Did you guys have to change the AF setting on the lens? I just got mine and it was set at zero. I took this pic of my daughter and something strange in going on there (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ZjZSSy5jqHOMZEyfhjiCssL9U9K1Scp6) it's front and back focused but eyes are completely out of focus. I used eye-AF with A9.
ajamils wrote:
Did you guys have to change the AF setting on the lens? I just got mine and it was set at zero. I took this pic of my daughter and something strange in going on there (https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ZjZSSy5jqHOMZEyfhjiCssL9U9K1Scp6) it's front and back focused but eyes are completely out of focus. I used eye-AF with A9.
The one of the girl is back focused.
The lens really has a bad time with eye-af in continuous, when the light is not perfect (face in shade or too bright) it seems it lacks contrast to focus in the eye and focuses in other areas. Disabling face detection makes things better.
Good thing at least af-s is quite quick and accurate. Sad thing this problem happens even in the a9.
Try in low light with a posing model. With eye af in af-c, you will see the camera confirms the focus but most pictures are oof, focused in the nose, eyebrow, etc, típica ley with a hint more light. If you disable face af and go small flexible spot you realized there's not enough light for the eye, and the camera really has a bad time in that area (at least my a73). I guess that's why with face detection on, when the camera can't find the eye, the AI algorithms think "as we need to deliver af confirmation and we know there's a face, let's focus in other part of the face as the eye is dark", and so in your pic it focused in the hair that is well lit and contrasty. This also happens in my Sony 50 1.8, so I'm seeing it's not just a problem of the samyang... And the further you go outside the center, the less accurate the results are.
Pd: I also tested -1 and +1 (at samyang customer service center) and 0 was the best.
Thanks for the input. I did some more testing and then ended up changing back the AF to -1, which seem to get more consistent results (At 1.4)
Unfortunately, what you said seem to be true that with C-AF and eye-AF turned on, the focus is very inconsistent so much so that in couple of instance I noticed that confirmation box was on the right eye but at 100% the AF seems to be on a different eye. In other times it is focusing on something completely different. Good thing is though that if eye-AF is turned off, even C-AF is giving better results. For now I'm going keep it at -1 and take more pics with it to see how it goes.
With all that said, lens definitely seems to be keeper. Love the rendering and contrast.
numbertwo wrote:
The one of the girl is back focused.
The lens really has a bad time with eye-af in continuous, when the light is not perfect (face in shade or too bright) it seems it lacks contrast to focus in the eye and focuses in other areas. Disabling face detection makes things better.
Good thing at least af-s is quite quick and accurate. Sad thing this problem happens even in the a9.
Try in low light with a posing model. With eye af in af-c, you will see the camera confirms the focus but most pictures are oof, focused in the nose, eyebrow, etc, típica ley with a hint more light. If you disable face af and go small flexible spot you realized there's not enough light for the eye, and the camera really has a bad time in that area (at least my a73). I guess that's why with face detection on, when the camera can't find the eye, the AI algorithms think "as we need to deliver af confirmation and we know there's a face, let's focus in other part of the face as the eye is dark", and so in your pic it focused in the hair that is well lit and contrasty. This also happens in my Sony 50 1.8, so I'm seeing it's not just a problem of the samyang... And the further you go outside the center, the less accurate the results are.
Pd: I also tested -1 and +1 (at samyang customer service center) and 0 was the best....Show more →
ajamils wrote:
Thanks for the input. I did some more testing and then ended up changing back the AF to -1, which seem to get more consistent results (At 1.4)
Unfortunately, what you said seem to be true that with C-AF and eye-AF turned on, the focus is very inconsistent so much so that in couple of instance I noticed that confirmation box was on the right eye but at 100% the AF seems to be on a different eye. In other times it is focusing on something completely different. Good thing is though that if eye-AF is turned off, even C-AF is giving better results. For now I'm going keep it at -1 and take more pics with it to see how it goes.
With all that said, lens definitely seems to be keeper. Love the rendering and contrast.
I received the lens today and have to say that initial impressions are...frustrating. Updated to firmware 4.0 and adjusted between 0 to -1 on the lens station. 0 seems to work consistently best but consistency is still a huge problem. Taking stationary self portraits, I was able to find excellent focus perhaps only 20% of the time in af-c with average lighting. Af-s was slightly better with perhaps 50 % excellent focus (eye-af in use). And using manual the sharpness and quality was amazing! Much better than virtually any of the af shots I took. That is what is so frustrating. I know the lens is capable of greatness. But the af is just not good.
Aside from this I also noticed the lens had many problems finding appropriate white balance. Kept getting strange yellow tint on 80% of shots mixed with 20% perfect white balance.
