Interesting. I've got the CZ AE 85/2.8, so no need to pay high price for a heavy lens to close down to perform!! Looking for one that can deliver wider open.
I might give the Rokinon a 2nd chance then. Unfortunately right now Cameta doesn't have that combo deal they had for Canon a couple of weeks ago.
I confirm that the ZE 85 is not a contender wide open. Stop it down to f:2.0 or smaller, and it really starts to sing. But wide open, it is not that sharp, and at minimum focusing distance, even less so.
Well, consider that the FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical is superior to either of those two Zeiss lenses. Now look again at how the Samyang compares to the FD 85/1.2. Neither Zeiss is going to be as sharp (wide open) as the Samyang, and the Samyang's bokeh will be far smoother.
Stopped down past f4 or f5.6, and the Zeiss's will likely pull into the lead with respect to resolution, but I'm not so sure how much this matters for a portrait lens. I suppose that is very subjective.
I don't find the focus stiff on my Rokinon, or too long for that matter. Mine is quite smooth and well-damped and the throw is about perfect for manual focusing, IMO.
I will note that there is one thing I wish the Rokinon did better; min. focus distance.
I've been spoiled by my SSC Aspherical, which enjoys a quite close min. focus distance due to the fact that it is tuned for less-than-infinity (I call it the "tube effect").
I am toying with the idea of removing the Rokinon's mount and adding a shim to reduce the min. focus distance. It sucks at infinity anyway (and I'll never use it for that, just like my SSC)
I have to try out my 105/2.5 against CZ 85/2.8 at infinity. At close focus (portraits) I noticed the CZ is sharper.
I wonder if that Rokinon 85 on a cropped frame could give the 135L on FF a good competition!! Hrmmmm. (I am moving towards the APS-C for the weight loss!)
ulrikft2 wrote:
Hmm, the Rokinon sucks at infinity? so it is not much of a landscape lens? :P I guess I would have to keep my 105 2.5 for that then maybe..
Well, it sucks wide open at infinity. Maybe that's asking too much
I really shouldn't say it sucks at infinity, I guess, since I haven't actually tried it stopped down at all. I'll take it out for a walk next weekend and do som f8-f11 infinity stuff, just for shits 'n giggles.
cogitech wrote:
I will note that there is one thing I wish the Rokinon did better; min. focus distance.
I've been spoiled by my SSC Aspherical, which enjoys a quite close min. focus distance due to the fact that it is tuned for less-than-infinity (I call it the "tube effect").
I am toying with the idea of removing the Rokinon's mount and adding a shim to reduce the min. focus distance. It sucks at infinity anyway (and I'll never use it for that, just like my SSC)
If you do, be careful as I have seen photos of what is underneath and it aint pretty!
The mount is apparently a very soft metal, not stainless or bronze, and it screws into plastic. Guess that is where some of the cost savings come into play.
Silentlight wrote:
I have to try out my 105/2.5 against CZ 85/2.8 at infinity. At close focus (portraits) I noticed the CZ is sharper.
I wonder if that Rokinon 85 on a cropped frame could give the 135L on FF a good competition!! Hrmmmm. (I am moving towards the APS-C for the weight loss!)
You must be thinking xxxD series? (because the xxD series isn't much lighter than 5D/5DII)
I can't imagine going back to crop. Especially xxxD series. Are you sure you want to manual focus on one of those?
cogitech wrote:
Well, it sucks wide open at infinity. Maybe that's asking too much
I really shouldn't say it sucks at infinity, I guess, since I haven't actually tried it stopped down at all. I'll take it out for a walk next weekend and do som f8-f11 infinity stuff, just for shits 'n giggles.
I performed some test shots at longer distances and stopped down its really not that bad so yes, "sucks" might be a little dramatic.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
If you do, be careful as I have seen photos of what is underneath and it aint pretty!
The mount is apparently a very soft metal, not stainless or bronze, and it screws into plastic. Guess that is where some of the cost savings come into play.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I performed some test shots at longer distances and stopped down its really not that bad so yes, "sucks" might be a little dramatic.
