Sirui had some issues with Aurora 85mm focus on Nikon Z, but I think that is fixed...we will see how this lens will perform with the first firmware(I hope it will work better).
And for the price of 550$ it will probably be great buy...optically better than 35mm f1.4Z.
Viltrox is slowly releasing their PRO lineup, 85mm f1.4 for Nikon Z will, I hope, be announced soon, and I think next is 35mm f1.4, so battle between these two will be fun.
Looking forward to seeing images and reviews for this lens. If it's as good as the Sirui Aurora 85/1.4 in terms of a beautiful rendering, I might have to get the pair of them.
Nikon has no native 85/1.4 for Z (yet?), and while the Nikon 35/1.4 Z can make good images, I also feel like Nikon could have done better with that one.
Hoping to get the announced Viltrox 35/1.2 and 85/1.2 if they ever come out for Nikon Z, maybe someday but they seem to be taking their time on those.
Well, Viltrox took around 5 months to release 135mm f1.8 LAB for Nikon after releasing for Sony, so I think they will release 35mm f1.2 LAB in september.
Nikon will probably release 85mm f1.4Z by the end of the year, and Viltrox will also release 85mm f1.4 PRO at the same time.
I‘m keeping an eye on the Aurora series too as I want a 35+85 f1.4 set with aperture rings.
Overall I prefer the Viltrox Pro line but who knows when they’ll be out for Z mount. Unfortunately I think their next release will be the 50mm f1.4, not the 35mm.. and then it will be E mount first, Z mount later..
'(Early) next year we are going to have a wider one (Aurora) and a longer one as well.' They are made for 'run and gun', and come after their well-respected anamorphic lenses. So they are another crossover cine lens company, pushing convergence along. They call the Auroras 'hybrid' lenses.
The aim is to deliver sharpness in the corners, this being a 35mm, and that is consistent with the Sigma-esque design configuration. They are taking their time but you get the sense they know they are onto a good thing.The Chinese actually design lenses for bokeh as well as focal plane performance, so many eyes will be on that aspect.
I read the manufacturers pages for Chinese lenses because they are so well-focused, informative and knowledgeable about their intended uses and clientele. This one stood out:
'Three-Year Replacement, Lifetime Warranty. Free replacement within 3 years for non-human damage (with valid proof of purchase). Lifetime paid repair service available for human-caused damage.'
..
An early user: 'During my test, I found that the 35mm is super sharp even at wide open. I did not need to stop it down to get sharper result. And the auto focus is very responsive. Once it locks the subject, it doesn’t go anywhere. I would say it's almost like using one of the Sony native lens.'
Their wide lens (due in maybe 4-6 months) will elicit great interest also. Their lovely VP-1 set features a 24mm variant, which makes sense as they intend to compete with the mainstream players, but a 28mm might suit their style better, in an f1.4 configuration.
Really curious to see some images out of this lens. On paper, it appears to be a lot sharper than the Nikon Z 35mm 1.4 which IMHO is a bit of a dud. Other than AF, my other concern is whether the optical formula is a compromise that will yield a sharper image but lack any depth/3D rendering.
Day 1 SooC shots with the 35. The rendering is exactly what it appeared to be from looking at "good" samples online. As has become obvious, Sirui suffers mightily from quality control issues, so getting a decently centered lens can be some work. I think this once could still be even more centered but it does clean up really well by f/2.8
It seemed like a big knock on the lens was its MFD and that it wasn't particularly usable up close, but I didn't find that the case at all in early testing. MFD could always be closer, but focus was reliable and bokeh looks nice.
I'm enjoying the 35 for driveabout type stuff too, though being f/1.4 makes it a tough lens to use with the Zf midday. Thankfully the Z9 can step in and preclude the need for an ND filter.
The files need about +3 to +5 distortion correction if editing a JPEG instead of a RAW.
Edited using my agx emulsion film simulation app, so no correction profile and EXIF are shot.. the ones with shallow DOF are all at f1.4, the pano is at f8, the last one at f10.
Just for giggles, I wanted to see how the Sirui and the CV 35 APO compare to each other in terms of LoCA, fall off, and contrast in harsh light. I was interested to see that the CV has a noticeably more narrow FOV. The Sirui also has a higher light transmission, requiring a faster shutter speed all else being equal.
F2 - Much of the Sirui's LoCA has cleaned up by F2 and the APO still has a bit to contend with near the edges. Same story with the vignetting...heavy wide open on the CV, quite cleaned up on the Sirui at F2.
I put the 24-120 on and replicated the Sirui's FOV and the resulting shot was reported as 33.5mm which sounds about right to me if we assume the APO is actually 35mm.
F5.6 - All lenses should be rendering near their peak here, and I think the Sirui is doing a pretty remarkable job hanging with the big boys. Ultimately, I feel like the 24-120 wins at 5.6, which I find both hilarious and redemptive
Testing the Sirui against an upcoming competitor that is undercutting it on size and price. You can also really see the wider FOV of the Sirui here. It's very interesting to see how much warmer the Sirui renders by default. All shots at f/1.8. Curious to hear which one you think renders more pleasingly. These are all SOOC with no corrections.
RoamingScott wrote:
Testing the Sirui against an upcoming competitor that is undercutting it on size and price. You can also really see the wider FOV of the Sirui here. It's very interesting to see how much warmer the Sirui renders by default. All shots at f/1.8. Curious to hear which one you think renders more pleasingly. These are all SOOC with no corrections.
The first and second image have very different oof disc size, they don’t look they’re the same aperture. Doesn’t seem to be the case in the other images so maybe worth double-checking?
fjablo wrote:
The first and second image have very different oof disc size, they don’t look they’re the same aperture. Doesn’t seem to be the case in the other images so maybe worth double-checking?
They are, I noticed that too and immediately checked. Seems to be more prominent the closer to MFD you go.
