On this page you can find a quick review of various cameras, lenses, softwares etc. I’ve used during the years. For a more in depth review of each object just click on the corresponding link, if present.
CAMERAS
35mm film
35mm & smaller digital
Medium format (film & digital)
Large format
Instant
LENSES
Full frame, APS-C, APS-H, m4/3
– Canon FD
– Canon EF
– Contax-Yashica
– Fujifilm X
– Konica
– Leica M
– Leica R
– m39 / Leica screw
– m42 / Pentax screw
– m4/3
– Minolta AF
– Minolta MC / MD
– Nikon DX
– Nikon F / FX
– Nikonos
– Olympus OM
– Pentax K
– Sony E
– Sony FE
– Sigma
– Soligor
– Tamron
– Tokina
– Vivitar
Medium & large format
– 4×5″
– 8×10″
– Hasselblad H
– Hasselblad V
– Mamiya RB
– Pentacon Six
– Pentax 645
– Pentax 67
Software
Extras
Cameras
35mm film
Canon Eos 50E
Pros: excellent camera, light, eye AF (meaning: it focuses where you are actually looking!)
Cons: fragile
Rating: 
Canon Eos 100
Pros: excellent camera, lightweight
Cons: not the most exciting way to shoot film…
Rating:
Canon Eos 1n
Pros: price; performance
Cons: a 35mm camera this big hardly makes sense anymore if not for limited tasks
Rating: 
Full review
Canon 7
Pros: excellent build; really pretty (not Leica pretty, but still…); price; m39 (if you don’t have/want Leica M mount glass)
Cons: useless ugly light meter (most likely dead); m39 (if you have/want Leica M mount glass); writings in the viewfinder can look blurry if you are farsighted.
Rating:
Canon F1n
Pros: excellent camera, pro build, nice and compact, spot metering
Cons: a tad heavy, doesn’t feel as refined as a Nikon or Minolta of the same vintage
Rating:
Contax 137 MA Quartz
Pros: excellent camera, lightweight, manual mode (the 137 MD is fully automatic, though), Zeiss lenses, winder
Cons: the sound of the shutter/motor is a bit unpleasant and loud
Rating:
Contax 139 Quartz
Pros: excellent camera, lightweight and compact, manual mode, Zeiss lenses, a joy to use, price
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Contax ST
Pros: apparently built like a tank
Cons: shoddy build quality (some parts just glued together); whining noise from the winder
Rating:
Fed 2
Pros: cheaper than dirt; extremely compact; quite cute; even with the cons, nice to use all the same
Cons: viewfinder is a peephole; cheaply build; prone to break if you don’t follow the right procedures
Rating:
Leica CL
Pros: price; performance; size
Cons: doesn’t meter properly, even with battery adapter (it used mercury cells); extremely well built, but not quite on par with a Leica M; rangefinder prone to desilvering; short rangefinder base (for fast lenses)
Rating:
Leica M2
Pros: nearly perfect camera
Cons: pricey; no meter
Rating:
Leica M4-P
Pros: nearly perfect camera
Cons: pricey (compared to an M6); no meter
Rating:
Full review
Leica M6
Pros: a jewel; perfect camera (other than not being medium format…)
Cons: a bit pricey (but it’s worth every penny*); build quality not quite on par with an M2
*a few years back, when it costed 600€, not anymore at 3.500€!
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Minolta Hi-Matic FP
Pros: really beautiful; compact; decent rangefinder
Cons: only automatic; unexciting lens
Rating:
Minolta CL-E
Pros: price; performance; size; rangefinder
Cons: doesn’t meter on manual; no longer in production; extremely well built, but not quite on par with a Leica
Rating:
Full review
Minolta SRT-101
Pros: one of the best 35mm cameras ever made; huge, extremely easy to focus finder; lenses (very good) sell for peanuts
Cons: only Manual mode, no auto-whatsoever (but for me this is a plus!)
Rating: ✚✚
Minolta X-500
Pros: really great camera, light, compact
Cons: metallic clinking sound when pressing the shutter
Rating:
Nikon F
Pros: excellent cult camera, nice handling
Cons: not as refined as the following models
Rating:
Nikon F4s
Pros: “THE” (35mm) camera, stable to shoot, fast, reliable, still super speedy af
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Nikon F801s
Pros: a sort of more portable F4s; perfect ergonomics; pure Nikon style (finder, dials etc.); spot and matrix.
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Nikon FM
Pros: excellent camera, a real workhorse, light and compact
Cons: the “3 dots” meter in the viewfinder (I prefer LED bars or needles)
Rating: ✚
Nikon L35AF
Pros: Sonnar scheme lens, distance indicator in the finder
Cons: a tad loud, a tad too large, no manual controls
Rating:
Nikonos II
Pros: cult camera; nice handling; wonderful lens (the 35mm); waterproof / underwater (if the seals are in good shape)
Cons: scale focus only; no meter; parts no longer available (even seals)
Rating:
Nikonos V
Pros: cult camera; nice handling; wonderful lens (the 35); waterproof / underwater (if the seals are in good shape)
Cons: scale focus only; no meter; not as pretty nor as well built as the II / III models in my experience
Rating:
Olympus XA
Pros: excellent camera, super light and compact, very sharp, rangefinder focusing
Cons: no buil-in flash (but there is the optional A11 flash available)
Rating: ✚
Olympus Mju-1
Pros: fairly sharp, super compact, really nice handling
Cons: when you turn it on the flash is always active
Rating:
Olympus OM1
Pros: excellent camera, light and compact, massive viewfinder
Cons: it doesn’t feel super refined, weird position of the shutter times dial (but you get used to it fairly fast)
Rating:
Pentax Spotmatic F
Pros: really beautiful and nice camera; can use M42 lenses (i.e. Pentax 50/2 or Fuji’s lineup)
Cons: viewfinder a tad dark, but still easy to focus
Rating:
Pentax LX
Pros: amazing camera, light and compact
Cons: build quality (mirror bumpers etc.)