Quick test at infinity focus for both lenses shot back to back. 100% crops from a900. Rokinon does alright by 5.6 though it does suffer from lower contrast and possible flare compared to Takumar. Sun was at about 30 degrees to front of lens. http://www.gibranstudio.com/infin.jpg
cogitech wrote:
Yeah, it looks more like a contrast issue than a resolution issue. Were you using the hood?
Yes on the hood for both lenses.
I have definitely noticed that my copy of the Rokinon has a softer contrast and color rendition compared to either my Takumars or better Minolta glass. I don't currently own a long Zeiss lens but having used plenty in the past, the color and contrast rendition of the Zeiss would be slightly more than the Takumar. If anything, the Rokinon reminds me a little of some of the Canon lenses I used to own as far as rendering quality.
I'm working on cutting down my amount of lenses too, and so far I'm planning on getting rid of the 85 1.4 (supersharp, but i seldom use AF, and the Rokinon seems just as sharp at 1.4). But now I also think that the nikkor 105 1.8 is an alternative. It is not much larger than the 85 1.4, and is a very nice lens, and I think that 24, 58 and 105 is a nice trio too. Hard choices.
Silentlight wrote:
I have to try out my 105/2.5 against CZ 85/2.8 at infinity. At close focus (portraits) I noticed the CZ is sharper.
I wonder if that Rokinon 85 on a cropped frame could give the 135L on FF a good competition!! Hrmmmm. (I am moving towards the APS-C for the weight loss!)
The CZ 85mm f1.4 Planar T* is sharper than the CZ 85/2.8 Planar T*, yet I would'nt say its sharper than my Nikon 105mm f2.5 AIS at close focus ranges...In fact I'd have to say the Nikon is sharper.
So I managed to shoot a few decent frames with this lense recently, as well as at my most recent gig, but found results on the web inconclusive at best compared to my findings - I'm posting here with my thoughts as I've received more then a couple inquiries about it. I am not a professional or even casual reviewer of gear, just a professional user of it, so please take these findings with a grain of salt.
What is it? Samyang 85mm 1.4 MF lense. Apparently branded also as Polar and a few other names.
Cost? Around $300-$350
Where did you get it??: Foto-Tip (Poland). http://www.foto-tip.pl/sklep/default.php I should note that it was shipped express 'regular' mail, arrived in 5 days (tracked - though I needed to ask for the number) and I did not have to pay any form of customs or duty on it. YMMV.
About the lens:
First, manual focus only. Heavy and very well constructed. In preparation for alt-lense usage I've been using my fast Canon glass in MF only, but this lense makes it 'feel' a lot easier - the focus ring is easy to grip and very easy to use. This is not to say it spins quickly, but rather firmly, allowing for precise focus. Also comes with plastic lense hood, which is necessary for limiting flare wide open. Image below @ 1.4 without hood illustrates the flare - since I'm new to manual focusing, getting the pigeon's face more or less sharp felt great! :
These flares are not present at any point outdoors when I've used the hood, though I have not shot directly into the sun yet.
This lense is *very* sharp, I daresay it rivals my beloved 135L in "wow" sharpness in the files I've seen so far. Obviously shooting 1.4 @ 85mm MF is not the easiest thing to do, so it takes some getting used to - however, the results are well worth it (note keeping the textured curtain recognizable):
Bokeh is smooth, distinct in it's own right. However, a favourite attribute of this lense has been it's colour reproduction. True, vibrant, and gorgeous straight out of camera (this shot has had no tweaks aside from resize/cropping, shot in raw. I don't understand it, but I rarely see any need to tweak the colour on my shots with this lense..they just 'look right' right away). http://www.jclayphoto.com/v1site_images/galleries/gallery204/kate_colour.jpg
So - amazing lense, especially considering the price, so unfortunate it's MF only, as I wish I could use this in more quick action circumstances. I will definitely be picking up their 14mm offering in March 2010!
