[Rover]

Still no AF. They should have at least an aperture coupling by now. This is not THAT difficult.

Amen bratha!

But it looks like they (and Samyang) never learn. Or prefer to play nonconformism by bucking the trends. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to bite them in the arse anytime soon.

[frank]

I agree, they should consider to add aperture coupling. Though I prefer NO AF on their lenses.

[Brightcolours]

Sizes are similar, Weight, the Nikkor is lighter becauses it uses cheap materials.

Cheap lighter glass? 

 

Amen bratha!

But it looks like they (and Samyang) never learn. Or prefer to play nonconformism by bucking the trends. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to bite them in the arse anytime soon.

<div> 

</div>
 

Samyang makes most of its lenses for many mounts, and most mount details are mot entirely shared with 3rd party lens manufacturers. So I soft of understand that Samyang does not offer AF on those. But yeah, they sure could already implement Canon's electronic aperture mechanism. And focus confirmation.

 

Voigtländer makes this lens for one mount, and a mount with open specifications too. So yes, why not try design an AF lens?

[thxbb12]

I'm still convinced that if Voigtlander offered AF in their 17.5, 25 and 42.5 f/0.95 lenses they would make a killing.

[frank]

I'm still convinced that if Voigtlander offered AF in their 17.5, 25 and 42.5 f/0.95 lenses they would make a killing.

Then the Voiglander lenses would become monsters in size and weight, if they would keep f0.95 and the build quality. If they would reduce the size and weight by reducing the maximum aperture, using non-metal materials, and even also leaving distortion corrections etc to softwares, then they are not Voiglander lenses any more.

[frank]

Cheap lighter glass? 

Voiglander use metal glasses (I cannot find face symbols on my browser I don't know why)

[frank]

Here are some examples of images taken with the lens on EM1. The distortion control is very impressive. The vegnitting control looks also not bad, maybe better than the Nikkor 20mm f1.8 (just impression).


http://www.optyczne.pl/7482-news-Voigtla...99cia.html

[thxbb12]

Then the Voiglander lenses would become monsters in size and weight, if they would keep f0.95 and the build quality. If they would reduce the size and weight by reducing the maximum aperture, using non-metal materials, and even also leaving distortion corrections etc to softwares, then they are not Voiglander lenses any more.

 

When looking at how little space ring motors take (from lensrentals.com), I doubt they would be much bigger than they already are.

I'm sure many users would like to see fast (< f1.4), reasonably compact and light MFT lenses.

[thxbb12]

Here are some examples of images taken with the lens on EM1. The distortion control is very impressive. The vegnitting control looks also not bad, maybe better than the Nikkor 20mm f1.8 (just impression).

http://www.optyczne.pl/7482-news-Voigtla...99cia.html

 

I agree IQ from the samples is very good from f1.4 on.

At f0.95 the image is too dreamy to my taste (it's the same with other f0.95 lenses).

I have no doubt the Nikkor at f1.8 will be much better than the Voigt at f0.95.

[Klaus]

It's difficult to tell what is low contrast and what is out-of-focus.

 

However, purple fringing is rather massive.