Rating: if not in proper shape
Rating: if you happen to find one working nicely
Pentax ME Super
Pros: amazing camera, light and compact (pretty much the same size of a Leica M6 if not slightly smaller, when used with a compact lens like the 40mm or the 50/1.7), wonderful viewfinder
Cons: buttons instead of a dial to set the shutter speeds (no big deal IMHO)
Rating:
Rollei 35T
Pros: excellent camera, amazingly light and compact, very sharp
Cons: no built-in flash, scale focus only, prone to break if you don’t follow the instructions
Rating:
Yashica FR-1
Pros: price; the only reflex I ever owned with a better viewfinder than the Minolta SRT-101, even easier to focus; it can use Zeiss and Yashica ML lenses
Cons: it’s impossible to see the needle of the galvanometer in poor light; battery-dependant; you have to push a separate button to activate the meter
Rating:
35mm & smaller digital
Canon Eos 1Ds Mark II
Pros: price; performance; colors
Cons: big and heavy; high iso
Rating:
Canon Eos 5D (“Classic”)
Pros: excellent sensor; performance at high-iso (for its age); pretty much everything else
Cons: heavy compared to a mirrorless; only 12Mp (but they go a long way…); great colors; cheap as dirt (when I bought it, not now anymore)
Rating: ✚✚
Canon Eos 5D Mark II
Pros: excellent sensor and resolution; performance at high-iso; pretty much everything else
Cons: heavy compared to a mirrorless; highlight nuances have a tendency to solarize if you “massage” the files too much; slow shutter lag
Rating: ✚✚
Fuji Finepix X100
Pros: a jewel (with the latest firmware), lightweight
Cons: manual focus (by wire) usable, but barely; files look a bit plasticky
Rating:
Full review
Fujifilm X100s
Pros: a jewel (especially if it had a proper mechanically linked manual focus), lightweight
Cons: manual focus (by wire); relatively slow AF
Rating: ✚
Fujifilm X-T10
Pros: excellent camera, light, fast and precise AF, nice film simulations and colors, super compact, wonderful lens lineup; keeps the highlights from blowing out quite nicely
Cons: X-Trans sensor (I find the rendering too “crunchy” with natural subjects, and at times too soft if there is any haze, fog etc.); at times weird, plasticky colors
Rating:
Fujifilm X-T1
Pros: excellent camera, light, fast and precise AF, nice film simulations and colors, super compact, wonderful lens lineup; keeps the highlights from blowing out quite nicely
Cons: X-Trans sensor (I find the rendering too “crunchy” with natural subjects, and at times too soft if there is any haze, fog etc.); at times weird, plasticky colors
Rating:
Fujifilm X-Pro 2
Pros: excellent camera, light, fast and precise AF, nice film simulations and colors, a 21th century Leica, wonderful lens lineup
Cons: slight tendency to blow the highlights beyond recovery over a threshold (esp. with flash), X-Trans sensor (I find the rendering too “crunchy” with natural subjects, and at times too soft if there is any haze, fog etc.)
Rating:
Leica M8
Pros: nearly-perfect camera; stunning color AND black and white rendering; super sharp detail
Cons: pricey; slow; 1.3 crop (not a big deal); IR filters (also a pro, for BW); shutter noise (compared to other Leica M); needs old, slow SD cards or it will corrupt the files; low resolution (but it upscales beautifully)
Rating: ✚
Leica M9
Pros: nearly-perfect camera, if not for the HUGE cons; rendering of detail (super sharp but smooth, a bit like large format film); color rendering
Cons: pricey; risk of sudden electronic death; sensor rot; sensor glass breaking by itself; shutter noise (compared to other Leica M); not easily repairable anymore
Rating: ✚
Nikon D2x
Pros: excellent camera, nice colors, wonderful files (even when printed fairly big), fast to shoot
Cons: a bit heavy, large size (but it incorporates a grip), hi-iso really bad for 2021 (I happen to like the rendering at 800 Iso, though)
Rating: ✚
Nikon D3200
Pros: price; performance; size; weight; silent (for a DSLR)
Cons: doesn’t focus with not AF-S lenses, or meter with Ai’s; only one command dial; cheaply built; horrid LCD; can’t change aperture in Live View
Rating: for a beginner
Rating: for an advanced amateur
Full review
Nikon D800
Pros: relatively light, excellent files, excellent colors (film, Canon, newer Fujis and Olympus still beat it soundly though)
Cons: often AF misses, not only in low light; extremely limited buffer; shutter lag if using the internal flash; the viewfinder is not big/sharp/contrasty enough to judge focus; quite unbalanced ergonomics (front heavy).
