What's up with the close-up softness from CF's video? My Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 looks way sharper at 28mm close-up than the Samyang 35mm 1.8 close-up! Also the coma looks worst than my Sam 45mm. Hmm, I think I might have to compare it with my current Sam 35mm f/1.4 FE side-by-side before making a decision. My 35mm f/1.4 cleans up nicely at f/1.8, so I'd have to be able to shoot the 35mm f/1.8 wide open and would expect it to perform strongly at that aperture.
Jonathan F wrote:
What's up with the close-up softness from CF's video? My Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 looks way sharper at 28mm close-up than the Samyang 35mm 1.8 close-up! Also the coma looks worst than my Sam 45mm. Hmm, I think I might have to compare it with my current Sam 35mm f/1.4 FE side-by-side before making a decision. My 35mm f/1.4 cleans up nicely at f/1.8, so I'd have to be able to shoot the 35mm f/1.8 wide open and would expect it to perform strongly at that aperture.
I think that's the price for compactness and relatively short MFD...
It's kinda opposite to what Zeiss did with Batis 40 CF, where the lens implictly closes the aperture down in short distances to preserve image quality...
I'd also expect SY35 f1.4 to be somewhat better optically than the newcomer as it's significantly bigger (similarly to SY75 vs SY85).
keepcoding wrote:
In my experience, Samyang lenses are no worse than other manufacturers in terms of QC (including Sony, Tamron and Sigma). I've had the 18mm, 45mm, 75mm and 135mm, and none of them showed any issues regarding manufacturing defects.
The 18mm, 45mm, and 75mm AF lenses are all improved over their past manual focus "hold everything together with glue rather than screws" days.
Jonathan F wrote:
What's up with the close-up softness from CF's video? My Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 looks way sharper at 28mm close-up than the Samyang 35mm 1.8 close-up! Also the coma looks worst than my Sam 45mm. Hmm, I think I might have to compare it with my current Sam 35mm f/1.4 FE side-by-side before making a decision. My 35mm f/1.4 cleans up nicely at f/1.8, so I'd have to be able to shoot the 35mm f/1.8 wide open and would expect it to perform strongly at that aperture.
There is a difference in sharpness close-up vs. at portrait or longer distances. The same is true for the SY 45mm/1.8, it is soft below F5.6 up close but very sharp even at F1.8 at infinity. Looks like spherical aberration is undercorrected. On the plus side bokeh may look better than on very sharp lenses like the Sony 35mm/1.8 (which has awful bokeh rendering IMHO).
MAubrey wrote:
The 18mm, 45mm, and 75mm AF lenses are all improved over their past manual focus "hold everything together with glue rather than screws" days.
After seeing the Lens Rental breakdown of the Samyang 50mm 1.4 FE lens, it gave me a little bit more confidence in buying Samyang glass. Also from what I gather, Rokinon USA will cover both Rokinon and Samyang warranty with either replacement lenses and/or discounted refurbs if something were to happen to your lens. It's not as good as a 1st party warranty, but for the price you pay, you can probably buy a 1st party lens 2-3 times over!
keepcoding wrote:
There is a difference in sharpness close-up vs. at portrait or longer distances. The same is true for the SY 45mm/1.8, it is soft below F5.6 up close but very sharp even at F1.8 at infinity. Looks like spherical aberration is undercorrected. On the plus side bokeh may look better than on very sharp lenses like the Sony 35mm/1.8 (which has awful bokeh rendering IMHO).
The problem with the 45mm 1.8 is that it doesn't have great close focus to begin with. The Sony 50mm 1.8 actually focuses closer. I just don't bother doing close-ups with that lens. Funny enough, my Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 @ 28mm, makes a far better close up lens than any of my small Samyang glass! Tamron in that regards, sacrifices a bit of OOF rendering to achieve that closer focus. It's actually interesting to see how different manufacturers prioritize their lens designs.
I might just order the Sam 35mm f/1.8 to compare to my Sam 35mm f/1.4. My issue with the 1.4 version isn't so much the rendering or image quality, but the AF motor. It's not all that precise and doesn't give me the same confidence in focusing like my Sam 18/45/85 lenses which basically nail it at any and all apertures. If the newer lens can nail focus, I'll sacrifice a bit of light gathering for a more reliable 35mm lens! Since I already have the Samyang USB dock, I figure I'd just get the Samyang version over the Sony, since I like the ability to focus tune which has allowed me to maximize the image quality from all my primes.
Wow the close-up performance between the Samyang and Sony 35mm lenses really showed the weakness at minimum focus of the Samyang.. Though I realize for the price you could buy both the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and the Tamron 35mm 2.8 for the same price as the Sony 35mm f/1.8 FE! That way you could have two 35mm lenses, one optimized for sharpness and another for amazing close-up work. Sony's 35mm is neither the sharpest, nor the best close focusing, but goes with a more all-around approach.
Jonathan F wrote:
Wow the close-up performance between the Samyang and Sony 35mm lenses really showed the weakness at minimum focus of the Samyang.. Though I realize for the price you could buy both the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and the Tamron 35mm 2.8 for the same price as the Sony 35mm f/1.8 FE! That way you could have two 35mm lenses, one optimized for sharpness and another for amazing close-up work. Sony takes the middle road approach with their 35mm neither being the sharpest, nor the best close focusing.
