Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

85mm Samyang f/1.4
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:22 pm    Post subject: 85mm Samyang f/1.4 Reply with quote
Just taken delivery of a pre-owned copy making me at least the third owner (Graham I believe this was your previously?).

Two days of walkabout snapping with it on my 5DII aren't enough to make me either fall in love with it or conclude that it's fundamentally better or no better than my trifox conversion Canon FD 1.8 SSC. Obviously it's faster and gives a further focal distance otherwise I am happy with the Canon so I need to do some back-to-back comparative testing. Maybe indoor shots of a fast-moving grandson in the next couple of weeks will be a good test.

Incidentally this is my first outing with a digital camera in well over a month after using film almost every day.

Anyway here's a few to be going on with:








and cropped


last pair:


and cropped:


Last edited by tikkathree on Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:44 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Blimey these things get around! Laughing I actually really enjoyed it...it's sharp, fast and modern! But...I found a cheap Planar, which had more character, so I kept that instead.

Your images look very good Smile Whether it's better than older 85mm lenses is another matter, but for someone looking for a fast, modern lens it fits the bill well.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I love this lens based on samples what I seen. Congrats!! It is still in my wish list , no matter I have Planar, Biotar, Pancolar etc.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Blimey these things get around! Laughing


Yes I picked it up at TP forum - paid extra 'cos it had been owned by a famous 'tog. hahaha!

Quote:
I actually really enjoyed it...it's sharp, fast and modern! But...I found a cheap Planar, which had more character, so I kept that instead.

Your images look very good Smile Whether it's better than older 85mm lenses is another matter, but for someone looking for a fast, modern lens it fits the bill well.


Modern? oooh! To think it'll go on me old EOS-1n as well. Given their differing overall dimensions I'm surprised that the Samyang isn't noticeably heavier than the Canon. I'm just now playing with low ambient indoor light and there's very noticeable difference (doh!) between f/1.4 and f/1.8: I think there's a slight bias developing here...


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've had a copy of this lens for about a year and a half. I neither love nor hate it, but still feel it was a bargain.

Like:
Quite sharp, especially at f/2.8 and f/4. Less impressive stopped down. In fact, my old Nikon 75-150/3.5 E is quite a bit sharper if both are stopped down to f/5.6 or more.

Dislike:
It went through a period when it wouldn't stop down reliably, leaving many overexposed shots. It didn't do this until the waranty expired, naturally. Seems okay now. I would like to replace it with a Zeiss Planar Makro 100/2.8. Too bad the price is so high--and this is exactly why I bought the Samyang: while I have no doubt the Zeiss is vastly superior, it costs 7 to 8 times as much as the Samyang. Some day, maybe.

Love:
The bokeh. Very nice, very smooth. Here is a shot of some amaryllis flowers, at f/2.8.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@tikkathree: congratulation .. you have the 85/1.4 lens with the smoothest bokeh on earth ... Smile Well, I haven't tried the smooth bokeh master the Minolta 85/1.4 G LE, so I can't compare them Smile

@Attila: I suggest that you buy the UMC version. It's the latest version and I believe it's only in Nikon mount. It's a lot sharper and more contrasty than the previous non UMC version. But the non UMC version has smoother bokeh Smile I have both and still can not make up my mind which one to sell Smile



Left: First version, Right: UMC version, shot using tripod, live view and timer


About the harsher bokeh on the UMC version, I think it's common that the sharper the lens the more pronounced the ring on the bokeh highlight. Is it? Something related to abberation correction?
I experience the same think with Rokkor MC 85/1.7 (smoother bokeh) vs Rokkor MD 85/1.7 (sharper).

Top: first version, Bottom: UMC version







PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
nixland wrote:

@Attila: I suggest that you buy the UMC version. It's the latest version and I believe it's only in Nikon mount. It's a lot sharper and more contrasty than the previous non UMC version. But the non UMC version has smoother bokeh :)


Based on this description I would suggest to buy the non-UMC version; I think much of the character of this lens comes from the smooth bokeh.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
nixland wrote:

@Attila: I suggest that you buy the UMC version. It's the latest version and I believe it's only in Nikon mount. It's a lot sharper and more contrasty than the previous non UMC version. But the non UMC version has smoother bokeh Smile


Based on this description I would suggest to buy the non-UMC version; I think much of the character of this lens comes from the smooth bokeh.


