Giao Nguyen

Giao Nguyen

Lives in Canada Canada
Works as a engineer
Joined on Oct 24, 2005

Comments

Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7
On article Have your say: Best High-end ILC of 2015 (21 comments in total)

Sony A7RII

Direct link | Posted on Dec 17, 2015 at 00:48 UTC as 9th comment | 3 replies
On article Canon EOS M3 real-world samples (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Canon has proven it again that mirrorless is crap. People If you want good quality images get a real camera DSLR.

Mirrorless is not crap. The EOS-M3 is crap

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2015 at 00:18 UTC
In reply to:

RichRMA: Given the choice, would anyone really pay as much for that body as a Nikon D810? If you put the two side by side, you'd have to ask yourself, "Were did the money go, Sony?"

The A7SII can do 4K video and it is the king in low light for video. D810 cannot do that

Direct link | Posted on Sep 12, 2015 at 00:15 UTC
In reply to:

bluevellet: So... Why did Zeiss approve the FE 24-70 f4 and the E 16-70 f4?

The Sony Zeiss 16-70 is good from technical point of view, ie, sharp across the frame but it does not match the IQ of SEL50F18 at F4. It is still better than DSLR lens like 18-105 F3.5-F5.6.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 6, 2015 at 13:53 UTC
In reply to:

bluevellet: So... Why did Zeiss approve the FE 24-70 f4 and the E 16-70 f4?

Do you actually own the 16-70 or just read online review? I own the 16-70f4. This is a good lens.

Direct link | Posted on Jul 30, 2015 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

nemark: Knowing the (POOOR) quality of Sony lenses, I`ll wait some practical results, tests and comments to create my own opinion. Nice collection of focal lengths and apertures, but discussable q. (Don`t confuse Sony with Zeiss-for-Sony.)

Sony E lens are not all very poor. Only the 16mm is very poor. All others are pretty good. I have used my Nex5 with Nikon, Canon and Zeiss lens. I know Sony E lens is not as bad as some people say.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 15:50 UTC
In reply to:

peevee1: 16-50 is OK. I guess depends on quality, E18-55 is incredibly bad for a modern lens.
10-18 and 35 are somewhat overpriced compared to SLR competition (Sigma 10-20 lenses are $480, Tamron 10-24 are $450 etc).

The E18-55 is pretty good. I have used the nex5 with E18-55 and many Nikon, Canon lens. I do not see any difference between them. Only Nikon prime like 50mm f1.8 really impressed me but it is a prime lens.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 15:47 UTC
Total: 7, showing: 1 – 7