The Nikon F,AI 85/1.8 manual lens has the best color, bokeh, sharpness, and least amount of CA - of any 85mm lens I've used. I might have to get a Rokinon and do some tests now. I'd also like to answer the unanswered question of whether this lens is truly f/1.4?
cogitech wrote:
The only 85 I've owned/used with bokeh close to the Rokinon is the Minolta MC-Rokkor 85/1.7, but still I think the Rokinon wins.
pdmphoto wrote:
The Nikon F,AI 85/1.8 manual lens has the best color, bokeh, sharpness, and least amount of CA - of any 85mm lens I've used. I might have to get a Rokinon and do some tests now. I'd also like to answer the unanswered question of whether this lens is truly f/1.4?
My shooting experience thus far is that the Rokinon offers a true f 1.4.
pascal03 wrote:
Anyone know if the Nikon version of the Rokinon features AiS or auto aperture control or is it all manual stop down only ?
Wonderful shots for such a reasonable lens... thanks for posting.
It's AI-S for Nikon and KA for Pentax. No electronics, but the only mount it lacks supported mechanical coupling for is Sony (because the camera needs a chip to know how to control the aperture).
And I gotta get me one of these. K mount most likely for me as my Nikkor 85/1.8K is a 'cold dead hands' lens.
I just came in from outside (it is nice out today for this time of the year) side by side testing of my Mamiya Sekor SX 85/1.7 vs. my Rokinon 85/1.4. Histograms do not lie, the Rok is not f/1.4 wide open. The Rok is warmer in color and has a bit lower contrast. The Rok has a smoother bokeh side open and even 1 or 2 stops down. The Rok is maybe a bit less sharp, but that's being very picky. Send me an email and I'll share results with anyone. Sorry to say I found no beautiful women in my woods.
Aperture is a ratio of the focal length and entrance pupil, so as long as the Rokinon has an entrance pupil of about 60.71mm, it is a f/1.4 max aperture lens. The maximum aperture is not measurable by the amount of light hitting the sensor plane, although I suspect coatings could have an effect in that regard.
In the studio, under controlled lighting, I just did a quick test of the Rokinon 851.4 compared against the Takumar 85 1.8 and a Takumar 50 1.4 just to get a general impression if there is something going on with the aperture. Although I don't have another 85 1.4 to compare directly, the Rokinon at 1.4 was about a half stop or so brighter than the Tak 85 at 1.8. Reframing with the 50 1.4 to cover the same area, the Rokinon at 1.4 was brighter than the normal Tak wide open/1.4 which surprised me. Very quick test but enough to show me that my copy of the Rokinon, at least, is not too far off from 1.4.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
In the studio, under controlled lighting, I just did a quick test of the Rokinon 851.4 compared against the Takumar 85 1.8 and a Takumar 50 1.4 just to get a general impression if there is something going on with the aperture. Although I don't have another 85 1.4 to compare directly, the Rokinon at 1.4 was about a half stop or so brighter than the Tak 85 at 1.8. Reframing with the 50 1.4 to cover the same area, the Rokinon at 1.4 was brighter than the normal Tak wide open/1.4 which surprised me. Very quick test but enough to show me that my copy of the Rokinon, at least, is not too far off from 1.4. ...Show more →
+1
Mine isn't either. As I said somewhere else, my copy of the Rokinon at f1.4 produces a nearly identical exposure as my 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical at f1.4, all else being equal.
My Rokinon 85mm f1.4 arrived and I am more than pleased with this lens... chunky piece of glass for sure and impressively sharp wide open.... plus I get auto aperture / Ais on my D700... WOOT !
Gotta wonder if some no-name brand can produce such good results at such a low price product, exactly how much profit are Canon or Nikon making on their lenses... even if the Canon and Nikon flavors feature AF and other goodies... is it really worth 8x the price.. ?
This rate is far higher than she ever achieved with her EF 85/1.8 and the AF system
I don't have much cause to use my 85 frequently, but I wanted to do some semi-nice shots of the kids for halloween. Honestly, I wanted to throw that lens in the aquarium when I saw how many were OOF. For me, it's like if the eyes are in focus, it is complete blind luck with AF. And this is with ample DoF, putting the center point square on the face. The kids, and my eyes, are just at that point that I can't really do MF with them all the time right now, but I guess based on what I just wrote one could argue things could only improve
Tariq Gibran wrote:
In the studio, under controlled lighting, I just did a quick test of the Rokinon 851.4 compared against the Takumar 85 1.8 and a Takumar 50 1.4 just to get a general impression if there is something going on with the aperture. Although I don't have another 85 1.4 to compare directly, the Rokinon at 1.4 was about a half stop or so brighter than the Tak 85 at 1.8. Reframing with the 50 1.4 to cover the same area, the Rokinon at 1.4 was brighter than the normal Tak wide open/1.4 which surprised me. Very quick test but enough to show me that my copy of the Rokinon, at least, is not too far off from 1.4. ...Show more →
If the 50/1.4 Tak is as yellowed as mine was (moderately) you lose about 1/3 of a t-stop. I tested a yellowed 50/1.4 against an EF 50/1.4.
I don't have much cause to use my 85 frequently, but I wanted to do some semi-nice shots of the kids for halloween. Honestly, I wanted to throw that lens in the aquarium when I saw how many were OOF. For me, it's like if the eyes are in focus, it is complete blind luck with AF. And this is with ample DoF, putting the center point square on the face. The kids, and my eyes, are just at that point that I can't really do MF with them all the time right now, but I guess based on what I just wrote one could argue things could only improve ...Show more →
Joe, I'll pass the compliments on to the Mrs.
My wife and I are both a bit short on luck, and we got sick of "rolling the AF dice". Once you simply commit to MF and stick with it, things start to fall into place. It isn't the lens' fault. We do really well with the EF 85/1.8 in MF mode, too. It's just doesn't produce images even remotely comparable to the Rokinon, in our opinions.
On the other hand, we are still far from having a really, really wonderful manual focus dSLR. The 5D + Ee-S is "adequate", and far better than anything else we have tried, but we would both love something better.
Sam N wrote:
If the 50/1.4 Tak is as yellowed as mine was (moderately) you lose about 1/3 of a t-stop. I tested a yellowed 50/1.4 against an EF 50/1.4.
Mine is yellowed as well and that probably explains why it underexposed. Need to put it back on the tin foil under the sun for a while I guess.
cogitech wrote:
So, I'm feeling like some people have a strange reflex that requires them to find something wrong with this lens...
I suppose there may be one other attribute that supersedes the "intelligence" of the Alt Forum.
I have to say that my natural reflex was to be suspicious as well. Usually, I find I'm lucky if the "You get what you pay for" rule applies when I spend a lot. Seldom do I ever end up getting more than I pay for. People are strange in that respect. If this lens sold for $500-$600 instead of half that price, consumer behavior would have the buyer feeling better/more confident in their purchase than if they paid less for the same lens!