That's why I still can not decide to let the older version go Smile

By the way, I have compared the UMC with Nikon AF 85/1.4D (using adapter) and the UMC still a lot smoother.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice images! This lens is a gem, definitely!

Allow me to post some links to other threads about it:

http://forum.mflenses.com/carl-zeiss-planar-85-1-4-v-samyang-85-1-4-t36915,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/samyang-85-1-4-compared-to-the-helios-40-t43540,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/samyang-ae-85-mm-f-1-4-if-mc-aspherical-nikon-fit-t41862,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/samyang-1-4-85-t37888,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/surprised-and-impressed-samyang-rokinon-85-1-4-mf-t34805,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/samyang-1-4-85-portrait-t33112,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/must-i-buy-the-samyang-85-1-4-t29847,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/first-shots-with-samyang-85-1-4-t22619,highlight,%2Bsamyang+%2B85.html


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh god, the Samyang looks very good.
Is it still the cheapest 85 1.4?


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ilguercio wrote:
Oh god, the Samyang looks very good.
Is it still the cheapest 85 1.4?


yes.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I prefer takumar smc 85/1.8 unless you really need the extra light. they use to go for the same price.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hoanpham wrote:
I prefer takumar smc 85/1.8 unless you really need the extra light. they use to go for the same price.


The S-M-C version seems to be more expensive, at least on eBay, that the Samyang 85mm, and the Samyang is new vs used Takumar. Of course it's possible to get lucky and find one cheaper, but then again I got my Samyang 85mm brand new for 133GBP when it had just arrived and apparently no-one else wanted to bid on the Sony-mount version… In any case I hope that Samyang's lenses will eventually bring down the price of certain vintage lenses, currently I find it hard to argue for the vintage solution considering the price, performance & warranty of the Samyang.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting this UMC/non-UMC thing... I wasn't aware of that.
Does it mean that UMC is multicoated and the other is not?

I really like the following picture - is it taken with UMC copy or with non-UMC? :

tikkathree wrote:



Another picture that I like - same question: UMC or non-UMC? :

Arninetyes wrote:



PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
Interesting this UMC/non-UMC thing... I wasn't aware of that.
Does it mean that UMC is multicoated and the other is not?


This thread is the first time I've heard of the UMC version, but the other versions anyways have “MC” in their name and… who would make a lens like this without multicoating these days? I would guess that the UMC is some newer coating technology (ultra MC?) that they've now been able to afford with increasing popularity (= increased price). My 14mm f/2.8 also says UMC, while my 85mm f/1.4 doesn't say anything at all on the lens itself, there's just a spot in which to glue the brand name tag for whichever brand it's to be sold as.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I seem to be the only one that unimpressed with this lens.

A mate of mine had it, used it twice and sold it. I should have said "I told you so!" Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I was unaware of the early vs late (UMC) versions of the Samyang. Mine is the early non-UMC version. According to this thread, that makes it the less-sharp version with smoother bokeh. That is the one reason I'll keep this lens. For "sharp", I have a few others that are sharper--of course, none of them are sharper at f/2.8 to f/1.4.

The amaryllis flowers were shot with the early version at f/2.8. At f/1.4, the depth of field was too shallow for the photo, and it needed to be stopped down to f/2.8 before I liked it.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
I seem to be the only one that unimpressed with this lens.

A mate of mine had it, used it twice and sold it. I should have said "I told you so!" Laughing Laughing


The Samyang is far from perfect. It isn't as good as a Nikkor 85/1.4, but it is remarkably good for the price.

I've done some subjective comparisons, but only against Nikon lenses, since I'm using a Nikon. The Nikon 85/1.8 is sharper when stopped down farther than f/4. So is the Nikkor 85/2. However, the Samyang has much better bokeh than either, and it is quite usable at f/1.4. Either will cost about the same as a Samyang. Compared to a Nikkor 85/1.4, I think the Nikon is sharper at every f/stop, but the Samyang bokeh is a bit nicer. However, the Nikon 85/1.4 will cost three to four times more.

