Upgrade from Samyang 85/1.4 for portraits

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

Hi!
I have an good Samyang 85/1.4 but wan't an upgrade (I'm especially looking for higher microcontrast at wide apertures).
I wan't something between 85mm (which is sharp at F2) and 135mm (which is sharp at F2.8 )

I'm already looking for cheap offer of these lenses:
Nikon 135 DC
Sony/Minolta 135 STF
Leitz Elmarit 135/2.8
Planar 85/1.4
Minolta 85/1.4 G

Price limit is 700€ MAX so I can forget super-lenses like Apo-Summicron 90/2.
And I like sharp potraits with thin DOF if necessary, so lens has to be already very sharp at F2 for ~85mm / F2.8 for ~135mm

Do you have further suggestions?

anscochrome · Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 115 Location: Omaha, NE

105mm F 2.5 Nikkor (Sonnar type, non AI)?

wuxiekeji · Joined: 15 Aug 2012 Posts: 213

I have both the Planar 85/1.4 and Sonnar 135/2.8 and both are spectacular for portraits.

I used to have the Samyang 85/1.4 as well; the Planar 85/1.4 performs overall quite similarly in image quality but has slightly better contrast and colour. Don't expect miracles by upgrading to Planar, the Samyang is actually a very decent lens, if you're not getting what you want with that you should evaluate your technique.

The Sonnar 135 is indeed super sharp wide open, and generally inexpensive, extremely good bang for buck; you should be able to grab it for 150 euros or less. The only downside is that its closest focusing distance is about 1.6m which may be a deal-breaker for face portraits on full-frame. If you're willing to drop 700 euros like you quote, you could consider also the 100/2.8 Makro-Planar which is an awesome portrait+macro lens in one and has close focus capabilities. My copy of the MP 100/2.8 is tack sharp corner to corner wide open, one of the best lenses I have ever had. It's not cheap but it's within your budget.

This is the Sonnar 135 AEJ shot wide open on APS-C. MMJ should theoretically be slightly better but I don't have it.

David · Expire: 2013-01-25

Pentax 100mm macro. The lens design for macro use makes it super sharp, it has a 2.8 wide aperture which is pretty decent, and you can get as close to or as far away from your subject as you want.

azimuth68 · Joined: 02 Nov 2013 Posts: 11 Location: sub arctic america

Canon 135 f2 FDn, or the late Nikkor 105 f1.8s, both are very good at f2.8 but I'm not certain either will be any better than the Samyang, durability issues aside a good Samyang is quite good as I'm sure you know.

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

Oh thanks great for suggestions!
@anscochrome
I've also heard it's a great lens. Is the Nikon sharp wide open? Do you know the min. focusing distance?
I wonder if it's really better than the Samyang though.

@wuxiekeji
I think I have a proper technique Wink

the Samyang is very good for the money but I would like to have the lets say 10-15% higher resolution and slightly higher (mirco-)contrast of the Planar at wide apertures. Also I don't think the Planar and the Samyang are thaat similar (Planar has higher contrast and classical planarish bokeh which I would prefer while Samyang is almost too smooth).

The 135/2.8 Sonnar sounds almost exactly what I'm looking for. Nice sample btw. But the 1.6m mfd sounds indeed pretty far away for FF (as well as the 1m of the Samyang and Planar already sometimes sucks me on FF). I think I will add it to my list anyway Smile

Thanks a lot!

@David
I don't know this particular macro but generally I found macro lenses to be not very nice for potraits due bokeh and/or colors. Also DOF of 100/2.8 is a tad wide.
Do you have samples?

(Larger physical aperture = Thinner DOF.
You can calculate physical aperture by dividing focal length in mm through F-Stop number. So 85mm F2 would be 85mm divided through 2 -->=42.5mm and 135mm F2.8 would 135mm/2=48mm effective aperture while 100/2.8 are "only" 35mm.
So 85/1.4 (~60mm aperture) gives the same DOF as an 50mm F0.8 (~60mm aperture) and so on)

bernhardas · Expire: 2017-05-23

edited

gaeger · Expire: 2021-03-09

Save some money and buy a Nikkor 135mm f3.5 AI. I got one for free in a box of other stuff.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaeger2/5197916790/in/set-72157635864600113/

hoanpham · Expire: 2015-01-18

- Canon fd 135/2 is sharp, but also purple fringle a bit at f2. It is very good indoor.
- CZ Planar 85/1.4 is sharp at f1.4 but not super sharp as Pentax FA 85/1.4. CZ has perhaps best contrast.
- CZ Planar 100/2 (non macro) is sharper wide open performance when compared with 85/1.4, but it is one stop slower. Very good bokeh.
- Nikkor 105/1.8 ais has ok sharpness at f1.8, but peak performance is around f2.5 - My copy has cpu. Best OOF, best bokeh, completely smeared.
- Canon fd 85/1.2 is sharp at f1.2, some minor purple fringle, very good contrast as well.

