Focusrite Saffire Pro 14 vs this focursrite 6i6? whats the difference?
1080963
Saffire line uses FireWire and Thunderbolt interfaces to connect to your computer.Scarlet line uses USB to connect to your computer.
1080964
The Saffire Pro 14 is spec'd 8 in 6 out interface and the 6i6 is 6 in 6 out. However technically the Saffire only has 6 physical inputs (3 stereo pairs). The other 2 input and outputs come for a virtual loopback port that is software controlled. Loopback allows you to record audio coming out of your system back into your system (Example audio from a youtube video in your daw). While the 6i6 lacks software loopback you can connect an SPDIF cable from the spdif output back into the spdif input to achieve the same thing. The Saffire is a Firewire interface while the 6i6 is a USB interface. The other difference is the 6i6 gives you two headphone outputs (1 tied to output 1/2 and other to output 3/4). The Saffire only has 1 headphone out. Other than that they're about the same. Some may argue that Firewire will be better but keep in mind it's getting harder to find computers with firewire. You can use a firewire to thunderbolt adapter on Macs. Personally I love having the extra headphone out on the 6i6. Loopback is not something that I use very often so the extra internal option in the software is not a loss at all for me. HTH.
1820658
I'm using it on the 2014 edition, not sure how different they are from each other
1766981
Yes there is....! Is the previous generation. Not much difference http://www.focal.com/en/integration-archives/271-is-130-3544055750116.html
1382336
I also got a laptop. I bought a Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 and it works well with MixCraft. At first I was scared 'cuz it didn't recognize the 3rd and 4th inputs from the Focusrite, but I just needed to change some settings in the Preference section, to ASIO and it was solved. Four channels at the same time, which is sufficient for me, for the moment. I also got a Zoom H4N and it also works fine with it. I still havent tried to connect both the Focusrite and the H4n and check if I can do a simultaneos 8-channel recording.
2041778
There are a couple of differences, but the real question is what are your needs as a photographer? I'm guessing that since you are asking what the differences are between these lenses, your needs are not of the professional nature, but I don't want to assume. The F1.2 is a pro lens. It is a stop faster, has sharper optics, manual focus override with just a twist of the lens, and from what I've heard nicer bokeh. Generally Canon puts everything it has into its "L" lenses. Better optics, build quality, and finish. I do not own the F1.2. I don't need it. To quote a friend of mine that shoots models all day in L.A., "If someone hadn't stolen my F1.4, I would not have purchased the F1.2". For someone who shoots portrait and magazine covers all day and makes a living at it, the subtle differences of the F1.2 are worth the extra money. For someone like me, who shoots portraits on occasion or shots for web sites etc., the F1.4 is a wonderful lens. It's very fast, handles well, and produces great photos. Not to discount the F1.2; it is an amazing lens and if money were no object of course I would own it. Hope this helps. Happy shooting!
1346890
These are 2 different focal lengths and on a crop camera it makes a big difference. I have both, and find the 50 f1.4 works best for indoors, portraits, etc. I use the 85 outside but must admit the 50 is a lot more used. Both wonderful--probably should get the 50 first.
7972
I would rather have a 2i2 based on the audio quality but the Akai EIE has additional features to justify its price. That being said I would rather have any Scarlett over the EIE.Focusrite's claim to fame is the quality of their converters. All of the Scarletts have the same converters, but the rest of the audio path gets better as you look at more expensive models. If you want really good audio quality for the money buy the 2i2. If you want better audio quality buy a more expensive model such as the Scarlett 18i20.
818157
With my old 5D MkII, I use the center focus dot 90% of the time. Pre-focus, lock and recompose
187070
I was not sure when I first looked, then I realized the different models had different temperature capabilities, and if I recall some of them had different focus ratio as well. Keeping this in mind, Read descriptions carefully, the differences will be more apparent!
1380699
I tried both, sent this one back. There is noticeable difference in sharpness when zoomed in.
1592121
I'm running Windows 8. This Focusrite is a great machine. So glad I switched from a Tascam box.
2077852
I recommend the focusrite 2i2. Great little 2 input interface that will do the job well.
1810434
Not sure, software that came with mine was for Win 7, but I have 8. I downloaded it and installed it right off! It worked seamlessly without any special downloads, it should work even better without all the crap that's in 8! I love 7 so much more than, for how good focusrite is I'd get anyway, I seriously LOVE this unit!
1398992
The 6th has weather sealed body, a faster start up time then the t3i. It also shots faster at 5.3 then the t3i at a 3.7fps. The 6th has a 9 cross type focus points verses the t3i at 1. Other then that it has same functionality as t3i, however the t3i has more lenses choices with the built in auto focuse and stabilizer verses the 60d. If your looking for good starter camera dslr the t3i is great, it's my go to camera for my hiking trips and family outings, you can buy waterproof cases for it if u plan 9 using it in rainy weather. And the for the price you can beat it.
678610
I had the f4 version, and sold it to a friend to buy the F2.8II. Frankly, the increase in IQ is there but very slight. I would have no qualms about going back to the F4 version, it's a stunning lens. So unless you have a specific need for F2.8 (weddings for example as others mention), the added weight of the 2.8 to me is hard to justify. These are both exceptional lenses, the difference is like comparing a Bentley and a Rolls-Royce.
736774
Given the high ISO capability and the noise-handling of current softwares (LR4!), I see no compelling reason for the extra stop, weight, bulk and expense of the f 2.8 version. It is NO sharper than its little brother. And you already have the 85 f 1.8.
656207
The difference is the FFP ( first focal plain ) The FFP is more expensive and you can look it up for an explaination