上個主題 :: 下個主題 |
作者 |
訊息 |
rodman911
註冊: 2010-02-09
上載我的肖像
|
畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 21 日 |
|
|
各位Ching, 我想由55-250升cup去SSW or SSWIS
若唔計外形,HSM同個f4, 唔知係畫質上既分別明唔明顯? 尤其55-250o既tele端用f5.6都幾散, 基本上chop唔到圖, 唔知SSW係咪差唔多?
以下有個比較:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=456&Camera=452&Sample=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0&LensComp=104&CameraComp=452&SampleComp=0&FLI=4&API=1
|
|
|
|
 |
Obi-Wan
註冊: 2006-02-06
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 21 日 |
|
|
不如買支384,只貴小小白IS少少,包你滿意
|
|
|
|
 |
rodman911
註冊: 2010-02-09
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 21 日 |
|
|
384 全名叫?
|
|
|
|
 |
wesleyyau
註冊: 2009-03-25
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 21 日 |
|
|
Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
http://www.price.com.hk/product.php?p=102564
|
|
|
|
 |
wesleyyau
註冊: 2009-03-25
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 21 日 |
|
|
要畫質定焦係好... 但係55-250/ssw 用途較廣... 起碼影人ok...
384 人o係6米外只影到大頭...
所以因應用途/需要而揀鏡會好d...
|
|
|
|
 |
rodman911
註冊: 2010-02-09
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 21 日 |
|
|
384 用來打雀幾好bo, 影蟲蟲得唔得?
用70-200打雀影蟲又得唔得?
|
|
|
|
 |
william_lau
註冊: 2007-02-03
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
樓主主要用途係咩呢?
人像小小白我覺得係正,但唔好諗打雀,300mm你都會覺得唔夠(除非你打籠中鳥)。 XD
|
|
|
|
 |
rankinelo
註冊: 2008-10-13
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
rodman911 CHing... 其實打雀同影蟲根本係要兩種鏡... 70-200係好鏡, 但係打雀又唔夠遠, 打蟲放大率又唔夠大...
|
|
|
|
 |
rodman911
註冊: 2010-02-09
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
rankinelo Ching,
may I use Extender 1.4x or 2x to shot bird and EF 12II to shot bugs?
I don't need a delicated lens such as 384
|
|
|
|
 |
rankinelo
註冊: 2008-10-13
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
SSW -> only Extender 1.4x can be used and it is just 320mm F5.6... usually ppl will use 384 + 1.4x to shot birds...
EF 12II can be used but you'll lost infinite focus... in addition, the CA will be much more serious if you use EF 12II...
maybe it is a temporarily solution, but if you really want to shot birds, a dedicated lens is a must
|
|
|
|
 |
rodman911
註冊: 2010-02-09
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
rankinelo Ching,
I am using APS-C so it becomes 200mmx1.6x1.4=448mm, is it right?
What is CA?
|
|
|
|
 |
rankinelo
註冊: 2008-10-13
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
rodman911 Ching.
>>CA
chromatic aberration
>>I am using APS-C so it becomes 200mmx1.6x1.4=448mm, is it right?
yes. Just my experience was that (long time ago), for the birds in Mai Po, I used 55-250 -> abt 400mm equiv., but the size of the bird is small to die.
if CHing really wants acceptable PQ to shot wild birds, really 384 + 1.4x, BW or 456 is the beginning choice
|
|
|
|
 |
rodman911
註冊: 2010-02-09
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
rankinelo Ching,
>>the CA will be much more serious if you use EF 12II
Is that a good news?
>>for the birds in Mai Po, I used 55-250 -> abt 400mm equiv., but the size of the bird is small to die
Mai Po is too far away from my home, I will not perfer to shot there. Normally I shot bird when they are in a tree. So I feel 400mm should be ok.
|
|
|
|
 |
rankinelo
註冊: 2008-10-13
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 22 日 |
|
|
rodman911 CHing,
If you have an answer in your mind... then it seems that there's no longer any questions for you in this topic...
>>the CA will be much more serious if you use EF 12II
chromatic aberration means that you'll have colored edges for the images. If you tried the extender you'll know that the PQ is acceptable only if you get an excellent lens... :D
|
|
|
|
 |
FatFatBob
註冊: 2010-06-17
上載我的肖像
|
Re: 畫質比較 55-250 vs SSW Post time: 6 月 23 日 |
|
|
The difference is obvious, from my point of view. Some people say 55-250 is preferable over SSW for APS-C, is this a matter of price only? I'll buy SSW instead of 55-250 for my 7D. What do other CHINGS think ???
|
|
|
|
 |
|