 200 Euros. Absolutely recommended. |
  | sent on September 26, 2016 Pros: first-class overall performance in absolute terms; Exceptional sharpness already at full aperture; excellent bokeh for portraits; compactness; feather-weight; Good general construction; price almost "ridiculous" when compared to benefits; Cons: Aesthetically cute, but not beautiful, design less attractive, for example, the Olympus Zuiko m4 / 3; Perhaps the focus ring to smooth fire and "slippery" if someone intends to use it in manual ... Opinion: Used paid 100 euro, it returns absolutely outstanding performance: call it perspective halfway (in a good way!) Between a lens purely from portrait (it owns the beautiful bokeh and appropriate focal length) and a tele macro (preserves extreme sharpness and really risolvenza at the highest levels); On my (old!) Pana GF1 produces first-rate portraits: I am honest, the yield of this lens has almost me "displaced" to the surprise of having in his hands a "lentina" so tiny and economic returns such photos ! .... RnPraticamente made me "think again" on the entire system m4 / 3 .... In the "portraits off" the subject, and the off well, like other fixed lenses from portrait that I own for SLR .. .... and I paid several times more than this !!! rn |
 | sent on August 20, 2016 Pros: Sharpness fantastic, already at f2.8 and the edges. Cheaply. With carrying case. Cons: No stabilization Opinion: sublime optical quality, better than his brother Sony 50mm f1.8 optically. Too bad for stabilization because otherwise it would be 10.rnIl that is f2.8 and f1.8 not like Sony is felt only when you are shooting in critical condition where combining 1.3 stops in more than diaphragm and 2-3 stops of stabilization , you can take pictures even in very little light. Autofocus not fast but still a bit 'better than Sony. |
 | sent on June 24, 2016 Pros: Exceptional sharpness already TA; rnBelle finishes with great ring MF; rnPrezzo negligible compared to the benefits; Cons: L had a printed and it cost 10 times as much, the vestal virgins of the German glass masturberebbero in public from excitement. Opinion: It got used but in excellent condition; therefore we paid very little. At first sight, having made the shots randomly in internal I was a little 'disappointed, then adjust the camera came out of unexpected quality images, both at the level of landscape portraiture when you can not get close to the subject. sharp and saturated colors, AF pretty fast, weight and dimensions after all contenute.rnIl mix of the high micro-contrast and saturated colors often involves obtaining a very significant piacevole.rnNon three-dimensional effect that is "only" an f 2.8; so many noble luminous and expensive objectives are to be closed at this level to get an acceptable result. This can be used safely in TA.rnDalle photos taken so far seems to me that even the margins are worthy of the highest considerazione.rnCredo can be compared without worries excellent and appreciated 45 Olympus.rnConcludendo: a mandatory target for microquattroterzisti without the snobbish. |
 | sent on April 08, 2016 Pros: Price, sharpness, supplied accessories, solid construction Cons: Barrel and smooth ring MF Opinion: I have this for over a year now and I use it with optical sull'Olympus M10 satisfaction, I must say I was pleasantly surprised by the light output reaches the maximum yield and sharpness already af / 2.8 no coincidence I use a lot in TA . I consider it an excellent medium telephoto portrait for m4 / 3 system, its versatility and I count greater than the Zuiko 75mm f / 1.8 in as short as a focal and 2.8 is already the limit for me to have the facial plans fire and frankly I see no reason to use the widest apertures. New took the modest sum of 180 €, in the box there were a hard case and lens hood (other brands should learn from Sigma) what to say more, lens Highly recommended! vote 10 |
 | sent on March 30, 2016 Pros: definitely price. But also a considerable sharpness. And solid construction. Cons: Lack of stabilizer, but for what it costs .... Opinion: Upon arriving, I took a dozen indoor portraits, in an absolutely unfavorable conditions. Sony A6000 camera. When I opened the files could not believe my eyes, a sharpness of fear (I Nikon full frame, so I can easily make the comparison). I am very happy to have resisted the sirens and, after the usual numerous readings, preferred to have an economic objective but by reputation. Deserved, I must say. |
 | sent on March 21, 2016 Pros: sharpness, price, size Cons: only 2.8, unstabilized Opinion: I state that I also had the sony 50 1.8 oss and I will make a comparison with this Sigma Sigma 60 to 60. 2.8 has the same depth of field of 50 to 2.2 for sony Sigma The greatest value is a devastating sharpness at full aperture. bokeh is pleasant, the focus is fast and accurate. a6000 of the continuous fire works only at the points of the central zone. since I do mostly portraits, I preferred to sony for field angle away on APSC. very often people leave out the crop factor and I've found a lot nicer this equivalent 90mm, compared to the sony 50 which is equivalent to a 75mm (it will fish meat). I must say that sony has since its a really creamy bokeh, I have not found in Canon and Pentax. certain that costs much more than the latter two. has even more stabilizing than the Sigma, but I always use outdoors and is not a problem to have if you do video stabilization. in essence I preferred to keep the 60mm and 30mm sigma, for the fact that the focali 30 and 50 are close enough. |
 | sent on October 15, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, Blurry pleasant, fast autofocus well supported, Price Cons: Uncomfortable the manual focus, ring slippery. Opinion: Trio sigma dn to, the better riuscita.rnNitidissima the center, good to bordi.rnIn manual pays the price of design, focheggiatura uncomfortable because slippery, compensation of a6000 has a handsome and af rapido.rnOttima and uniform between f4 and focal f6rnLa is a bit 'strange, on APSC more suited to portrait and ambientato.rnConsigliata. |
user47725  | sent on October 10, 2015 Pros: sharpness wide open, non-existent chromatic aberration Cons: nobody Opinion: Yesterday I purchased this light for 120 Euros from NOC practically new with warranty still to be shipped, I made some shots that I published, the next try in astrophotography, I think will give me great satisfaction. Another field that will experience is that of the macro, but I will need an extension tube I've seen on the web but I still have to buy. From the evidence seen on ePHOTOzine sharpness it is higher than the mark olympus. See for yourself the photos published and give me one of your parere.rn29.09.2016 I added a close-up made with this in mind, I emphasize the remarkable speed autofocus |
 | sent on July 11, 2015 Pros: excellent value for money, great sharpness nice boken, precise autofocus. Cons: perhaps the focus speed is not the best Opinion: I bought a few days this lens by a website for my Olympus epl7 and are very pleased with the good building excellent sharpness very nice in boken, at first I was undecided whether to take that lens I take a ring adapter and mount the metabones 50mm.nikon but the price was even higher than the 60mm.sigma, so I made the best choice, highly recommended. |
 | sent on July 07, 2015 Pros: Sharpness abominable, ridiculous price, dimensions, bokeh Cons: Nobody Opinion: Optics really fabulous I always used 5DMKII ladies with optical and this makes me not regret I was really speechless, I did not think you could get a sharpness and thus a pleasant bokeh with optics of this size and price I could put in against the " only "2.8 but I think it would be stupid because the advantages mentioned above. Tested on a6000 |
 | sent on June 29, 2015 Pros: Value, weight and size, sharpness, af. Cons: with the camera turned off, moving it one perceives a noise inside the lens body. Opinion: I bought this light attracted by the price and the positive opinions on the internet. The use with a sony a6000. I am fully satisfied and I think in terms of yield well above the 1670z I purchased recently, which is very much less clear for the same focus and does not reach the same detail in any circumstances. The AF is fast, pleasant bokeh. The detail is so high that you can not use a click even cutting it out much. Among the lenses available for grafting And this is the best choice, since all zeiss always have a high cost and that Sony does not offer a wide selection. |
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