Of these lenses, the nikkor 105/1.8, CZ 100/2 should beat the Samyang easily.
Then the CZ 85/1.4 better in contrast, canon fd 85/1.2 one stop faster,
Then Canon fd 135/2 which is different.

I still have to testrun the CZ 135/2, but based on Orio's images, I expect it wins over the Samyang as well.

As far, price performace, the nikkor 105/1.8 ais should be the best overall when compared with the Samyang, then CZ 85/1.4 as complementary in 85mm focal.

Aanything · Expire: 2014-05-30

I have bought a Planar 85/1.4 recently and, if portraiture is your main purpose in this case, I think it's pretty much unbeatable - amo mg the lenses i owned/used at least. It's sharp from wide open (not the sharpest 1.4 lens out there, probably, but definitely sharp) and, from my first quick snaps with it, it has a very unique and beautiful rendering of skin tones - that peculiar "sharp but silky" look.
The only downside I can think of is some slight CA in some situations, but it is not too evident and often easy to correct in PP with current softwares (I have had great results with the DxO optics free trial).
The planar should fit quite comfortably in your budget. I don't know if it will be a big upgrade from the samyang (many subjective factors will be involved in the comparison), but I'm really impressed by it.
Also, the contax sonnar 85/2.8 is a good cheaper alternative if f2.8 is fast enough: it is for me, and I was going to buy that before I found an unbelievable bargain for the planar: the relatively cheap price and my passion for oof rendering of sonnars are its strong points for me.

ZoneV · Expire: 2011-12-02

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Quality of light more important than lens, you can buy 10000 USD lens if you use it in crap light, and 20 USD lens makes better portrait if you have proper lighting. Try it out before spend extra useless, look in both case 100% crop it will be very visible.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

wuxiekeji · Joined: 15 Aug 2012 Posts: 213

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I agree, microcontrast really isn't something you want a lot of on a portrait. In fact, the best portrait lenses are often considered to be those with residual spherical aberration which also means thy have low microcontrast.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

One more side note lens choice to me emotional thing also, I love old lenses and always yield them against new ones, so take what makes you feel better, I doubt they have very important differences.

ForenSeil · Joined: 15 Apr 2011 Posts: 2726 Location: Kiel, Germany.

I disagree that high microcontrast is bad for potraits. I know that most people wan't low sharpness on their potraits to handle skin impurities and to make it look artsy but I personally prefer high microcontrast giving more 3dimensionality and a natural look.

I just had a look at some resoltion charts. The Planar has higher resolution at all apertures.

Thanks for your tips guy! I think I have enough suggestions for know.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Who says most people don't want sharpness for portraits? Many consider the ideal look for portraits to be sharp but smooth, hence they want a sharp lens with residual spherical aberration. The classic Petzval lenses are very sharp indeed in the centre, a good one can easily rival any Planar for centre sharpness.

3D is much more to do with lighting that microcontrast BTW.

David · Expire: 2013-01-25

No portrait samples. The new DFA version has rounded aperture blades to smoothen the bokeh.

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/130-lens-sample-photo-archive/174734-smc-pentax-d-fa-100mm-f2-8-macro-non-wr.html

Here is the same lens with weather sealing. This thread has portraits. http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/130-lens-sample-photo-archive/153755-pentax-dfa-100mm-f-2-8-macro-samples.html

Laurentiu Cristofor · Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA

Laurentiu Cristofor · Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA

This dxomark comparison shows how much sharper the Samyang is wide open than the Zeiss Planar:

Samyang 85 vs Zeiss Planar 85 Nikon comparison at dxomark

ManualFocus-G · Expire: 2014-11-24

Look at that pop though Shocked

DR.JUAN · Joined: 08 Feb 2013 Posts: 661

It's very difficult to obtain a good image enlarging a portrait to 40 x 50 when it was taken at 1,4 aperture.

I don't remember have seen a very good one.

The effect of the nose, ears, cheeks, lips, all OOF is not good to my taste. Of course that occue if you want to have in focus the eyes (at least the nearest one to the lens).

The F/4 or 5,6 or F/8 yet, are more classic effects (and better to me).