Also, I find the Rokinon just as easy to focus as I did the SSC Aspherical. Maybe I lucked out with my copy of the Rokinon, but I had no qualms about letting my other 85s go (well, I really did love the SSC.... but the Rokinon's bokeh sealed the deal):
wayne seltzer wrote:
Another altenative is the Conurus converted Contax N 85 1.4. Waiting for my copy to be converted.
Yeah, that's a great lens. I forgot about it. It was pics from that lens that made me buy the CZ 85/1.4, before I knew that they weren't quite the same.
cogitech wrote:
I've used them all except the MD 85/1.7 and I chose the Rokinon. The 85/1.2 SSC Asph is wonderful, but the Rokinon is 98% of that lens for much less money and hassle. Have you seen my direct comparison? If not, let me know and I will show you.
Bottom line; of the lenses you mentioned and based on your specific criteria, the Rokinon is the clear choice. The FDs bring basically nothing to the table over the Rokinon except 1/3rd of a stop, a much higher price tag, more weight and a conversion hassle (I know from experience). The MC and MD might be good options, but again they will be more expensive than the Rokinon and will require conversion. Simply not worth it for a slower lens unless you absolutely must have "the Minolta look".
I never would have sold my FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical and MC 85/1.7 if the Rokinon didn't perform. It does and now it is my goto 85mm lens....Show more →
I do not see the "Rokinon is the clear choice". That's not to say its not a good choice. There needs to be qualification.
In this matter, I would consider the end result medium. If large scale prints are the goal, I would be careful to assume this opinion as having validity. If the end result is internet comparisons/displays and smaller format prints then this attitude of performance may suffice.
There have been some alt lens "heavy hitters" posting in this thread already,
so I'll just add my experience, without any claim to it being definitive.
The Rokinon is altogether sufficient for portrait work, assuming you can
work well with a non-AF lens. I found at my last photo shoot [I don't do
a lot of them, mind you] that auto focus is useful when working under
pressure. If the new Sigma has good AF performance and is optically
as good as I expect it to be, I'll likely buy one after the dust settles.
The Rokinon acquits itself very well, however, as Cogitech's photos show
convincingly. It doesn't hurt that the woman his wife photographed is
very attractive. Paul's photogenic daugthers have made good photo
subjects as well.
My experience is that the Rokinon delivers a very well balanced portrait:
Not too much contrast, not too little. Smooth bokeh -- perhaps too smooth,
if, like Braniac, you like some definition in your bokeh. I find that strong backlighting
can tend to bloom just a bit, as with the Sigma 50/1.4, but this is no issue for
most of my shooting.
It exhibits significant curvature of field at far focus distances. Also, it does
exhibit some signs of less than stellar correction for what I think is coma.
See the strange pattern in the highlights here:
Obviously, for 250$ the Rokinon offers remarkable VFM. But, as far as I am concerned, there is something in the colour palette that leaves me wanting. There are a number of eminent shooters that have posted samples here, so it is not down to indivual lenses/togs, but I have yet to see a Rok picture where I just go "Wow!" . If I went back what I posted over the last 3 months, I am not sure I have paid many compliments based on Rokinon pictures.
This is not written to offend/inflame/defend my turf, merely offered as an individual preference/opinion.
Sorry for the late answer. It's a different time zone ;-)
freaklikeme wrote:
I've read that the SSC isn't as easy to adapt as the L due to the position of the aperture, um, coupling, I guess would be the best choice of words (not that either appear all that easy to adapt). Is that true from your experience?
I think it is more or less a similar effort.
The SSC requires modification of the silver breechlock ring and the L requires reduction of the mounting plate which is sandwiched between the lens body and the new mount. I personally found the SSC conversion more straightforward. The effort on the aperture may depend on the method. I liked the SSC more because you can easily screw the new aperture lever to the aperture ring.
There is one additional matter not to forget: on full frame, infinity operation of the FD L and the FD SSC requires a shaved mirror.
cogitech wrote:
What I see is the Rokinon producing at least as much detail in the 100% crops and better colour and bokeh.
I see no more "3D" or "microcontrast" or whatever anyone wants to call it in the SSC.
.
I agree about the color (if those are straight-converted raw files) inasmuch as there is more of it. I'm not sure I like the overall TONE of the color, but I guess it's OK. It's sort of like Canon vs Zeiss: An awful lot of folks prefer the Zeiss color, even though it's subdued & cool compared to Canon. It takes PP very well. Again, I'm not sure about the Ro, but I've seen a ton of pics shot with Canon 85/1.2's and that lens is known for great color, so maybe the Rokinon is actually oversaturated?
-and sure the Rokinon is amazing for the price. I might buy one.
- but I disagree about the bokeh (a little too soft, or lacking in detail, or something, just boring) and I STRONGLY disagree about the micro-contrast. The difference is small, but seriously important. Not one Rokinon picture on this thread (or elsewhere) has that magical "pop" that I've learned to love.
But one must note that the Canons don't exactly scream 3D, either. In that one regard, I think the Minolta would likely win any shoot-out.
Yeah, the Rok doesn't give Zeiss color. I grant you that.
In the right light, you can certainly get rich, saturated color though.
Closer to Leica than Zeiss, but really not Leica-like either.
Frankly, if I had to do it again I would get the Samyang (Rokinon). That said, I just cannot get rid of my FD 85L ... Love the beast, plus focusing is so smooooth.
philber wrote:
Cableaddict, you might consider the forthcoming Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar 90 mm f3,5 SL-II
It is due to ship in April, it is a native EF mount, with electronics, its price seems very reasonable, weight is low, bulk is minimal, and the reputation of other APO-Lanthars is excellent (even stellar for the 125mm). Specification indicates that it must be pretty good up close, because its MFD is half that of the Zeiss 85, and ont third if you add the close up lens that gets it into macro territory.
Hope this helps
Considering its not a macro lens, its a slow lens and likely to be very expensive...I cant see why anyone would want to buy one?
Well, Alf, first there is a lot to be said for true APO lenses, just not that many of them around, and most of them highly thought of. Then it is light and small, which is another valuable feature. Then many people enjoy Voigtl�nder lenses, which raises hopes that IQ and mechanical build will be of a high caliber. Add to it that it has a short MFD and a close up lens thrown in, and you get a lens that shines where, for example, the 85 Planar does not, and has makeshift macro ablity, hardly a detriment. Lastly, it is listed here at some 35% of the cost of the 85 Planar, or double the Rokinon. For a lens in native EF mount with electronics and good build quality, that is IMHO inexpensive.
Is that a lens for everyone? Definitely not, if only because some people are looking for faster glass, and/or more blurred background. But worth looking, at, again IMHO, very definitely. The rest is up to the OP.
Mar 20, 2010 at 05:40 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
I am going to get the Voigtlander APO 90mm for my daughter later this summer when it becomes widely available. She likes landscapes and close-up photography and doesn't like to shoot portraits. She also highly values light lenses. For her it is the perfect lens.
JimBuchanan wrote:
Does real world situations mean small format prints or web displays?
Your selling hot air.
Wrong. I've done (and sold) very large prints from the Rokinon and they are just as good/sharp as prints from the SSC Asph. My wife and I do weddings, portraits, magazine work, etc. We do not judge lens quality from web JPEGs, we judge them based on large (12x18) prints and on our customers' reactions. The model on the previous page was overjoyed with her portfolio shots, which look incredible at 12x18.
