Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
125 Pages « < 62 63 64 65 66 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Photography The Sony Alpha Thread V34!, The Orange Legion

views
     
cheeft
post Dec 7 2009, 11:17 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
101 posts

Joined: Jun 2005
QUOTE(kevinwcw @ Dec 7 2009, 11:06 PM)
lol...can see tat many ppl struggle between 16105 with tammy 1750...not many ppl look at 16-105 with 1680z
*
because the price difference is quite a lot... last time i also had the dilemma... dunno 16105 or 1680 but in the end i go for 1680 and im really loving it... im really surprise at the focusing speed... i find it faster compare to my 50mm F1.8...
neo_lam
post Dec 7 2009, 11:18 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(kevinwcw @ Dec 7 2009, 10:54 PM)
1680z vs 16105 anyone?
*
u go sony style and have a touch on both lens and u will know the difference....
kevinwcw
post Dec 7 2009, 11:20 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
943 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: KL Sri Petaling
QUOTE(lwliam @ Dec 7 2009, 11:12 PM)
the 1680 has got extra anti glare coatings compared to 16105, there's where the extra money goes to
*
if 16105+anti glare filter can save a lot of money lo? laugh.gif
noprob
post Dec 7 2009, 11:21 PM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,982 posts

Joined: Jul 2007
QUOTE(hafeez71 @ Dec 7 2009, 10:10 PM)
that's the thing, i know how the G perform in outdoor event..it is super duper marvellous, the tammy has the f2.8, bit the focussing..very potong stim one., of course in low light in mamak stall..the tammy is the winner if compared to black G
*
Depend on ur shooting style ..

QUOTE(Kul | Mo0 @ Dec 7 2009, 10:24 PM)
135mm on apsc memang la good. But for me the distance is not comfortable at all. LOL.
*
Then ... its No Good la ..
neo_lam
post Dec 7 2009, 11:21 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(kevinwcw @ Dec 7 2009, 11:20 PM)
if 16105+anti glare filter can save a lot of money lo? laugh.gif
*
the sharpness and the color of 1680 is quite different frm wat 16105 produced....
plus tht seducing blue logo of Zeiss..... rclxm9.gif
lwliam
post Dec 7 2009, 11:22 PM

Your friendly neighborhood photographer
Group Icon
Elite
6,075 posts

Joined: Jan 2006
From: 3.1553587,101.7135668
its not a filter, its a coating... thin film coating the lens element.
a filter is like a 1st line of defence from knocks and scratches
kevinwcw
post Dec 7 2009, 11:26 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
943 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: KL Sri Petaling
QUOTE(neo_lam @ Dec 7 2009, 11:21 PM)
the sharpness and the color of 1680 is quite different frm wat 16105 produced....
plus tht seducing blue logo of Zeiss..... rclxm9.gif
*
the zeiss logo really cost a lot... tongue.gif

Added on December 7, 2009, 11:27 pm
QUOTE(lwliam @ Dec 7 2009, 11:22 PM)
its not a filter, its a coating... thin film coating the lens element. 
a filter is like a 1st line of defence from knocks and scratches
*
ya...but i said there is anti-glare filter also biggrin.gif

This post has been edited by kevinwcw: Dec 7 2009, 11:27 PM
neo_lam
post Dec 7 2009, 11:32 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(kevinwcw @ Dec 7 2009, 11:26 PM)
the zeiss logo really cost a lot... tongue.gif

Added on December 7, 2009, 11:27 pm

ya...but i said there is anti-glare filter also biggrin.gif
*
Zeiss is famous by its T* coating....somemore filter is just way thicker than merely a coating , so thts y zeiss is expensive...
Kul | Mo0
post Dec 7 2009, 11:39 PM

Cow's Zeiss
*******
Senior Member
3,844 posts

Joined: Nov 2008
From: Damansara Utama
Filter how to lawan coating? LOL.
soket
post Dec 7 2009, 11:40 PM

♥ chu chu
*****
Senior Member
885 posts

Joined: May 2008
From: i donno LOL
too all sifu, is there any rules on putting watermark ? any tips?
Kul | Mo0
post Dec 7 2009, 11:40 PM

Cow's Zeiss
*******
Senior Member
3,844 posts

Joined: Nov 2008
From: Damansara Utama
Watermark also got rules? Whatever and however you like it, put only la. LOL.
soket
post Dec 7 2009, 11:41 PM

♥ chu chu
*****
Senior Member
885 posts

Joined: May 2008
From: i donno LOL
haha, i donno tats y ask 1st
kevinwcw
post Dec 7 2009, 11:44 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
943 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: KL Sri Petaling
QUOTE(Kul | Mo0 @ Dec 7 2009, 11:39 PM)
Filter how to lawan coating? LOL.
*
totally got wads the meaning....other than the coating? is there any other diff thats better vs 16105?
neo_lam
post Dec 7 2009, 11:49 PM

Player
******
Senior Member
1,921 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(kevinwcw @ Dec 7 2009, 11:44 PM)
totally got wads the meaning....other than the coating? is there any other diff thats better vs 16105?
*
the lens build quality...the zoom and manual focus ring on cz is so smooth to rotate compare to 16105....
and the color and sharpness....
kevinwcw
post Dec 7 2009, 11:53 PM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
943 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: KL Sri Petaling
thanks for advice...finally comfirmed..will go to 16105 biggrin.gif
lwliam
post Dec 7 2009, 11:54 PM

Your friendly neighborhood photographer
Group Icon
Elite
6,075 posts

Joined: Jan 2006
From: 3.1553587,101.7135668
its not that fair to compare the 1680 with the 16105 actually, its somehow in a different league to those who knows how to see it, but for those less experienced, the 16105 surely is better for its range and versatility
kevinwcw
post Dec 8 2009, 12:00 AM

Enthusiast
*****
Senior Member
943 posts

Joined: Feb 2005
From: KL Sri Petaling
QUOTE(lwliam @ Dec 7 2009, 11:54 PM)
its not that fair to compare the 1680 with the 16105 actually, its somehow in a different league to those who knows how to see it, but for those less experienced, the 16105 surely is better for its range and versatility
*
due to shortage of lenses versatility of coz is the main point
destfull
post Dec 8 2009, 12:17 AM

Brain for Creativity
******
Senior Member
1,063 posts

Joined: Jul 2005
QUOTE(lwliam @ Dec 7 2009, 11:54 PM)
its not that fair to compare the 1680 with the 16105 actually, its somehow in a different league to those who knows how to see it, but for those less experienced, the 16105 surely is better for its range and versatility
*
I think same league as long as you treat both as kit lens replacement..
16105 is fast enough =)

go for 16105 as sharpness is comparable unless guy from this thread posts some

1k diff for comparable result and zeiss logo but same lens body quality is not good

This post has been edited by destfull: Dec 8 2009, 12:18 AM
noprob
post Dec 8 2009, 12:19 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,982 posts

Joined: Jul 2007
Malaysian Super Series - Classic Cars Race

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


CC Appreciated ..

More Here
likito
post Dec 8 2009, 12:19 AM

Regular
******
Senior Member
1,468 posts

Joined: Sep 2006
From: Taman Melati, KL
Now Everyone Can Fly laugh.gif
user posted image

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «


C&C welcome !

This post has been edited by likito: Dec 8 2009, 12:19 AM
« Next Oldest · Photography, Digital Imaging & Video · Next Newest »
 

125 Pages « < 62 63 64 65 66 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
 0.0248sec    0.23    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 4th December 2025 - 08:19 AM
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Removal Request
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.