Skyllaney did release a lens they worked on for quite some time now, even though it’s out of my price range budget wise, it looks pretty interesting, would be curious to test it. Maybe they can send a sample to Fred to review it.
The image circle would cover digital medium format, it’s a trend that we see more and more.
I saw a review of this lens yesterday and it had me wondering if the FLB mechanism would be a massive PITA to fix if it ever goes out of alignment.
It’s a brilliant idea to compensate focus shift this way. But it introduces another adjustment, even a non-linear one, based on brass parts interacting, so eventually there must be some wear? (Okay probably only a long long term issue, but still)
fjablo wrote:
I saw a review of this lens yesterday and it had me wondering if the FLB mechanism would be a massive PITA to fix if it ever goes out of alignment.
It’s a brilliant idea to compensate focus shift this way. But it introduces another adjustment, even a non-linear one, based on brass parts interacting, so eventually there must be some wear? (Okay probably only a long long term issue, but still)
I guess Skyllaney would deal with the needed repairs, it’s their trade after all.
I’m not familiar with buying lenses from a bit more prestigious manufacturers, such as this, Leica or similar brands, I do not know exactly on how they are committed to maintenance and customer service.
I appreciate the effort and ambition behind this $4,000 lens, especially coming from such a small and relatively unknown company. It clearly took a lot of resources and dedication to work on the optical challenges they mentioned, and based on the samples, the lens does seem to produce some very pleasant images.
That said, with so many excellent 50mm f/2 options already available from well-established manufacturers, it is hard to justify the investment, especially for a first release. I can'tt help but wonder if offering it at a more accessible price point, even with minimal profit, might have been a smarter way to build trust, gain experience, and get their name out there.
It is definitely not easy to break into this market, especially with strong competition from Chinese lens makers who have really stepped up their game in terms of build quality. I sincerely wish them success, but it will be a steep hill to climb if buyers are in doublt about long-term support or whether the company will continue beyond this launch.
Well, for me it has nothing to do with the lens, but with his way of presenting it.
Too much effort was put towards emphasizing lens' uniqueness (hence the over repeated analogy with the hand made wrist watch from an independent manufacturer, repeted several times).
Then "here we get a lot more lens for the money" (while comparing with the Leica lenses in general, and the Leica Classic line in particular) - just wondering if he has any experience with the new Summilux Classic, for instance, as he was continuously featuring that lens throughout the whole video, inffering how expensive it is.
Even the lens filter thread is a piece of genius, as being 39mm....
Just last week I watched his review about the Leica 50mm Summilux ASPH v1 (from 6 years ago) where he states the Leica lens is "incredibly expensive, at 4000 Euros, for the silver version". But this Omnar is "a lot more lens for the money"- Really
Then judging the lens' character, shapness, contrast on film...hmmm. Throw it in front of a 60MPx sensor, then we can see exactly how much of a lens it is.
Just my thoughts, nothing more. Really dissapointed by this guy. I used to appreciate his reviews until now. He looked/sounded like a sales man.
I want to try this lens, it could capture an era before the time that LLL (and others) lenses aim to capture (the 1950s-60s of LLL for instance) but in a context fitting modern cameras, both film and digital, especially in transient light glowing situations- city and outdoors. I want to see what it will do especially with the large illuminated circle for wide open. This is a possible "origin" lens that harkens back to the beginnings of serious photographic lenses, much as the LLL 1966 captures a key moment in lens design.
As for the money part, anything handmade low production in UK will be expensive, compared to handmade low production in China (the 1966 for example). As Fred pointed out there is immense time and cost in doing this project, might not be that profitable, so it had to be done out of love of the goal. I fly fish, I use bamboo rods, they are hand made, custom, and far more expensive than graphite rods, do I catch more with bamboo, maybe not, do I enjoy it more, yes. If something is well made, performs well, maybe even hand made, there is a pleasure in its use, I think that is what was being conveyed in the you tube review the pleasure in its use, and anyone who uses a M and keeps it understands and appreciates the value of pleasure in its use.
That its what was conveyed to me, is that this would harken back decades and would be a pleasure to use, and for that there is an entry fee (much like buying a new M). I'd like to see what I could do with this lens in my hands.
freddy_hayek wrote:
I'd rather buy from them than some Crazy Glued-together contraption out of any of the multiplicity of Chinese lens makers that seem to be popping up monthly with crazy monikers---Astrhori > space prostitute?.
freddy_hayek wrote:
I will say this about Skyllaney's handiwork; several years back, I bought one of the two reference Sonnars they based this new lens on. It's a circa 1935, single coated Contax, converted to M mount. The mount was bespoke, impressively designed and meticulously machined while the optical cell, helicoid completely reworked, collimated and rehoused. Skyllaney is a serious outfit. I'd rather buy from them than some Crazy Glued-together contraption out of any of the multiplicity of Chinese lens makers that seem to be popping up monthly with nonsensical monikers---Astrhori > space prostitute?.
I’ve taken the liberty of highlighting a sentence from Freddy’s post, which I strongly endorse. Like him, I have one of Skyllaney’s Sonnar M-mount conversions (a late 1930s / early 1940s Carl Zeiss Jena 50mm f/1.5). It is superbly done. My impression is that the quality of work that has gone into resurrecting the 80+ year old Sonnar and machining the components needed to make the conversion cannot be faulted. So I could be very tempted by one of their Planar conversions, too. And if I ever need to have something like an MS-Optics lens serviced, they would be my first port of call.
So, yes, their new 50mm f/2.0 is expensive, but I’d be more than a little surprised if the lens is not beautifully designed and engineered. I hope it’s a great success — and I’ll be fascinated to see what they do next.
