JohnJ wrote:
Surely November 2015 isn't the last time someone asked about this lens! I want to buy one but have my doubts about it's quality, largely based on the comments in this thread.
Is todays Mitakon 0.95/50 (mark II or 67mm version) still likely to fall apart as seemed to be the case a couple of years ago?
Hi John, I got the Mitakon 0.95/50 (mark II or 67mm version) when it first came out.
So far it has been rock solid built-wise. I like the lens a lot.
It’s pretty heavy for a 50mm lens. But I don’t mind.
On my A9 it stays on maximum magnification until exposure.
On my A7rII it switches to full view when half pressing the shutter button.
So far I have not found the Menu settings to make both cameras do the same.
k-h.a.w wrote:
Hi John, I got the Mitakon 0.95/50 (mark II or 67mm version) when it first came out.
So far it has been rock solid built-wise. I like the lens a lot.
It’s pretty heavy for a 50mm lens. But I don’t mind.
On my A9 it stays on maximum magnification until exposure.
On my A7rII it switches to full view when half pressing the shutter button.
So far I have not found the Menu settings to make both cameras do the same.
K-H.
Thanks for feedback. Interesting about the 'half shutter press' thing too. Do you find it an issue when shooting stopped down a little, ie is it harder to focus? TBH, I'm not sure I'd be stopping it down much, if at all.
JohnJ wrote:
Thanks for feedback. Interesting about the 'half shutter press' thing too. Do you find it an issue when shooting stopped down a little, ie is it harder to focus? TBH, I'm not sure I'd be stopping it down much, if at all.
Thanks John. My eyes don't qualify any longer as a valid tool for such measurements.
Nowadays I tend to focus with maximum magnification wide open and then stop down.
At f/5.6 my lens is sharp enough that I also use it for landscape shots.
I'm still on the fence about the Mitakon, I can't really convince myself to buy it.
TBH, I'm very happy with my Canon FL 1.2/58 which I suspect will still be working in another 50 years, as the first 50 seemed OK.
It's also crossed my mind that F0.95 at 50mm might be quite similar to F1.2 at 58mm (that's what the 'justification-fairy' in my head is telling me), or that the difference in DOF would be minor. At the end of the day it's the character of the lens that appeals to me and the FL has it in spades. I've been thinking about picking up a Minolta 1.2/58 instead of the Mitakon.
You don't have a 1.2/58 (Minolta, Canon FL or whatever) to compare to the Mitakon by any chance?
EDIT!
Using the DOF calculator here ( https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof ) the DOF for the lenses is as below. Note that F1, the largest aperture choice available, is only approx. 1/8th of a stop difference to F0.95 ( see http://www.photocornucopia.com/1046.html ). Whilst the calculator is not 100%, because F0.95 can not be selected, it's probably close enough to give a reasonable guide.
DOF at F1 with 50mm lens focused at 10 feet = 0.72 feet
DOF at F1.2 with 58mm lens focused at 10 feet = 0.63 feet
I own the Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 - but it is since a long time at a photographing friend. Furthermore I have the Hexanon 57mm f/1.2 and a Canon FD SSC 55mm f/1.2 and Canon 50mm f/1.2L.
So the blur (at same magnification ratio object - sensor and same distance object to background) is more on the faster 50 to 58mm lens here.
With a 85mm f/1.2 lens the blur is more for backgrounds a bit more behind the object.
So the difference between a f/0.95 and a f/1.2 lens ~50mm is not much. But more than between a f/1.2 and f/1.4 lens.
Regarding the bokeh (quality of blur) the Mitakon gives often a smooth background bokeh. Many photographers like this - I have to admit I would like a more nervous bokeh more (over corrected spherical aberration).
ZoneV wrote:
I own the Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 - but it is since a long time at a photographing friend. Furthermore I have the Hexanon 57mm f/1.2 and a Canon FD SSC 55mm f/1.2 and Canon 50mm f/1.2L.
So the blur (at same magnification ratio object - sensor and same distance object to background) is more on the faster 50 to 58mm lens here.
With a 85mm f/1.2 lens the blur is more for backgrounds a bit more behind the object.
So the difference between a f/0.95 and a f/1.2 lens ~50mm is not much. But more than between a f/1.2 and f/1.4 lens.
Regarding the bokeh (quality of blur) the Mitakon gives often a smooth background bokeh. Many photographers like this - I have to admit I would like a more nervous bokeh more (over corrected spherical aberration). ...Show more →
JohnJ wrote:
DOF at F1 with 50mm lens focused at 10 feet = 0.72 feet
DOF at F1.2 with 58mm lens focused at 10 feet = 0.63 feet
The 58mm should have a subject distance of 11.6 feet for a fair comparison, with a longer lens you're likely to back away from your subject slightly to fill the same proportion of the frame. This gives DOF of 0.86 feet, so the Mitakon with have give shallower DOF (and blurrier backgrounds).
My aperture blades went nuts after a year and half of mild and gentle use.
can confirm build issues.
Mitakon zonghyi .95 50mm problem https://imgur.com/gallery/LJbi4VS
datatank wrote:
My aperture blades went nuts after a year and half of mild and gentle use.
can confirm build issues.
Mitakon zonghyi .95 50mm problem https://imgur.com/gallery/LJbi4VS
I am sorry that happened.
Which version do you have, the original flaky one, or one from a later batch?
Mine is from a later batch and working fine. Knock on wood!
>Which version do you have, the original flaky one, or one from a later batch?
No idea.
I bought it as soon as I could get one for a decent price so I might have one from the first batch.
Anyone has a hint on mitakon's guarantee Policy?
Zonghyi seems to only be able to sell products, can't find any customer service or even reply.
[EDIT] That's a Mark II from 2016
