The samples look not bad at all to me. Nice and even across the frame. Contrast looks good but definitely not Zeiss-like. I see very little difference between the shots at f/2.8 and f/8 of the church.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Hard to tell much from this tiny sample. Is there a larger sample available?
Sorry, I linked to their smaller image since the bigger one I thought was too high res.
Just go to the samyang website mentioned earlier in this thread.
wayne seltzer wrote:
Sorry, I linked to their smaller image since the bigger one I thought was too high res.
Just go to the samyang website mentioned earlier in this thread.
I see what you mean in the larger image - oof bokeh circles have bright halo's with loCA (green edges) rather then a smooth, soft gradation. That particular shot is focused extremely close to the lens so I would guess the bokeh might look different at longer portrait distances.
the f/1.4 ones don't look soft to me for the aperture. I downloaded the full sized jpegs of the ones at or near wide open and looked them at 100%. they seem pretty sharp, I then gave them more agressive tone curves (which came out a bit weird - not used to processing jpegs) and posted downsized versions a few posts up from yours. the lens doesn't seem to have a lot of microcomtrast, but is plenty sharp and loCA is a little better than I'd expect from such a fast lens.
The detail is there and for the money you really can't ask for more. That said, images from this lens are never going to be mistaken for those from a Zeiss or Leica lens (for instance) unless A LOT of post processing is carried out. Color rendering and micro-contrast looks to be pretty dull (again, reminding me of the typical Canon look). Some may prefer this...and this looks similar to what the Samyang 85 1.4 gives. Personally, I don't care for the rendering from what I have seen thus far.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
The detail is there and for the money you really can't ask for more. That said, images from this lens are never going to be mistaken for those from a Zeiss or Leica lens (for instance) unless A LOT of post processing is carried out. Color rendering and micro-contrast looks to be pretty dull (again, reminding me of the typical Canon look). Some may prefer this...and this looks similar to what the Samyang 85 1.4 gives. Personally, I don't care for the rendering from what I have seen thus far.
yup, i'll agree with that. it seems very similar to the samyang 85/1.4 which is as much as i had hoped for. it certainly looks better to me than the nikkor ais 35/1.4, which is it's price competition. i certainly prefer the look of the c/y 35/1.4, but i never thought a samyang would draw like a zeiss (or a leica).
sebboh wrote:
the f/1.4 ones don't look soft to me for the aperture. I downloaded the full sized jpegs of the ones at or near wide open and looked them at 100%. they seem pretty sharp, I then gave them more agressive tone curves (which came out a bit weird - not used to processing jpegs) and posted downsized versions a few posts up from yours. the lens doesn't seem to have a lot of microcomtrast, but is plenty sharp and loCA is a little better than I'd expect from such a fast lens.
Oh, right. Sorry, for some reasons I wasn't able to see the pictures you posted. They do look better, though a bit too yellow for my taste ^^
I'm not sure I want to go through post-processing all my pictures for them not to look dull though... I already don't like my canon lenses because of this, so I'm probably going to pass on this lens. Too bad =/
Just to be a Melvin, "manual aperture" meaning you have to twist a physical aperture ring rather than whatever on-body wheel you usually use. This lens will be auto-aperture though -- you won't need to deal with stop-down metering.
Those examples from sebboh look pretty good, except for the warm WB.
cgiff wrote:
Just to be a Melvin, "manual aperture" meaning you have to twist a physical aperture ring rather than whatever on-body wheel you usually use. This lens will be auto-aperture though -- you won't need to deal with stop-down metering.
Is this true? I thought that stop-down metering would be required. I don't think the camera has any way to control the aperture.
