I've taken some shots at different distances and apertures to have an idea of the behavior of the two lenses, especially regarding corner performance and bokeh with busy background. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.
I've uploaded the full size jpgs here: Contax 35mm 1.4 v. Samyang 35mm 1.4
I've just noticed that the samyang seems to have a shorter angle of view at short focusing distance, see these two shots taken at around 60cm: Samyang f/5.6 Contax f/5.6
Admirable effort, very much appreciated ... you've certainly made a case for the Samyang.
I was hoping to see it against the Zeiss 35/2. Any chance to add a late comer to the party, or a head to to head (possibly with some CA inducing areas) with 35/2.
That Samyang seems to have more contrast and resolution than the C/Y 35mm 1.4 both wide open and at all aperture settings in all the crops. Although it does have a bit more CA too.
Romain -- Thank your for your comparison. You certainly have an outstanding copy of the lens. I'm only personally familiar with the 17-40, but your results parallel mine, and why I got rid of it (very sharp in center, but awful on the edges).
I love these sorts of comparisons, and appreciate how much work goes into them. If you could do another set in more contrasty lighting, I'd appreciate seeing the results.
Yours is the best performance I've seen for the Samyang, but others look very good to. Hmmmmm . . . I may have to put it on the wish list.
dasrocket wrote:
Does anyone have a shot of this lens on a NEX? I am very interested in it but worried about how it would balance on the body.
thanks,
george
I don't have a photo but it would look ridiculously huge. The NEX would just hang off the end of the lens. You would basically be holding the lens. No way would I suggest holding the body alone with the lens attached. Doing so would probably break your wrist! Definitely NOT the lens for an NEX if you include the idea of "balance" as part of the equation.
Thanks for posting the links to all your comparison shots and taking the time to do all this.
But I think your C/Y 35/1.4 is suffering from too thick an adapter and not getting proper infinity focus when wide open and even at f2.8 at non-close subject distances. I had this problem with my copy until I got a thinner adapter. I can see this by looking at the shots of the woman statue. The f2.8 shots look worse than what they should be, if you compare them to the f5.6 shots. The close up shots of the cross don't have this problem and the performance wide open and at f2.8 are pretty close to the Samy.
Which adapter do you have?
Hard to judge color rendition and micro-contrast with such flat and murky light. Any chance for some normal sunshine lit shots? TIA
As a side note, I just did a quick and casual test of the Rokinon against the C/Y 28 2.8 Pen sent back to me. The Rokinon shows more micro-contrast and "Zeissness" than the Zeiss - and it's sharper at every similar aperture in any part of the frame. I just wish it was as small as the Zeiss.
Romain's results really don't surprise me too much. This Rokinon wipes the floor with just about every other 351.4 lens out there regardless of price. It really is an amazing lens.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
As a side note, I just did a quick and casual test of the Rokinon against the C/Y 28 2.8 Pen sent back to me. The Rokinon shows more micro-contrast and "Zeissness" than the Zeiss - and it's sharper at every similar aperture in any part of the frame. I just wish it was as small as the Zeiss.
Romain's results really don't surprise me too much. This Rokinon wipes the floor with just about every other 351.4 lens out there regardless of price. It really is an amazing lens.
Tariq, if you look at the MTF's the C/Y 28/2.8 is much weaker lens than the C/Y 35/1.4 and Z* 35/2 and Z* 35/1.4 so I don't know how that is relevant.
Cavewalker's shots showed the opposite. I haven't seen any comparisons of the Samy to the new Z* 35/1.4 which has better CA control and slightly more vibrant color than the other Zeiss 35's along with the smooth bokeh. I would like to see other tests like bokeh and color tests done in better light before I would say that the Samy "wipes the floor with just about every other 35/1.4."
wayne seltzer wrote:
Tariq, if you look at the MTF's the C/Y 28/2.8 is much weaker lens than the C/Y 35/1.4 and Z* 35/2 and Z* 35/1.4 so I don't know how that is relevant.
Cavewalker's shots showed the opposite. I haven't seen any comparisons of the Samy to the new Z* 35/1.4 which has better CA control and slightly more vibrant color than the other Zeiss 35's along with the smooth bokeh. I would like to see other tests like bokeh and color tests done in better light before I would say that the Samy "wipes the floor with just about every other 35/1.4."...Show more →
The relevancy has to do with the look of the file, not just detail into the corners. I have shot a number of Zeiss lenses which exhibit that look of high micro contrast that contributes to a certain presence in the images. The fact is, it's there with the Rokinon 35 1.4. Surprising to me as it certainly was not there with regard to the Rokinon 85 1.4.
Beyond the look, I'm still betting there does not exist another 35 1.4 which can match the Rokinon for detail rendering into the extreme corners at the same bright apertures.
Sorry, I haven't seen a Samy 35/1.4 shot that looks to me to have more microcontrast and better color detail, "more Zeissness" than a Z* lens, especially the new Z* 35/1.4 which has slightly more vivid color/better color than other Z* lenses.
I think you would need to try shooting with the new Zeiss 35/1.4 before you proclaim the Samy 35 as the king of the 35's.
Let's see a bokeh shootout between the new Zeiss 35/1.4 and the Samy.
Romain wrote:
I've taken some shots at different distances and apertures to have an idea of the behavior of the two lenses, especially regarding corner performance and bokeh with busy background. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.
I've uploaded the full size jpgs here: Contax 35mm 1.4 v. Samyang 35mm 1.4
I've just noticed that the samyang seems to have a shorter angle of view at short focusing distance, see these two shots taken at around 60cm: Samyang f/5.6 Contax f/5.6
Thanks for the comparison, Romain. Your C/Y is an AEG. yes?
wayne seltzer wrote:
Sorry, I haven't seen a Samy 35/1.4 shot that looks to me to have more microcontrast and better color detail, "more Zeissness" than a Z* lens, especially the new Z* 35/1.4 which has slightly more vivid color/better color than other Z* lenses.
I think you would need to try shooting with the new Zeiss 35/1.4 before you proclaim the Samy 35 as the king of the 35's.
Let's see a bokeh shootout between the new Zeiss 35/1.4 and the Samy.
Since you already own the Zeiss 35 1.4, I guess it would be cheaper for you to try the Sammy/ Rokinon. I'm betting you would be pretty surprised. Heck, you might even end up pocketing $1500 or so out of the deal...when you end up selling the Zeiss!
Joking aside, the new Zeiss 35 1.4 may end up being the better portrait/ editorial lens, I don't know. As I said earlier, the Samy/ Rokinon seems quite rare in it's ability to not only offer decent bokeh and rendering when shot at bright F-stops but is also capable of delivering tack sharp, corner to corner landscape performance by F4 or so on high MP FF. From all the tests and images I have seen from the new Zeiss 35 1.4, it does not appear to offer that versatility, due to field curvature or whatever. This versatility is the reason I suspect the Samy/ Rokinon is pretty much untouchable at this speed and focal length.
thats kinda interesting....it looks like the red ring is gold/yellow on the ones he is selling. Think this is an incorrect photo, or do they make the ring in different colors?