The af motor noise is quite noticeable, but that is not a huge factor for me.
I am going to give it another few days to test for user error but overall I have to say it is so inconsistent as to not be worth it to me, initially. Will report back with further findings and perhaps some image samples.
abadger wrote:
I received the lens today and have to say that initial impressions are...frustrating. Updated to firmware 4.0 and adjusted between 0 to -1 on the lens station. 0 seems to work consistently best but consistency is still a huge problem. Taking stationary self portraits, I was able to find excellent focus perhaps only 20% of the time in af-c with average lighting. Af-s was slightly better with perhaps 50 % excellent focus (eye-af in use). And using manual the sharpness and quality was amazing! Much better than virtually any of the af shots I took. That is what is so frustrating. I know the lens is capable of greatness. But the af is just not good.
Aside from this I also noticed the lens had many problems finding appropriate white balance. Kept getting strange yellow tint on 80% of shots mixed with 20% perfect white balance.
The af motor noise is quite noticeable, but that is not a huge factor for me.
I am going to give it another few days to test for user error but overall I have to say it is so inconsistent as to not be worth it to me, initially. Will report back with further findings and perhaps some image samples....Show more →
Self portraits with an 85mm lens? How are you doing it?
It's sad but I'm glad that I'm not the only one with focusing issues here, at the beginning it was supposed to be working perfect for everybody and I was the only one complaining, I went through 4 copies and actually the sharpness was pretty much the same among all of them, and none was perfectly focusing, although one was specially bad.
I feel sometimes like some people in this forum have "something" with samyang. Not saying names but I've seen some users claiming how good the lenses are (35mm, this 85, the new 45,etc), how good they are at focusing now, how perfectly centered their copies are, etc. Then you see them sell their lenses in the forum and keep their sigmas /gms. Weird. I know YouTube is all about sponsors and you can't trust them, but I'm starting to have my doubts in the forum as well.
numbertwo wrote:
Self portraits with an 85mm lens? How are you doing it?
It's sad but I'm glad that I'm not the only one with focusing issues here, at the beginning it was supposed to be working perfect for everybody and I was the only one complaining, I went through 4 copies and actually the sharpness was pretty much the same among all of them, and none was perfectly focusing, although one was specially bad.
I feel sometimes like some people in this forum have "something" with samyang. Not saying names but I've seen some users claiming how good the lenses are (35mm, this 85, the new 45,etc), how good they are at focusing now, how perfectly centered their copies are, etc. Then you see them sell their lenses in the forum and keep their sigmas /gms. Weird. I know YouTube is all about sponsors and you can't trust them, but I'm starting to have my doubts in the forum as well....Show more →
Well, I see what you are talking about as well. I see it frequently. But, I don’t think it is some conspiracy with Samyang, I think it is mostly just excitement about new stuff, and that people have varying requirements for focusing accuracy and sharpness.
In just about every discussion about any lens except for a very few, you will see claims that people have copies that are “tack sharp corner to corner” and eye AF nails it every time. Even after Zeiss announced the flaw with Eye AF on the Batis 40, people denied it was a thing.
It’s not malicious, just that some people get excited about different things. I think it’s important to realize very little objective testing is being done here, and everybody has wildly variable opinions on things and different reasons for valuing them.
numbertwo wrote:
Indeed I love the lens, this lens and ibis is what keeps me from moving to canon.
the low price, good size for what it is, I may be picking up some of these fast lenses once I get back to buying lenses again. I liked the 50 f1.4, just too big for vacation. Same thing with the 85, even if smallest in class. Firmware improves over time, I saw the 50 make big strides from completely unusable to very usable.
p.30 #10 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
I got my copy and am also having trouble with Eye-AF in CAF. I rely on my Sony gear for those features otherwise I'd rather shoot with my Nikon setup. I'm not noticing any major white balance issues that I haven't encountered with other Sony lenses.
While I like the size and build quality, I share my frustrations with the focus issues others are also having. If price and weight wasn't a factor, would some of you spring for the 85GM instead?
p.30 #11 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
starkrace wrote:
While I like the size and build quality, I share my frustrations with the focus issues others are also having. If price and weight wasn't a factor, would some of you spring for the 85GM instead?
I'm in the same boat. I can pick up an 85GM used for about $950 while, due to Samyang consistency, I'd pretty much have to pick up the Samyang new for $700 plus another $50 for the lens station. At that point price difference isn't much of an issue anymore and I'd rather pick the more consistent performing lens. I was really hoping they'd have some kind of fix out since the lens has been out for a few months, but so far not so much.