Rating:
Olympus OM-D EM-10
Pros: excellent camera, light and compact, amazing colors, IBIS (hint: pair it with a Panasonic 25/1.7 for pure fun)
Cons: it is not sluggish, but it feels like it is (the sound of the shutter is the main culprit)
Rating:
Olympus Tough TG-850
Pros: light and compact; 180 degrees tilt screen for selfies; 21mm equivalent lens; wonderful colors; waterproof / underwater
Cons: blotchiness of the files (extreme compression); no raw
Rating:
Panasonic Lumix DMC LX-15
Pros: excellent camera; light and super compact; 180 degree selfie-friendly tilt screen; colors; 4k video
Cons: no viewfinder
Rating:
Sigma DP1 Merrill
Pros: excellent camera; light and compact; amazing colors; excellent controls
Cons: no viewfinder; lens not as good as the DP2 (but still…); needs to use Sigma Photo Pro; eats batteries like rolls of 35mm film (you can expect to shoot 30 odd frames per battery)
Rating:
Sigma DP2 Merrill
Pros: excellent camera; light and compact; amazing colors; excellent controls; spectacular lens
Cons: no viewfinder; needs to use Sigma Photo Pro; eats batteries like rolls of 35mm film (you can expect to shoot 30 odd frames per battery)
Rating:
Sony Nex 3
Pros: really good image quality; compact
Cons: more a remote than a camera; shutter noise; LCD useless in the sun
Rating: interface
Rating: image quality
Full review
Sony Nex 7
Pros: exceptional image quality; compact; extremely good controls layout; quiet shutter
Cons: you can’t use a remote AND auto bracketing at the same time
Rating:
Sony A7
Pros: nearly-perfect camera, with exceptional image quality; compact; nearly perfect control layout; better than the A7r in all respects IMO; nice colors (not SOOC, you will have to work the files in LR or CO); great black and white machine (like the A7r)
Cons: the look of the noise at high Iso (even if technically it has less noise than other older cameras, I prefer them to the A7); shutter lag; (relatively) slow AF (plenty fast for me, and not a problem with the LA-EA4); “mushy” shutter button (solvable using a sticky soft release); a touch uninspiring
Rating:
Sony A7r
Pros: nearly-perfect camera, with exceptional image quality; compact; nearly perfect control layout; great black and white machine
Cons: shutter shock and noise; shutter lag; (relatively) slow AF (plenty fast for me, and not a problem with the LA-EA4); “mushy” shutter button (solvable using a sticky soft release); colors often fixable to my satisfaction not even in post; a touch uninspiring
Rating:
Sony A7r Mark II
Pros: exceptional image quality; compact; control layout; great black and white machine; IBIS
Cons: (relatively) slow AF; Sony colors (not as bad as the original A7r though); uninspiring
Rating:
Sony RX100 IV
Pros: excellent camera, super light and compact, very sharp, really nice colors
Cons: expensive, the retractable lens in theory could be easy to break
Rating:
Medium format (film & digital)
Fuji GS 645
Pros: amazing lens; extremely compact; great rangefinder & viewfinder
Cons: mechanically fragile; leak-prone bellows (the original one)
Rating: ✚ lens
Rating: mechanic
Full review
Fuji GW690
Pros: huge 6x9cm negatives; sharp; uncomplicated; lightweight (for the format); hand-holdable; luxurious bokeh
Cons: the rangefinder can be tough to focus in extremely dim light (interiors at night with no light)
Rating:
Fujifilm GFX 50s II
Pros: amazing and relatively big sensor (smaller than Hasselblad H or 645 film, but still 70% larger than 35mm); uncomplicated; lightweight (for the format); hand-holdable; best camera I ever used in terms of results (colors and sharpness).
Cons: the viewfinder could be a touch sharper (to avoid having to punch to zoom for manual focus); AF is on the slow-ish side (but fast for medium format); a couple more customizable buttons would have been nice.
Rating: ✚✚
Hasselblad 500c & 500c/m
Pros: for me it is THE camera, period
Cons: price (but it’s worth every penny); no longer in production; digital backs are still hugely expensive (ok, not the ‘blad fault)
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Hasselblad H3D2-22
Pros: it’s an Hasselblad…; colors
Cons: price; no longer in production; slow and cumbersome; not as intuitive as a 500c/m (read the manual!)
Rating:
Holga 120FN
Pros: super-fun to use; the crazy distortions on the film plane (I love them); super-cheap
Cons: the crazy distortions on the film plane (if you don’t like it); a fair bit of DIY is often needed to fix some problem at the beginning
Rating:
Mamiya RB67
Pros: excellent camera, excellent glass, fairly compact for what it does (IMO! Even though it is generally considered a giant beast), usable handheld with an L grip
Cons: heavy, the bellows can develop light leaks (it never happened to me, though)
Rating:
Pentax 645
Pros: excellent camera, super easy to use handheld, super easy to focus (really nice viewfinder, even if a bit dim), wonderful lenses
Cons: really too heavy (for the format; if I have to lug around all that weight, I’d rather bring along a 6×7; even the 8×10 kit is way lighter that this one!); controls (no dials)
Rating:
Pentax 6×7 & 67
Pros: price; really good hand-held; if you shoot portraits, the 105/2.4 alone is a valid reason to buy it
Cons: bulk; some of the lenses (no “spark”; many too old); no digital back options; shutter induced vibrations / shake
Rating:
Full review
Rolleicord IIb
Pros: price; really good hand-held; the Zeiss Triotar has lot of character, perfect for portraits (but landscapes too); whisper quiet; light
Cons: the original screen is unbelievably dim, replace it with a modern one from Rick Oleson
Rating:
Rolleicord III
Pros: price; really good hand-held; extremely sharp Schneider Xenar lens; whisper quiet; light
Cons: supposedly you cannot keep it on a tripod when you walk around without bending the back (never had a problem, and the same should be true for every other Rolleiflex / Rolleicord)
Rating: ✚
Full review
Rolleicord Vb
Pros: price; really good hand-held; extremely sharp Schneider Xenar lens; whisper quiet; light
Cons: focusing knob on the left (I prefer the older models, with the knob on the right)
Rating:
Voigtlander Perkeo IIIE
