AnthonyRhoades wrote:
When any of you Oly 90mm f2 owners want to sell your lens and get/keep their Rok, please let me know as I'd like to have one. I will be adding a Rok to my arsenal as well to give myself a nice range of portrait length looks to compliment my Helios 40-2.
The Helios 40-2 has virtually identical looking bokeh to the C/Y Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Planar T*, when there is no fine detail in the frame and the subject is relatively close...In this situation the Zeiss has smoother bokeh, where the Helios has swirly bokeh and the Planars OOF highlights are almost perfectly circular where they are misshaped, often oval/ish with the Helios. The contrast of each seems to be about the same. The Planar is definetly sharper between middle distance to infinity.
BTW, I have'nt seen anypics in this thread that would make me want to rush out and buy a Rokinon.
I also have the Tamron SP 90mm f2.5 Macro and the Mamiya 80mm f2.8N and I feel both have better bokeh than anything I've seen from the Rokinon. The Mamiya is probably as sharp and contrasty as the Rokinon but I would say that the Tamron lacks the Rokinons high contrast. The FD 85 f1.2 L is currently my favorite 85-ish mm lens and now that I've seen that its predecessor, which has virtually identical optical performance, can hold its head up high against the Rokinon I see even less reason to get a Rokinon.
Guys, guys! I think it's great that so many alt-guru high-flyers have succumbed to the Rokinon after all the exotic glass on their CV . . .
The bemused 'can't you see it?!' comments I think are at cross-purposes: I have always maintained that anyone can make a great 85mm prime: even the East Europeans and Russians have been doing it since the 1950s. The Rok 85/1.4 is case in point . . . but clearly there are differences in drawing style.
They are equally clearly less empirical and more subjective than the discussion we usually have, which is why this thread is littered with homespun vocabulary.
The bottom line is that the Rokinon has a distinct style: it has very, very smooth bokeh, which some (famously brainiac) find strongly repellent. It also has moderately gentle micro-contrast and softly sloping focus transitions, all of which add up to a very 'relaxed-looking' signature, despite the competitive resolving ability. It doesn't look like a Canon 85mm, but it's not fair to say that one is 'better': I think it depends entirely on the subject matter, and your own style as a photographer. The Rokinon is a better tool for certain jobs than the more aggressively 3D Zeiss or Canon equivalents, and vice versa.
With 85mm lenses, its always been about picking a look you like: nothing else looks quite like the Rokinon (although I suspect the SIgma 85mm will be cut from the same cloth), and good luck to it. It's cheap enough to bag one alongside the Canon 85mm or Zeiss version: that's what I did.
No arguments from me. I think both the Zeiss and the Helios are quite low on contrast, but I kind of like that and if I want more, it's just a couple of clicks in post. I haven't done, and never will, extensive testing to see if the Planar is sharper from middle to infinity. I quite like the Helios, the one I have and that's enough for me.
I did just purchase an Oly 90 f2 and can't wait to put it through it's paces. I may just skip the inexpensive Rokinon - it seems like a fine lens for the money, but from what I've seen, it's a little boring to me.
Alf Beharie wrote:
The Helios 40-2 has virtually identical looking bokeh to the C/Y Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Planar T*, when there is no fine detail in the frame and the subject is relatively close...In this situation the Zeiss has smoother bokeh, where the Helios has swirly bokeh and the Planars OOF highlights are almost perfectly circular where they are misshaped, often oval/ish with the Helios. The contrast of each seems to be about the same. The Planar is definetly sharper between middle distance to infinity.
BTW, I have'nt seen anypics in this thread that would make me want to rush out and buy a Rokinon.
I also have the Tamron SP 90mm f2.5 Macro and the Mamiya 80mm f2.8N and I feel both have better bokeh than anything I've seen from the Rokinon. The Mamiya is probably as sharp and contrasty as the Rokinon but I would say that the Tamron lacks the Rokinons high contrast. The FD 85 f1.2 L is currently my favorite 85-ish mm lens and now that I've seen that its predecessor, which has virtually identical optical performance, can hold its head up high against the Rokinon I see even less reason to get a Rokinon. ...Show more →
wow awesome!!! I cant wait...trying to find a place online that I can overnight it from... buy.com and overstock are weird about actual ship dates.. ugh.
Aperture is selected manually with the ring. The pentax mount variant also has an "A" position on the ring, which lets the aperture be controlled from the camera. But apparently the aperture mechanism isn't all that robust, because I've seen reports that using the lens with auto-aperture leads to the blades sticking.
you did overstock? they only offer 1-3 day shipping when you pay for the most expensive option...its frustrating...if you ordered from them, how long did it take?
4 days from order to shipping, 3 days in transit i think. Fedex still has mine though.. i sat home 8-16 both days, both times got "not avilable".. gah!
)