Jonathan F wrote:
Wow the close-up performance between the Samyang and Sony 35mm lenses really showed the weakness at minimum focus of the Samyang.. Though I realize for the price you could buy both the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and the Tamron 35mm 2.8 for the same price as the Sony 35mm f/1.8 FE! That way you could have two 35mm lenses, one optimized for sharpness and another for amazing close-up work. Sony's 35mm is neither the sharpest, nor the best close focusing, but goes with a more all-around approach.
In europe, at least in Spain, amazon usually sells in offer the sony for less than 500€ (mine 490). The diference is less than 100€ with the samyang. I think the sony is a better buy.
Hmm so Samyang is actually slightly sharper but has even more CA / fringing.
That's surprising but I don't think it's good considering CA was already a weak point for Sony...
Jonathan F wrote:
Wow the close-up performance between the Samyang and Sony 35mm lenses really showed the weakness at minimum focus of the Samyang.. Though I realize for the price you could buy both the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and the Tamron 35mm 2.8 for the same price as the Sony 35mm f/1.8 FE! That way you could have two 35mm lenses, one optimized for sharpness and another for amazing close-up work. Sony's 35mm is neither the sharpest, nor the best close focusing, but goes with a more all-around approach.
True, but then you will have to carry two lenses and it defeats the main idea behind these lenses: lightweight and compact size. Might as well go for f/1.4 at that point to get more light and better corrections.
---------------------------------------------
Josegulias wrote:
In europe, at least in Spain, amazon usually sells in offer the sony for less than 500€ (mine 490). The diference is less than 100€ with the samyang. I think the sony is a better buy.
Yeah, but in the US it is the other way around. Samyang lenses go on deep discount soon after release, but Sony rarely goes on sale. If Samyang other lenses are any indication, this lens will be selling for about $300 to $329 new in ~ 6 months.
Jonathan F wrote:
Wow the close-up performance between the Samyang and Sony 35mm lenses really showed the weakness at minimum focus of the Samyang.. Though I realize for the price you could buy both the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and the Tamron 35mm 2.8 for the same price as the Sony 35mm f/1.8 FE! That way you could have two 35mm lenses, one optimized for sharpness and another for amazing close-up work. Sony's 35mm is neither the sharpest, nor the best close focusing, but goes with a more all-around approach.
My Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 USD seems to have less optical issues than the Sony and does 0.4X magnification, but it is bulky and slow focusing.
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
True, but then you will have to carry two lenses and it defeats the main idea behind these lenses: lightweight and compact size. Might as well go for f/1.4 at that point to get more light and better corrections.
I'm pretty happy optically with the Sam 35mm 1.4 FE, the problem is that compared to the more advance AF motor of the Sam 85mm, it's not at all accurate even with focus tuning. It's really hit or miss depending on lighting conditions. My only desire from the Sam 35mm is to get an accurate focusing 35mm lens that's sharp at f/1.8, which this upcoming lens seems to be...except at close up distances!
Some more heavily edited samples. But I really like what I see here. Like the 75mm, it seems to render overall really nice. There's a certain "character" that I like.
Tonzah78 wrote:
Some more heavily edited samples. But I really like what I see here. Like the 75mm, it seems to render overall really nice. There's a certain "character" that I like.
This lens is shaping up to be the better of the two 35 1.8s, for me at least. Still behind the 40 CF... but at like, 30% the price this time. Rendering is good, color rendition doesn't seem so forcefully yellow as the Sony, and if CA is worse for every sample like it was in the Frost review posted on the preceeding page—it might be even more correctable? Gonna have to see a lot more samples to get a better feel, but I haven't seen any samples posted outside Frost's review that had any visible fringing.
JVan_02 wrote:
This lens is shaping up to be the better of the two 35 1.8s, for me at least. Still behind the 40 CF... but at like, 30% the price this time. Rendering is good, color rendition doesn't seem so forcefully yellow as the Sony, and if CA is worse for every sample like it was in the Frost review posted on the preceeding page—it might be even more correctable? Gonna have to see a lot more samples to get a better feel, but I haven't seen any samples posted outside Frost's review that had any visible fringing.
Given the price, I'd really like that to be true but I highly doubt it. Someone would have to take the same photos or at least photos in a controlled environment by both 35mms to see if the rendering/bokeh/transitions are indeed nicer in SY offering. The CAs scare me away, I think a photo inside a forest with strong backlight against the leaves/branches covering the top portion of the frame will look horrendous (GM24 has this problem too to some extent and it seems to be worse on FE 35 and even worse on SY 35...)
j4nu wrote:
Given the price, I'd really like that to be true but I highly doubt it. Someone would have to take the same photos or at least photos in a controlled environment by both 35mms to see if the rendering/bokeh/transitions are indeed nicer in SY offering. The CAs scare me away, I think a photo inside a forest with strong backlight against the leaves/branches covering the top portion of the frame will look horrendous (GM24 has this problem too to some extent and it seems to be worse on FE 35 and even worse on SY 35...)
Might be, which is why I wanna see more samples. CV 35 1.7 and the 35 Sonnar left everyone wishing for pretty much that, I think. The 40 is fantastic optically—no complaints there. I do wish it were smaller & gathered more light, but after (I think) figuring out what makes the AF bug out in some situations I've been able to get better consistency in bad lighting. If you wanna replicate the magic in 35mm, I think your only options optically are... the new Sigma or switch to Nikon.
(GM24 has this problem too to some extent and it seems to be worse on FE 35 and even worse on SY 35...)