Giao Nguyen

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


Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9

D850 is a copy of Sony A99II

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2017 at 14:03 UTC as 140th comment | 2 replies
On article Sony Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sample Gallery (269 comments in total)
In reply to:

ph2004: Hi guys, just got the 55mm 1.8. First impression: amazing.
This 50 came out literally the same day I received the 55. So now I'm in the middle of a crossroad if I return or not. Of course main differences are aperture and size/weight (55mm is tiny btw). I'm also into video and one thing that concerns me is if I'll adapt to focus by wire. I've done some reading on this new 50mm 1.4 and it's not so clear to me if it has a full manual option (like my old Canons...), despite the A/M button on the lens.
Does anybody know this?

For video shooters out there, should I keep this 55mm and get used to focus by wire? My first tests weren't bad, and since I'm a heavy enthusiast (only), I feel like I could manage the adaptation. Not sure tho

The new 50mm 1.4 is very tempting.. But the weight is though to get around, esp compared with the solid 55mm. So I'm looking for more reasons (if any) to actually change my 55 1.8 to the 50 1.4... Money is not the problem, but I value intelligent decisions!

I have the 55mm F1.8 but I don't like focus by wire for video. I have a set of MF lens for video. The Sony lens is great in AF mode.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2016 at 01:13 UTC
On article Have your say: Best High-end ILC of 2015 (21 comments in total)

Sony A7RII

Link | Posted on Dec 17, 2015 at 00:48 UTC as 9th comment | 3 replies
On article Canon EOS M3 real-world samples (147 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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2012 at 15:47 UTC
Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9