I do like the more dreamy Samyang rendering due to the mechanical vignetting and provokable lens flare, and I like the smaller weight (this kills any kind of Sigma for me, seriously) but the GM has its own strong points and class-leading rendering.
p.30 #12 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
starkrace wrote:
I got my copy and am also having trouble with Eye-AF in CAF. I rely on my Sony gear for those features otherwise I'd rather shoot with my Nikon setup. I'm not noticing any major white balance issues that I haven't encountered with other Sony lenses.
While I like the size and build quality, I share my frustrations with the focus issues others are also having. If price and weight wasn't a factor, would some of you spring for the 85GM instead?
Of course if price was not a factor I would have gone for the GM, but usually it's double the price and I can't justify it. For the size, between GM and samyang there's a little difference and I wouldn't care, and the weight, even if over 300g would be OK, I wouldn't care either maybe. What I was sure I didn't want for an 85 is the size of the Sigma and the super harsh clinical look of the Sigma (I like it for 35, but not for 85), so even if I could have got the Sigma doe the same price, I prefer the samyang. And even if the af still have issues (not sure what % of the issues are due to the lens itself or to the Sony firmware), I much prefer the samyang over the Sony fe 85 1.8 I had before.
p.30 #13 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
Here is another comparison for those deciding on the Sony FE 85/1.4 GM or Samyang 85/1.4 AF.
My impression is that they are more similar than different. The GM has a cooler color temperature and it's a bit less corrected for spherical aberration which gives images a slight glow in expense of some micro-contrast. The Samyang is more contrasty and has more optical vignetting which is the give-away in this comparison, where bokeh balls are not as rounded towards the corners.
The Samyang is slightly better corrected for axial CA as well.
Images taken only seconds apart (A7RIII).
Precise manual focus (12.4x mag.) used for both lenses (MF feel is pleasant and precise for both lenses)
Images shot in RAW and transferred to Lightroom with zero adjustments except for sharpening: (50, 1.0, 25, 50) and color temperature adjustment for the Samyang (to better match the GM)
All Wide Open (f/1.4) for both lenses:
Crop (1:1) from the image above showing the focused area: Slight more axial CA for the GM
p.30 #16 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
Marky12 wrote:
impressive! Samyang just need to fix the af issue.
Agreed. The fact that the Samyang is close to matching (and possibly in some respects beating) the GM in IQ - that we are even talking about them in the same league - with the Samyang being a fraction of the cost and weight, is just incredible. I got a similar impression from viewing @GabrielPhoto 's earlier comparisons.
p.30 #17 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
Marky12 wrote:
impressive! Samyang just need to fix the af issue.
Which AF issue?
I been issuing this lens for more than a week without noticing any difference to my Batis as far as AF ist concerned. But maybe I haven’t tried under hard enough circumstances?
p.30 #18 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
This is really puzzling to me as well, even the recent review at optyczne.pl does not indicate any issues with AF. (but the amount of users here reporting AF issues is staggering).
Might be that optyczne.pl did not test eye-af, which seems to be most problematic.
With all the praise this lens got, I've started thinking of replacing my Sony FE 85 F1.8. However, I have similar feelings towards Samyang 35 F1.4, where the AF is ok for most of the time (though on the slower side), but is a bit lacking (consistency) when compared directly to Sony lenses ...
p.30 #19 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
j4nu wrote:
This is really puzzling to me as well, even the recent review at optyczne.pl does not indicate any issues with AF. (but the amount of users here reporting AF issues is staggering).
Might be that optyczne.pl did not test eye-af, which seems to be most problematic.
That would be my reading of the past 50 pages or so of posts here. I don't think anyone is suggesting there is an AF problem with vanilla AF-S, quite the contrary. Most if not all of the posts that are reporting problems (including mine), in various versions of firmware, are almost exclusively pinpointing (pun intended) eye AF in AF-C, especially moving subjects, as a weak area, and that turning off eye AF seems to improve accuracy and consistency somewhat.
If you only shoot non-human or stationary subjects then you shouldn't expect any problems, based on above.
p.30 #20 · Official: Samyang AF 85mm 1.4 FE ($699)
ryanli wrote:
That would be my reading of the past 50 pages or so of posts here. I don't think anyone is suggesting there is an AF problem with vanilla AF-S, quite the contrary. Most if not all of the posts that are reporting problems (including mine), in various versions of firmware, are almost exclusively pinpointing (pun intended) eye AF in AF-C, especially moving subjects, as a weak area, and that turning off eye AF seems to improve accuracy and consistency somewhat.
If you only shoot non-human or stationary subjects then you shouldn't expect any problems, based on above.
If that is indeed the case, I'll have to stick to Sony