Pros: wonderful camera, extremely light and compact (for medium format), very sharp, rangefinder focusing (uncoupled), lens rendering (in both color& b/w)
Cons: the rangefinder is uncoupled; after all these years the shutter will likely need a CLA; values extremely hard to read on the shutter if you’re farsighted, even just a bit
Rating:
Yashica-Mat
Pros: price; good lens; extremely easy to focus (for its age; compared to the Rolleicords, even with the Oleson screen, it’s a night and day difference)
Cons: hard to see shutter values (for my eyesight, at least); prone to break (lubricants do not age well: do a CLA before starting using it and you should non have any trouble); focus dial on the left (I prefer on the right)
Rating:
Large format
Busch Pressman model D (4×5″)
Pros: super duper compact, precise movements, rangefinder focusing
Cons: spring back (no Graflok back, but not a huge deal IMO: if you want to shoot medium format for the same money buy a medium format camera, not a rollfilm adapter)
Rating: ✚
Intrepid 8×10″
Pros: super lightweight 8×10″ camera, nice ground glass
Cons: movements not that precise, front standard could be stronger, camera not that well refined (but for the price and weight: no cons at all)
Rating:
Instant
Fuji Instax Wide 300
Pros: the film is large, the lens renders quite nicely
Cons: piece of plastic crap, fairly slow lens, no AF, forced flash
Rating:
Polaroid SX-70
Pros: a piece of art and an artist brush
Cons: prone to break (after all these years)
Rating: ✚✚
Polaroid Image System / Spectra
Pros: large(r) film format
Cons: it is not as nice to use as an SX-70 (not by a long shot); discontinued film format
Rating:
Lenses for DX, Full frame and m4/3
Canon FD mount
Canon FD 50mm f/1,8
Pros: sharp; cheap; bokeh
Cons: build quality
Rating:
Canon EF mount
Canon EF 24mm f/1,4 Usm I
Pros: sharp
Cons: heavy; spherochromatism at full aperture (purple fringing)
Rating:
Full review
Canon EF 24mm f/2,8 Usm IS
Pros: sharp; IS
Cons: –
Rating:
Canon EF 24-85mm f/3,5-4,5 Usm
Pros: light; cheap; reasonably sharp at 24mm
Cons: soft at 85mm
Rating:
Full review
Canon EF 35mm f/2 Usm IS
Pros: sharp; IS; fast
Cons: a tad large for my taste
Rating:
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
Pros: really sharp and small
Cons: AF a touch too slow
Rating:
Canon EF 50mm f/1,8 II
Pros: sharpness; bokeh; cheap
Cons: lack of consistency in the autofocus at full aperture
Rating:
Full review
Canon EF 50mm f/1,8 STM
Pros: sharpness (my sample better than the EF v II); bokeh; cheap
Cons: you can’t focus it without turning on the camera first (might be a cons for street)
Rating: ✚
Canon EF 135mm f/2 L Usm
Pros: wonderful
Cons: price; no Zeiss “spark”
Rating:
Full review
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 Usm IS
Pros: sharp; IS; wonderful bokeh, excellent for portraits (it doesn’t render like an f/4 lens at all)
Cons: –
Rating: ✚
Canon EF 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6
Pros: sharp enough; compact; light
Cons: plasticky
Rating:
Contax-Yashica mount
Contax Zeiss 18mm f/4 Distagon MM
Pros: compact, light; super sharp close up; quite flare resistant in most circumstances
Cons: vignetting; a bit of distortion; not super sharp at normal distances
Rating: landscapes
Rating: close-up (let’s say up to 1 or 2 meters)
Contax Zeiss 25mm f/2,8 Distagon
Pros: colors
Cons: sharpness not that great
Rating:
Full review
Contax Zeiss 28-85mm f/3,3-4 Vario-Sonnar MM
Pros: pretty darn sharp at every focal length; bokeh; super cheap these days; wonderful rendering at 85mm.
Cons: fairly (but not excessively) big; 82mm filters; a tad flare-prone for a T* lens
Rating:
Contax Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 Distagon
Pros: sharp; compact; colors; cheap
Cons: –
Rating:
Contax Zeiss 50mm f/1,7 Planar
Pros: sharp; compact; colors; amazing bokeh; cheap
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Contax Zeiss 60mm f/2,8 Makro S-Planar
Pros: stunning lens; 1:1
Cons: a bit heavy; hits the mirror slightly at infinity (on a Canon 5D Mark II)
Rating: ✚
Full review & Full review
Contax Zeiss 85mm f/2,8 Sonnar
Pros: razor-sharp; bokeh; compact
Cons: f/2,8
Rating:
Full review
Contax Zeiss 100-300mm f/4,5-5,6 Vario-Sonnar MM
Pros: stunning at every focal; compact
Cons: price; sticky aperture (but this could be my sample)
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Yashica ML 28-85mm f/3,5-4,5
Pros: cheap; colors; sharpness
Cons: flare; minimum focus distance (if not in macro mode)
Rating:
Rating: on Sony A7r
Full review
Yashica ML 28mm f/2,8
Pros: sharp; cheap; great colors
Cons: field curvature; not that sharp @ f/2.8
Rating:
Yashica ML 50mm f/1,7
Pros: cheap; beautiful colors; sharp
Cons: not so sharp on the A7r (still plenty good, though, just not exceptional)
Rating:
Yashica ML 80-200mm f/4
Pros: cheap; colors; sharpness
Cons: way less sharp than the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar (but I paid for it 1/600 of the price: 1€ vs 600€!), still very competent
Rating:
Fujifilm X digital mount
Zhonggi Lens Turbo II for Nikon lenses on Fuji bodies
Pros: compact; excellent results with the vast majority of Nikon lenses I tried
Cons: not super cheap like other focal reducers (but it’s wort it)
Rating:
Fujinon 14mm f/2.8 XF R
Pros: light and compact, super sharp
Cons: –
Rating:
Fujinon 16-50mm f/3,5-5,6 XC OIS II
Pros: light and compact, reasonably sharp, image stabilization
Cons: aperture not too fast
Rating:
Fujinon 18-55mm f/2.8-4 XF R OIS
Pros: light and compact, quite sharp, image stabilization
Cons: maybe a tad softer at the long end
Rating:
Fujinon 35mm f/2 XF R WR
Pros: light and compact, super sharp, weather resistant
Cons: f/2 for a 35mm lens is not that fast
Rating:
Fujinon 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 XF R LM OIS
Pros: relatively light and compact, really sharp, image stabilization
Cons: not that fast
Rating:
Konica mount
Konica AR 40 f/1.8 Hexanon Pancake
Pros: compact; very sharp from one stop down (much sharper than the 40mm M-Rokkor); renders beautifully
Cons: not so sharp wide open
Rating:
Leica M mount
Leica M Summicron-C 40mm f/2
Pros: scary-sharp; compact; one of my favourite lenses of all time.
