FYI, I just measured the light transmission of the Mitakon V2 (67mm front element) vs the Leica Noctilux f/0.95; at f/0.95 the Mitakon transmits -0.20EV less light than the Noctilux, as measured in the center of the frame on a grey patch of an x-rite color chart, using an NEX-5N. Has anyone else done a light transmission comparison?
Mine is gone
please remember that I have a version 2, dark night lens.
I sent back to B&H and they have refunded my money
fortunately, they had no more in stock because I'm sure they would of been from the same batch.
As I said above. The image quality is met lens was fantastic, but it has started falling apart after only three days of using it.
It was the bargain of the century for the money and I might buy another one in the future, but I'm really not sure
I have mixed feelings about this lens because so many people across the Internet have reported similar issues with this particular version 2 lens
the offing as that lens seems like it's built like a tank, and had such tight tolerances on day one but the amount of play in bolt the focus of aperture ring after a very short amount of time was nothing short of alarming
for now I'll just enjoy this thread and shoot with my other lenses... Maybe I'm not destined to have a hyper-prime after all, sadly
snapsy wrote:
FYI, I just measured the light transmission of the Mitakon V2 (67mm front element) vs the Leica Noctilux f/0.95; at f/0.95 the Mitakon transmits -0.20EV less light than the Noctilux, as measured in the center of the frame on a grey patch of an x-rite color chart, using an NEX-5N. Has anyone else done a light transmission comparison?
I'm still intrigued by this lens, but after reading reports like that of Snapsy that it doesn't transmit as much light as it should, and is more equivalent to a 1.2-1.4 lens, I'm having second thoughts.
When I first received the lens, I compared to the gm1+Panasonic 15mm 1.7 w/ T Value 1.9 per dxo (since it was sitting next to it). I got 2sec at ISO6400 w/ gm1 which is equal to 1sec at ISO 12800 vs A7R+Mitakon was metering 1/5sec at ISO 12800 which puts the difference over 2 stops. Again this was not using the same camera/metering, but it was my rough test to check it. Only light source was outside lights coming to room. I can check it with Sony 55mm 1.8 (T=1.8) also. Most of the lenses has a T value 0.2 below their aperture...
R.Young wrote:
I'm still intrigued by this lens, but after reading reports like that of Snapsy that it doesn't transmit as much light as it should, and is more equivalent to a 1.2-1.4 lens, I'm having second thoughts.
Yeah it would be good to check metering on the same camera which similar focal length but moderate aperture. I've only got an old Rokkor 58 1.2 which I'm sure doesn't give me a clear 1.2 amount of light due to the yellowing of the lens etc. But if the Mitakon delivered a genuine advantage in light gathering I'd be more tempted. In the meantime I'm buying an old Fd 85 1.2 which I'm going to test as my fast portrait lens
it was shot in total darkness. How much more light gathering do you need? it can see thing that your eyes can't even see in the dark. On top of it, It is 1/10 the price vs Leica.
I just received my lens yesterday. Looks and feels good, but I haven't had any time to test it yet.
Unfortunately the lens hood was already broken when I received it. I guess ZYoptics will replace it, but I wasn't impressed with the quality on the hood.
Marve Almar wrote:
I just received my lens yesterday. Looks and feels good, but I haven't had any time to test it yet.
Unfortunately the lens hood was already broken when I received it. I guess ZYoptics will replace it, but I wasn't impressed with the quality on the hood.
Has anyone found a good replacement hood for it?
don't count on the hood. It is terrible. Just like plastic toy.
I think I will order the one xwing15 linked to. ZYoptics also agreed to replace the broken one, but it will be the same quality and probably not last for long.
I have had my lens now for two weeks and like it.
I bought it after I read this thread.
Build quality seems fine so far.
The lens works as advertised. Feels solid.
Should that change I will post again.
With regards to the hood.
It took me a couple of minutes to stick the hood on the lens.
Have not taken it off nor have I taken the lens off my A7R.
YMMV. I still feel considering the price a risk worth taking.
I own several of the Leica Summiluxes and Summicrons for my M9.
I feel the Mitakon gives me enough of an f/0.95 look.
No need for me to spend a small fortune on a Noctilux.
PS: One of a handful of folks on getdpi got a bad first copy. Something rattled inside. He exchanged it for another copy that seems fine to the owner.
Yes but by that logic, a f/1.4 lens would already be a T/1.7 or so...
R.Young wrote:
I'm still intrigued by this lens, but after reading reports like that of Snapsy that it doesn't transmit as much light as it should, and is more equivalent to a 1.2-1.4 lens, I'm having second thoughts.
R.Young wrote:
I'm still intrigued by this lens, but after reading reports like that of Snapsy that it doesn't transmit as much light as it should, and is more equivalent to a 1.2-1.4 lens, I'm having second thoughts.
.2 doesnt make it a 1.2 I dont think. I did test the lens against the 50mm F1.2, and it is brighter, but it's a minor issue at best, you buy it for the blurring power, and it does give a bit more blur and looks even sharper than the leica based on the samples above.
think of 0.2 EV as exactly that, 0.2 EV, how much does that matter in the real world? Not much. The blurring power is different though, you can see those differences.
if snapsy does a comparison between 0.95 vs 0.95 lens, that only means one lens has more light transmission by 0.2, however it doesnt mean the lens is equivalent to 1.2/1.4 lenses, those lenses ALSO lose light and arent T1.2/T1.4. F aperture != T transmission
I would second guess the weight of this lens before the T stop. It certainly gobbles up the light, but it's a seriously heavy lens. I'de love to carry it over the 50 1.2L, but it's too heavy IMO. I usually only reserve 1 heavy lens when I'm out shooting, and that's either the 135F2 or 85F1.2. The mitakon is heavy as those (maybe even heavier).
The lens is great when it works! Beauthiful images and great IQ. Unfortunatley lens no 000621 has exactly the same problem as described above, just fell apart when I tried to mount the lens shade! I hope that Zhongyi Optics takes responsability and repairs or replace the lens. If they do I can really recomend it. I will update when they get back to me...
