AhamB wrote:
sebboh wrote:
aren't molded aspherical elements plastic?

No. Molded aspherics are pressed in a mold and they are the ones showing the onion rings in the bokeh, due to the spiral groove pattern in the mold. There are aspherics that are grinded, which is more difficult/expensive to repeat than reusing a mold.
Then there are composite aspherics that consist of a spherical element with a plastic layer that makes it aspherical.

ah, i thought molded aspherics were the same as composite aspherics. thanks.

Lens manufacturers use plastic elements instead of mineral because they are cheaper, lighter and easier to produce. When new, they are as good, or almost as good as mineral glass, but they deteriorate quickly with time.

Your last test, the distance, and maybe the medium distance test too is WAY WAY over-sharpened. IMO this makes those tests kinda worthless.


Ed, how quickly is "quickly"? There's an OM plastic lens from the late 70's or early 80's that tests very well even today.

Which lens do you mean? I am not aware of plastic lenses in that period of time. Plastic elements afaik started mainly with AF for obvious reasons.

Bifurcator wrote:
Your last test, the distance, and maybe the medium distance test too is WAY WAY over-sharpened. IMO this makes those tests kinda worthless.


Ed, how quickly is "quickly"? There's an OM plastic lens from the late 70's or early 80's that tests very well even today.



I didn't sharpen any of the images. Not sure what you're seeing.

I think Bif is referring to the edge contrast on the windows. It kinda looks like there are some halos, but other than that I see no signs of (over)sharpening.

I just ordered the Bell & Howell labeled version of this Samyang lens on eBay. I'm curious to see how it does, as I don't have a fast 85mm in my collection.

Are there any other user reports or updates anyone can make?

Thanks!

man, this is the third samyang 85/1.4 comparison thread i've seen on this forum where it matches or beats (in this case) either the canon or zeiss for wide open sharpness at portrait distances. they always end with people pointing out tiny little flaws in the test and i continue to see lots of talk about the samyang being weak wide open though. i don't get it.

anyway, i dig the sissy bokeh. i think the either old or new zeiss 35/1.4, sigma 50/1.4, and the samyang 85/1.4 make an excellently sissy holy trinity.

Seb,

I'm hoping the 24 1.4 is good from samyang. The 35 certainly is

'Yang 24/1.4, Sigma 50, 'Yang 85 would indeed be good

I did not find it to be weak wide open. I think people just have a hard time actually believing that a lens so reasonably priced can be so sharp.

plasticmotif wrote:
Seb,

I'm hoping the 24 1.4 is good from samyang. The 35 certainly is

'Yang 24/1.4, Sigma 50, 'Yang 85 would indeed be good

That's what I am waiting for! For may years the 24mm was my most used lens (Nikkor 24 2.8). If the new 24mm is in the same ball park as other Samyang/Rokinon releases I would be ecstatic.

Great thread!
Thank you very much for taking your time and doing this test.
If not, this really saved me from buying Zeiss 85..

Best Regards

Ergonomically, it kind of feels like a low quality lens. I ended up getting rid of mine because it simply inspired no joy or fun in using the lens.

Can't argue with the results though!

FlyPenFly wrote:
Ergonomically, it kind of feels like a low quality lens. I ended up getting rid of mine because it simply inspired no joy or fun in using the lens.

Can't argue with the results though!

the body definitely looks and feels plasticky compared to an oldschool manual lens or a high end autofocus lens, but i've been pretty happy with the feel of the focus ring (certainly no match in that respect for my leica or rokkor lenses though).

wayne seltzer wrote:
flashinm wrote:
Yes, but neither the Rokinon nor the Sigma display the microcontrast Zeiss is known for. I think the higher contrast shows up in all aspects of the image, including the out of focus portions leading to a busier, more detailed bokeh. I have never seen a Zeiss lens that can produce bokeh as smooth as the Rokinon. In fact, I don't think it's possible with T* coatings. That's not to say one is better than the other, but I don't think it's possible to have both. The same thing that makes Zeiss lenses wonderful for details, prevents them from having buttery smooth bokeh.
The new Zeiss 35/1.4 has very smooth bokeh and the old contax n 85/1.4 has smooth bokeh.
Also Sony-Zeiss ZA 135/1.8 has very smooth bokeh.


The ZA 85 combines very sharp WO performance and very smooth bokeh as well. The ZA 24 has also the same characteristics so I guess it would be safe to say all three ZA primes have been designed with smooth bokeh and WO performance in mind.

As an owner of the Zeiss C/Y, I'm always interested in this kind of test. What I see as missing, particularly when phrases like 'portrait lens' are used, is a comparison of the lenses used to shoot portraits! Ultimate sharpness may not be the key property of portrait lenses.

Ultimately a can of paint while good for showing high contrast borders doesn't have the intricate details and 3D depth of a face.

Also if you look at the F1.4 close up of the bricks, it seems the focus on the Zeiss is different than the focus on the Rokinon. Looking at them side by side, it appears the rear of it is in focus in the Roki and out of focus on the Zeiss. This might also explain why there is far more CA on the Zeiss as well.

There also appears to be more detail and micro contrast on the Zeiss if you look at the second middle brick to the right at the very front of the crop.

Thanks all! This is exactly the kind of information I've been interested in.

I agree, more comparison examples would be welcome.

I just ordered a set of extention tubes (without electrical contacts) to try this a close-focus (not real macro). I remembered that my Canon EF ext tubes won't work properly with a non-EF contact lens (error signal). I can also use these on my C//Y Zeiss and Leica R lenses. Also ordered a 72mm screw-in hood & cap (same as I've done with the C/Y Zeiss 50 and 80-200).

Getting excited to try this lens!

OK....I just received my Zeiss C/Y 85 1.4 MMJ from a fellow FM'er , and I have been doing some tests, quite like a few people here have been doing. I love teh lens, very much, but is it worth it to keep over the Rokinon 85 1.4 I already have?? I haven't answered that question, but I thought I would put up a link to the first set of comparison photos between the two. These pictures haven't been altered, sharpened, or white balanced...anything, except loaded as a .dng file into LR 3.5, and then exported out straight into picasaweb as a 100% .jpg. Open in separate tabs and compare. I'm interested in what everyone thinks(between the lenses...not the pics!!)
Focus point on the eye of the frog...LV with 2 sec timer and camera on top of the hot tub(stable)
Gregg
https://picasaweb.google.com/112876940890442133557/CY8514MMJVsRokinon8514?authuser=0&feat=directlink