Cons: bokeh not that great (on film; great on digital); often sold at crazy prices; focus ring on some samples a bit too tight
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Leica M Tele-Elmar 135mm f/4
Pros: sharp; compact; amazing bokeh
Cons: difficult to frame or focus on Leica M bodies (but not impossible, on my M8 and M9 is spot on); heavy
Rating:
Minolta M Rokkor 28mm f/2.8 (Leica M mount)
Pros: sharper than the (2nd and 3rd gen) Elmarit; colors; price
Cons: bubbles / Schneiderite (but they are not a problem); it brings up the wrong framelines on Leica M bodies
Rating:
Full review
Minolta M Rokkor 40mm f/2 (Leica M mount)
Pros: scary-sharp; compact; focus ring butter-smooth
Cons: bokeh not that great (on film; great on digital); often sold at crazy prices
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Minolta M Rokkor 90mm f/4 (Leica M mount)
Pros: compact; focus ring butter-smooth; beautiful tonalities; shallow DOF even if f/4
Cons: heavy field curvature at infinity (mostly noticeable shooting seascapes or “empty” horizons)
Rating: on Aps-c
Rating: ✚ on Sony A7r
Full review
Voigtlander 35mm f/1,2 Nokton Aspherical
Pros: sharp even at f/1,2; phenomenal bokeh
Cons: quite large and front heavy on a Leica M (paradoxically enough, pairs extremely well with a Leica CL, but watch out for focus errors at f/1,2 due the short base length of its rangefinder)
Rating: ✚✚
Leica R mount
Leica R Elmar 180mm f/4
Pros: extremely sharp; compact; nice bokeh; colors (corrected)
Cons: less sharp than the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar at the borders on full frame (but still excellent); greenish cast (WB needs a correction)
Rating:
m39 screw mount (Leica m39)
Canon ltm 50mm f/1,2
Pros: reasonably sharp even at f/1,2 (but hazy); bokeh (esp. up close); build quality; relatively small (for the speed); BW rendering
Cons: heavy; rendering in colors (esp. at f/1,2); infinity lock (mine is disabled though)
Rating:
Canon ltm 50mm f/1,8
Pros: reasonably sharp even at f/1,8; bokeh; build quality; small; BW rendering
Cons: infinity lock; rendering in colors
Rating:
Fed 50mm f/3.5 (m39)
Pros: collapsible, so super compact; decent sharpness
Cons: really low contrast; aperture really hard to change
Rating:
Jupiter-3 50mm f/1,5 (m39)
Pros: bokeh; really compact
Cons: sample variation; mechanical build quality
Rating:
Full review
Jupiter-9 85mm f/2
Pros: extremely sharp (for a Russian lens); absolutely gorgeous bokeh
Cons: sample variation; mechanical build quality
Rating:
Full review
Voigtlander 15mm f/4,5 Super-Wide Heliar (Leica m39/M mount)
Pros: really sharp; extremely compact
Cons: magenta / purple coloration at the borders; no filter thread (v 1)
Rating: on Aps-c
Rating: on Sony A7r
Full review
Voigtlander 21mm f/4 Color-Skopar P
Pros: sharp enough; extremely compact; controls
Cons: –
Rating:
Voigtlander 28mm f/1,9 Ultron Aspherical
Pros: sharp; extremely compact; phenomenal bokeh
Cons: a touch large on a Leica M (but now unwieldy by any means)
Rating: ✚✚
m42 screw mount (Pentax m42)
Fujinon-W 35mm f/2.8 EBC
Pros: nice rendering
Cons: not the sharpest (but I use it only handheld, to be fair I should try it first on a tripod)
Rating:
Pentax 50mm f/2
Pros: nice rendering; cheap
Cons: radioactive
Rating:
Zenitar 16mm f/2,8 fish-eye
Pros: cheap; colors; sharpness; resistance to flare
Cons: sample variation; special front cap; not razor-sharp wide open
Rating:
Micro 4/3 mount
Olympus OM Digital II R M.Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 (m4/3)
Pros: sharp; compact; cheap
Cons: a bit weaker at 42mm but still capable enough for huge prints
Rating:
Panasonic Lumix G Asph 25mm f/1.7 (m4/3)
Pros: sharp; compact; cheap; amazing rendering and bokeh
Cons: at times it misses focus on very small subjects or close focusing (but it could be my camera…); a bit too much CA in certain circumstances
Rating: ✚
Panasonic Lumix G Vario Asph 35-100mm f/4-5.6 Mega OIS (m4/3)
Pros: sharp; unbelievably compact; cheap; image stabilization
Cons: not that fast
Rating: ✚
Minolta AF mount
Minolta AF 50mm f/1,4 RS
Pros: manual focus buttery smooth (esp. for an AF lens); blistering sharp from f/2 (and at f/1.4 very little will be in focus anyway); still usable at f/32!!!; small and compact; cheap
Cons: could be sharper at f/1.4, with less aspherical aberration (“glow”); curved focus plane at infinity.
Rating:
Minolta AF 100mm f/2,8 Macro D
Pros: blistering sharp, especially from f/4; still sharp at f/22; relatively small and light; cheap
Cons: manual focus not so nice
Rating: ✚✚
Minolta AF 100-300mm f/4,5-5,6 Apo
Pros: really compact; super sharp even @ 300mm one or two stops down; ultra cheap
Cons: it’s so lightweight that it’s fairly easy to get shutter shock on the A7r; not so sharp wide open (usable, though)
Rating:
Minolta MD/MC mount
Minolta Rokkor 24mm f/2.8 MC
Pros: a bit sharper than the Olympus OM 24; great colors
Cons: I’m getting slightly inconsistent results (possibly due shutter shock?)
