p.4 #1 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
Sure, why not.
135 mm is not exactly the most difficult focal length to manufacture. I'm mildly surprised that Canon and Nikon have not updated their old lenses.
p.4 #2 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
Just spent 2 weeks with the Rokinon 135 and I have to say it's pretty damn fine for a $500 lens. It's sharp, colors are decent and the bokeh isn't bad either. My only complaint is the focus ring is a pain in the ass. You have to really turn it a lot to go from focusing on something close to far away. Luckily I don't do the so often at weddings do it should be just fine. And it's also pretty big and heavy but hey, it's like having a 200 f2 since I'm using it on the Fuji X. Looking forward rockin this at weddings this year.
p.4 #5 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
Manual focus does not bother me. For sports, landscapes and other static images, I find I get a higher percentage of keepers with manual focus. For photographing dogs, cats and fish I do better with autofocus.
p.4 #6 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
Dan Knowlton wrote:
Manual focus does not bother me. For sports, landscapes and other static images, I find I get a higher percentage of keepers with manual focus. For photographing dogs, cats and fish I do better with autofocus.
Dan
Interesting, I wonder how shooting sports with a MF would provide a higher percentage of keepers than AF especially when you're tracking unpredictable action that's coming towards you or away from you and using f/2-f/2.8 apertures?
p.4 #8 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
EB-1 wrote:
I wonder what sport that is
EBH
Underwater basket weaving competitions?
I guess any sport where you have a set distance of where the action takes place could be pretty easy with MF, but then when the action changes and you get an intense few seconds of the unexpected, then I'd say AF keepers would be higher than MF keepers.
p.4 #11 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
Interesting that many people mention the manual focus but few seem to care about the stop down aperture. Is this because they always plan on shooting wide open? Focusing stopped down is usually difficult due to the dark viewfinder, and focus then stop down is incredibly slow. Even in the days of manual focus (1970s and on) lenses had automatic apertures to allow wide open focus at any shooting aperture.
p.4 #12 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
tr1957 wrote:
Interesting that many people mention the manual focus but few seem to care about the stop down aperture. Is this because they always plan on shooting wide open? Focusing stopped down is usually difficult due to the dark viewfinder, and focus then stop down is incredibly slow. Even in the days of manual focus (1970s and on) lenses had automatic apertures to allow wide open focus at any shooting aperture.
the vast majority of people interested in this lens intend to shoot at f2-2.8 almost always.
p.4 #14 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
tr1957 wrote:
Interesting that many people mention the manual focus but few seem to care about the stop down aperture. Is this because they always plan on shooting wide open? Focusing stopped down is usually difficult due to the dark viewfinder, and focus then stop down is incredibly slow. Even in the days of manual focus (1970s and on) lenses had automatic apertures to allow wide open focus at any shooting aperture.
OMG, really!
Is the lack of aperture control only for the electrical diaphragms and maybe not Nikon F mount?
p.4 #15 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
DmitriM wrote:
can't believe in 2015 we are still producing manual focus lenses. Then rave when we managed to get one sharp image...
Uh, I get lots of sharp images with my manual focus lenses. It's not the manual focus of the lens that's the problem, it's the poor optical viewfinders and insensitive PDAF focus confirm indicators in the viewfinder that are the problem.
p.4 #17 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
jhinkey wrote:
Uh, I get lots of sharp images with my manual focus lenses. It's not the manual focus of the lens that's the problem, it's the poor optical viewfinders and insensitive PDAF focus confirm indicators in the viewfinder that are the problem.
I had the ZEISS APO for almost 18 months. Only few keepers (25%) out of 100 shots. If light condition is dark and people move I really wonder how to use the lens handheld. Using a tripod is mandatory and mirror slap (D800/E) has some significant influence as well.
I wonder why the D810 viewfinder should be poor? And, of course the PDAF has a +/- drift but this can be trained and with some experience you will know the position where focus is achieved.
The lens itself is exceptional. Wonder as well why ZEISS is not implementing AF since they do it with other lenses.
One reason could be the cheap sales price which holds them up to add AF or VR to the package. They might will come out with an APO-S 5000,- USD version in the long run including these features which are quite standard today.
p.4 #20 · Samyang/Rokinon 135mm f/2 ED UMC officially announced!
scst48 wrote:
The lens itself is exceptional. Wonder as well why ZEISS is not implementing AF since they do it with other lenses.
Zeiss has no problem implementing AF or OIS; their issue is with the PDAF systems in current DSLRs and the inherent problems with getting AF accurate, so you're not going to see a Zeiss AF lens for a DSLR mount.
However, they are quite happily pumping out AF lenses for mirrorless mounts- assuming Canon decides to get on the ball, we could see Zeiss AF lenses for the EF-M mount quite soon.
I was not logged in and did not see your location to assign correct currency units. However, I was also thinking of the Zeiss 135/2.