But, that brings me to the one aspect where all the Nikons are better than the Samyang--build quality. The Samyang feels wonderful, and I really like the feel of the focus ring. It's almost as nice as a good Nikon focus. But, there are quality control issues with the Samyang that don't exist with the Nikkors. Most of the problems involve sticky apertures.

So, is the Samyang worth the money? To me, yes. Easily. However, if I had the money, I'd rather have a Nikkor 85/1.4 Ais. It's better in every way except bokeh, and it's not far off the mark there, not far at all. As I said though, I'd still rather have a Zeiss Planar Makro 100/2, except that it's twice as much as the Nikon.

Based on money, I think I'll keep the Samyang for a while.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 10:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:

This thread is the first time I've heard of the UMC version, but the other versions anyways have “MC” in their name and… who would make a lens like this without multicoating these days? I would guess that the UMC is some newer coating technology (ultra MC?) that they've now been able to afford with increasing popularity (= increased price). My 14mm f/2.8 also says UMC, while my 85mm f/1.4 doesn't say anything at all on the lens itself, there's just a spot in which to glue the brand name tag for whichever brand it's to be sold as.


I wasn't aware that they released a version with the newer multicoatings, but Samyang did indeed upgrade their coatings sometime after they released the 85mm and 8mm lenses and UMC is the name of their latest coating.

Arkku wrote:
... currently I find it hard to argue for the vintage solution considering the price, performance & warranty of the Samyang.


+1. I don't understand why people are looking for Takumars when this lens is available. OTOH, I've just seen people bidding $255 for a Jupiter 3 on ebay when they could have just got one from fedka for $189. Fixation is a tough thing to deal with.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arninetyes wrote:
The Nikon 85/1.8 is sharper when stopped down farther than f/4. So is the Nikkor 85/2. However, the Samyang has much better bokeh than either, and it is quite usable at f/1.4.


Most reviews have pointed out that the Samyang was optimized for performance wide open. As a result, it never reaches the high resolutions of other 85mm lenses when stopped down. It's Samyang's design tradeoff.

Last edited by Laurentiu Cristofor on Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:27 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
who would make a lens like this without multicoating these days?


Well, Cosina Voigtlaender did, but they are retro freaks like us, so they don't count Laughing


PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
nixland wrote:

Top: first version, Bottom: UMC version





Even at this small enlargement, it is evident that the correction of the spherical aberration that has been obviously done in the UMC lens,
(and which can not depend on the new coating, but must be the result of an optical correction),
has also introduced as a consequence a much more visible purple fringing, where as the fringing in the first version of the lens
is much less evident.

If I had to choose one version of this lens, I would take the older version no doubt.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:

Even at this small enlargement, it is evident that the correction of the spherical aberration that has been obviously done in the UMC lens,
(and which can not depend on the new coating, but must be the result of an optical correction),
has also introduced as a consequence a much more visible purple fringing, where as the fringing in the first version of the lens
is much less evident.

If I had to choose one version of this lens, I would take the older version no doubt.


I have to agree. Sharpness is nice, but I'd gladly trade it for less CA. Besides, it's not as though the original version of the lens wasn't sharp to begin with.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
gearsNcogs wrote:

I have to agree. Sharpness is nice, but I'd gladly trade it for less CA. Besides, it's not as though the original version of the lens wasn't sharp to begin with.


Yes, also because this is a portrait lens, and usually with posed portraits people uses some kind of light reinforcement, even in exteriors.
And my experience shows that if sharpness is an issue, a well placed, well calibrated flash can make all lenses look much sharper than one would suspect if never used before.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
Arkku wrote:
who would make a lens like this without multicoating these days?


Well, Cosina Voigtlaender did, but they are retro freaks like us, so they don't count Laughing


Heh, I have to confess I didn't know they have made a non-multicoated lens (lenses?), which one is it?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2