Rating:
Minolta Rokkor 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5 MD
Pros: great colors; rendering
Cons: not the sharpest lens out there (downright soft, indeed), even considering it is a zoom
Rating:
Minolta Rokkor 35mm f/1,8 MC
Pros: sharpness, bokeh, build, everything
Cons: –
Rating: ✚
Minolta Rokkor 50mm f/1.2 MD
Pros: quite sharp even @ f/1.2 on the A7r, and super sharp from f/2; the best bokeh I’ve ever seen this side of a large format Symmar
Cons: the borders are not as sharp as with slower lenses, even stopped down (but are still good enough)
Rating: ✚✚ this rating is given taking into account this is an ultra fast lens; don’t buy it for landscapes though, the borders are never great
Minolta Rokkor MD 50mm f/1,7
Pros: color rendition; bokeh
Cons: not the sharpest at full aperture
Rating:
Full review
Minolta Rokkor-PF 55mm f/1,7 MC
Pros: butter smooth focus; sharpness; bokeh (almost on par with the 50/1.2 in terms of quality)
Cons: not super sharp wide open or close-up
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Minolta Rokkor-PG 58mm f/1,2 MC
Pros: stunning on the GFX; butter smooth focus; sharpness; bokeh (on par with the 50/1.2 or even better in terms of quality)
Cons: not super sharp wide open or close-up (it’s from the ’70s…)
Rating: ✚✚
Minolta Rokkor 100mm f/2,5 MD
Pros: beautiful bokeh; quite sharp
Cons: CA
Rating:
Minolta Rokkor 135mm f/3,5 MD
Pros:
Cons:
[rating:]
Minolta Rokkor 200mm f/4 MC
Pros: sharper than the Leica 180/4 stopped down; nice rendering and colors; compact and nicely built; super cheap
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikon DX mount
Nikon AF-S 18-55mm f/3,5-5,6 DX G VR II
Pros: convenient focal range; quite sharp for a kit lens, especially at 18mm; resistance to flare
Cons: CA at 18mm; a bit slow to focus; focus sometimes hunt in low-light
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1,8 DX G
Pros: sharp (the Minolta 35/1.8 MC is sharper, though, on the A7r); beautiful rendering; cheap; it almost covers the full-frame
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikon AF-S 55-200 mm f/4-5,6 DX VR G ED
Pros: convenient focal range
Cons: I can handheld a legacy 200mm without stabilization at the same shutter speeds; waaay too soft
Rating:
Nikon F & FX mount
Nikon AF-S D 17-35mm f/2.8 ED
Pros: convenient focal range; nice and sharp
Cons: at times it misses focus in low light (it might be my sample); a tad bulky
Rating:
Nikon Ai 18mm f/3,5
Pros: “smooth” highlights roll; quite sharp; compact
Cons: a bit pricey
Rating: on film
Full review
Nikon AF D 18-35mm f/3,5-4,5 IF ED
Pros: convenient focal range
Cons: sharpness; better alternatives
Rating:
Full review
Nikon UD 20mm f/3,5
Pros: sharp; compact; nice, “old Nikkor” colors
Cons: chromatic aberration (trivial to correct in Lightroom)
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF 20mm f/2,8
Pros: sharp; compact
Cons: –
Rating: on film
Full review
Nikon Nikkor-N Auto (pre-Ai) 24mm f/2,8
Pros:
Cons:
[rating:]
Nikon AF 24mm f/2,8
Pros: reasonably sharp
Cons: nothing to write home about
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF-S G 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 ED VR
Pros: convenient focal range; vibration reduction; really sharp (at landscape apertures)
Cons: you need to turn off vibration reduction at certain speeds or it will blur the image
Rating:
Nikon Ai 28mm f/3,5
Pros: sharp as a tack; dirty cheap
Cons: –
Rating: visible light & infrared
Full review
Nikon AF D 28mm f/2,8
Pros: sharp; compact; price
Cons: –
Rating: on film
Full review
Nikon pre-Ai 35mm f/1,4 N
Pros: sharp; compact
Cons: a bit rare to find (this first version, with the rounded aperture blades); not cheap
Rating: visible light & infrared
Full review
Nikon 35mm f/2 O
Pros: price; compact; sharp; nice bokeh; close focusing; usable reversed in macro
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikon Ai 35mm f/2
Pros: compact; sharp
Cons: borders not great at full aperture; low contrast at full aperture
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF 35mm f/2
Pros: f/2; center sharpness
Cons: border sharpness; worse than the Ai sibling; decentering (my sample)
Rating: landscapes
Rating: low light & reportage
Full review
Nikon AF D 35-70mm f/2.8
Pros: convenient focal range; fast; really quite sharp (esp. at landscape apertures)
Cons: it starts at 35mm; limited zoom range (with a 50mm you just take a few steps to cover the same range, and a 50mm is cheaper, faster, sharper, lighter)
Rating:
Nikon Nikkor-S.C. Auto (pre-Ai) 50mm f/1.4
Pros: amazing bokeh and rendering; quite sharp
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikon Ai 50mm f/1.8 Series E
Pros: quite sharp; really compact
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikon AF 50mm f/1.8
Pros: quite sharp; ultra cheap; really compact; exceedingly nice bokeh
Cons: noisy (“screwdriver”) AF
Rating:
Nikon pre-Ai 55mm f/3,5 Micro
Pros: superb lens; sharp; dirty cheap
Cons: without a tube it goes only to 1:2
Rating: visible light
Rating: infrared
Full review
Nikon AF 60mm f/2,8 Micro
Pros: sharpness
Cons: stiff focusing ring; images less pleasant than with its Ai sibling
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF D 70-180mm f/4-5,6 IF ED Micro
Pros: sharpness
Cons: needs a rock solid tripod; limited full aperture
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF D 80-200mm f/2,8 ED
Pros: sharpness
Cons: purple fringing in some conditions (snow etc.); no tripod collar
Rating:
Full review
Nikon AF 85mm f/1,8
Pros: biting sharp; lightweight; small; fast; cheap
Cons: ugly plastic-covered barrel (ok, not a proper con, but still…)
Rating:
Full review
Nikon Ai 85mm f/2
Pros: sharp
Cons: less sharp and light than its AF sibling
Rating:
Full review
Nikon Ai Series E 100mm f/2,8
Pros: sharp; compact; price
Cons: f/2,8
Rating:
Full review
Nikon Ai 100-300mm f/5,6
Pros: compact; sharp; becomes a great macro coupled with an inverted Nikon 6T lens
Cons: way less sharp than a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar (but again, the price is and was vastly different too)
Rating:
Rating: in macro, coupled with an inverted 6T diopter lens
Nikon Nikkor-P Auto (pre-Ai) 105mm f/2.5
Pros: Sonnar like optical scheme; nice rendering; quite sharp
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikon Ai 105mm f/4 Micro
Pros: exceptional sharpness at macro distances
Cons: soft for landscape use (at least on DX); f/4
Rating: close up
Rating: distant subjects
Full review
Nikon Ai-S 180mm f/2,8
Pros: sharpness; bokeh; handling; easy to focus
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Nikon AF D 180mm f/2,8
Pros: sharpness; bokeh
Cons: a bit pricey (compared to the 80-200/2,8)
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Nikon Ai 200mm f/4
Pros: sharp (esp. from f/5,6); small; light; price
Cons: only “average” at full aperture
Rating:
Full review
Nikon Ai 300mm f/4,5 ED IF
Pros: light; quite sharp
Cons: manual focus (for sports etc.)
Rating:
Full review
Nikon TC-200 telecoverter
Pros: dirty cheap; compact; decent sharpness even wide open (with the 180/2.8 Ai-s)
Cons: –
Rating:
Nikonos mount
Nikon 35mm f/2,5 W-Nikkor
Pros: sharp; bokeh
Cons: scale focus only
Rating: ✚
Olympus OM mount
Olympus OM Zuiko 24mm f/2.8
Pros: sharp; compact; cheap
Cons: build quality feels really cheap compared to all the other major brands (this is a problem shared with the 28s, the 50 and the 135 as well)
Rating:
Olympus OM Zuiko 28mm f/2
Pros: excellent quality; pretty sharp from f/2 [as sharp as or sharper than the Canon EF L 24/1,4 mark I]
Cons: chromatic aberration [still a ton less than the Canon]
Rating:
Olympus OM Zuiko 28mm f/3,5
Pros: price; excellent quality; nice colors; zero chromatic aberration
Cons: a touch less sharp then the f/2 model; vignetting in the extreme angles
Rating:
Olympus OM Zuiko 35mm f/2
Pros: sharp; compact; cheap; nice rendering
Cons: build quality feels a bit cheap compared to all the other major brands (this is a problem shared with the 28s, the 50 and the 135 as well)
Rating:
Olympus OM Zuiko 35mm f/2,8 Shift
Pros: excellent quality; nice colors
Cons: not great at full aperture; resistance to flare
Rating:
Full review
Olympus OM Zuiko Auto-S MC “Japan” 50mm f/1,8
Pros: cheap; compact; sharp
Cons: no big improvements stopping down
Rating:
Full review
Olympus OM Zuiko 135mm f/3,5
Pros: compact; really sharp; ultra-cheap
Cons: build quality feels really cheap compared to all the other major brands (this is a problem shared with the 24, 28s, and the 50 as well)
Rating:
Pentax K mount
Pentax K 28mm f/3.5 M
Pros: cheap; compact; excellent lens
Cons: –
Rating:
Pentax M 40mm f/2,8 Pancake
Pros: compact; reasonably sharp
Cons: you can find better and cheaper lenses for a couple of mm more length (Pentax M 50mm f/1,7 etc.)
Rating: on film
Rating: on digital (full frame and APS-C)
Full review
Pentax Super-Takumar 50mm f/1,4 (8 elements design)
Pros: stunning lens
Cons: “grazes” slightly the mirror just at the infinity stop (on a Canon 5D Mark II); a bit rare to find
Rating:
Full review & Full review
Pentax Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm f/1,4 (7 elements design)
Pros: cheap; excellent lens
Cons: borders not that great
Rating:
Full review
Pentax K 50mm f/1.7 M
Pros: cheap; compact; excellent lens
Cons: bokeh not bad, but not to my taste
Rating:
Pentax Takumar 50mm f/2 (m42)
Pros: cheap; excellent lens; amazing rendering
Cons: radioactive
Rating:
Pentax M 50mm f/4 Macro
Pros: cheap; excellent lens; compact
Cons: requires a (simple) modification to work on Canon full-frame [like every other Pentax K lens]; f/4; only 1:2
Rating:
Full review
Pentax 105mm f/2,8 Super-Takumar
Pros: cheap; excellent bokeh
Cons: not that sharp in general, and quite soft at f/2,8
Rating:
Sony E mount
Sony 16mm f/2,8
Pros: decently sharp; useful focal range; nice rendering
Cons: nothing special;
Rating:
Sony FE mount
Sony 35mm f/2,8 Sonnar Zeiss ZA
Pros: reasonably sharp; useful focal range; nice rendering
Cons: nothing special; a touch too expensive for what it is; slow AF
Rating:
Sigma lenses
Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5,6 DC HSM (for Nikon)
Pros: reasonably priced; useful focal range
Cons: border sharpness only so-so; APS-C only
Rating: visible light
Rating: infrared
Full review
Sigma 30mm f/2,8 EX DN (for Sony Nex / APS-c)
Pros: reasonably priced; useful focal length; quite sharp; almost covers full frame (or at least a large 1.2 crop, especially if you remove the rear baffle)
Cons: cheaply built; manual focus implementation; APS-C only; slow maximum aperture
Rating:
Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 HSM DG (for Nikon)
Pros: excellent lens; sharp even wide open
Cons: expensive; large and heavy
Rating:
Sigma 400mm f/5,6 Apo Macro (for Nikon)
Pros: light; quite sharp
Cons: for landscapes, not as sharp as the Nikon 180 + the TC-200 converter (stopped down a bit)
Rating:
Soligor lenses
Soligor 80-200mm f/4,5 C/D MC (for Contax-Yashica)
Pros: really compact; reasonably sharp (esp. at landscape apertures); really cheap
Cons: never critically sharp
Rating:
Tamron lenses
Tamron AF 17-35mm f/2,8-4 Di LD IF Asph (for Minolta)
Pros: compact and lightweight; really sharp, especially close-up, straight from f/2.8 in the center @ 17mm; at landscape apertures (i.e. f/8 and below) quite sharp on the difficult sensor of the A7r at all focal lengths; super cheap
Cons: its name does not show up in the Exif (at least with the LA-EA4); sometimes you have to disconnect the LA-EA4 from the camera for the A7r to recognize the lens
Rating:
Tokina lenses
Tokina RMC 500mm f/8 (for Pentax K)
Pros: cheap; sharp; compact; nice colors
Cons: the usual ugly bokeh of catadioptric lenses; not that much depth of field
Rating: on Canon 5D Mark II
Rating: on Sony A7r and Nex 7
Vivitar lenses
Vivitar 17mm f/3,5 (for Olympus OM)
Pros: compact; reasonably sharp (esp. at landscape apertures); really cheap
Cons: heavy vignetting
Rating:
Lenses for medium & large format
4×5″
Kodak Ektar 127mm f/4.7 (4×5″)
Pros: beautiful rendering, very sharp, super compact
Cons: not a ton of coverage (but more than enough for landscapes)
Rating:
Schneider Angulon 90mm f/6.8 (4×5″)
Pros: beautiful rendering, very sharp, super compact
Cons: not a ton of coverage (but more than enough for landscapes)
Rating:
8×10″
Fujinon W S 250mm f/6.7 (8×10″)
Pros: amazing rendering, very sharp, decently compact
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Hasselblad H mount
Hasselblad HC 80mm f/2.8
Pros: ultra-sharp; (relatively) fast focusing; compact
Cons: expensive
Rating:
Hasselblad V mount
Hasselblad Zeiss 50mm f/4 Distagon C T*
Pros: 3D; ultra-sharp; one of my all-time favorite lenses
Cons: heavy
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Hasselblad Zeiss 80mm f/2,8 Planar C T* & CF
Pros: 3D; compact; one of the best lenses I ever used
Cons: –
Rating: ✚✚
Full review
Hasselblad Zeiss 150mm f/4 Sonnar C T* & CF
Pros: sharp
Cons: busy bokeh (strangely for a Sonnar)
Rating:
Hasselblad Zeiss 250mm f/5,6 Sonnar C T* & CF
Pros:
Cons:
[rating:]
Mamiya RB mount
Mamiya RB6 Sekor C 50mm f/4.5
Pros: cheap
Cons: –
[rating:]
Mamiya RB67 127mm f/3.5 K/L
Pros: beautiful modern rendering, very sharp, decently compact, fast
Cons: –
Rating: ✚
Pentacon Six mount
Zeiss Jena BM (Biometar) 80mm f/2.8
Pros: compact; reasonably priced; nice rendering
Cons: not that sharp
Rating:
Pentax 645 mount
Pentax 645 45mm f/2.8
Pros: compact; reasonably priced; nice rendering
Cons: –
Rating:
Pentax 645 75mm f/2.8
Pros: compact; reasonably priced; really beautiful rendering
Cons: –
Rating:
Pentax 67 mount
Pentax 67 45mm f/4
Pros: compact; reasonably priced
Cons: not that sharp, with poor borders
Rating:
Full review
Pentax 67 55mm f/3.5
Pros: compact; cheap
Cons: not that sharp
Rating:
Pentax 67 105mm f/2.4
Pros: amazing rendering (it is worth buying a Pentax 67 system even just for this lens, especially for portraiture); bokeh
Cons: slow to focus
Rating: ✚✚
Pentax 67 165mm f/2,8
Pros: sharpness; bokeh
Cons: lacks the Zeiss “spark”
Rating:
Full review
Software
Adobe PhotoShop CS 5 & 6 as a raw converter
Pros: the industry standard; average quality; options
Cons: price
Rating:
Full review
Adobe PhotoShop Lightroom from 3 to CC raw converter
Pros: streamlined workflow; average (old versions) / very good (current) quality
Cons: depending on your settings the modifications to your images can exist only in its database (hint: use XMP files); sloooooooooow (still, 2021)
Rating:
Full review
Full review
Apple Mac Os X Lion (7.1)
Pros: fast; new features
Cons: gray sidebar
Rating:
Full review
Apple Preview as a raw converter
Pros: great quality (Canon 5D Mark II); decent quality (Sony Nex 7)
Cons: limited for “creative” interpretations
Rating:
Full review
Capture One Pro 6.3.5 raw converter
Pros: decent quality (Canon 5D Mark II); great quality (Sony Nex 7)
Cons: pricey; confusing interface; litters the file system
Rating:
Full review
Capture One 21 raw converter
Pros: great quality; great colors
Cons: a bit pricey
Rating:
Core Image Fun House raw converter
Pros: free; great quality (Canon 5D Mark II); a lot of functions
Cons: no batch processing
Rating:
Full review
Corel AfterShot Pro 1.0.1 raw converter
Pros: nice interface
Cons: better options out there, and free
Rating:
Full review
Digital Photo Professional 3.11.4 raw converter
Pros: free
Cons: limited conversion options; quality not that great
Rating:
Full review
DXO Optics Pro 7 raw converter
Pros: (if your camera/lens combo is supported) automatic corrections
Cons: pricey; not that great; I had better results with other softwares (with a supported combo)
Rating:
Full review
Gimp 2.6.12 as a raw converter
Pros: free; levels; a lot of functions
Cons: no 16bit; messy interface
Rating:
Full review
Magic Lantern alternative firmware for Canon
Pros: adds a ton of useful functions
Cons: camera takes 1 second more to start; increased battery drain; can brick your camera
Rating:
Read the full review
Pocket Light Meter for iPhone
Pros: perfect app; free / cheap
Cons: –
Rating:
Full review
PerfectRaw 0.6 raw converter
Pros: –
Cons: surpassed
Rating:
Full review
RawDeveloper 1.9.4 raw converter
Pros: pretty good results
Cons: lacks an histogram; pricey
Rating:
Full review
Rawker 2.3.4 raw converter
Pros: fast; free; excellent quality (Canon 5D Mark II)
Cons: “barebone” interface
Rating:
Full review
RawTherapee 4.0.8 raw converter
Pros: excellent quality; a ton of options; excellent interface; free
Cons: –
Rating:
Full review
RawPhotoProcessor 4.5 64bit raw converter
Pros: great quality (Canon 5D Mark II); exceptional quality (Sony Nex 7) ; free / donationware
Cons: quality not up to par with Rawker and Preview (Canon 5D Mark II)
Rating: Canon 5D Mark II
Rating: Sony Nex 7
Full review
UFraw raw converter (stand alone)
Pros: free; nice interface
Cons: better options out there (unless you are on Linux)
Rating:
Full review
Extras
iFoco 2x Auto Teleconverter (for Pentax M-42 screw)
Pros: –
Cons: everything
Rating:
Full review