[mst]

Since you mentioned the swirly bokeh twice now: do you have links to examples? Not asking because of any doubt, but because I didn't follow other reviews or field reports about the lens (intentionally... I try to remain unbiased about lenses I haven't reviewed yet).

-- Markus

[Brightcolours]

Sure , here are a few examples:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldoe...n105mmf14/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldoe...n105mmf14/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldoe...n105mmf14/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldoe...48/sizes/l

https://www.flickr.com/photos/eternal_ra...n105mmf14/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldoe...n105mmf14/

http://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-...oto_05.jpg

[mst]

Thanks!

-- Markus

[JJ_SO]

Remaining unbiased is an illusion, Markus  :lol:

[Rover]

Wanna bet the Mitakon 85mm f1.2 vignettes more than the new Samyang 85mm f1.2 because of that? 

No bets against the obvious - I can see that this is going to be the case. Again, I don't really care about MF lenses so I haven't been researching these, but if Photozone is ever going to review one of those, I'm going to read the article, if only out of pure curiosity.

[davidmanze]

The heavy vignetting (and swirly bokeh) are both because of the narrow F-mount. A lovely lens nonetheless.

Oh how ironic the world can be, while we're talking about large aperture F mounts.

 

Lenstips review of the Mitakon 85mm F1.2 in the Nikon mount... the Mitakon's vigneting..I quote:

 

"Employing the maximum relative aperture you have to take into account the loss of 45% of light (−1.73 EV) in the frame corners. It is not a low value but still the Mitakon is better than the Canon which lost as much as 51% of light. By f/1.4 the vignetting decreases to 40% (−1.49 EV). Once again that value is quite high but you should remember that the huge Otus by f/1.4 lost as much as 56% of light!" 

 

  Out bayoneted the Nikon F mount?  No........ how's that for a rabbit out of the hat-trick?

[davidmanze]

Haha, well, it's probably safe to assume that it's not a zoom lens... sorry, dave

 

-- Markus

 

   Hey I guessed it first time.. 

 

  Background bushes seem to be the 105's Achilles heel;

 

 https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4063454

 

  Behind the sundial.

[JJ_SO]

About that "swirly bokeh": After seeing from the same photographer this here

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/michaeldoe...n105mmf14/

 

I start suspecting what other lenses would have done with the swirly background while try to getting that sharpness level   smooth bokeh and super sharpness are contradictory. In doubt, I prefer to have a sharper lens as more blur can be added (within limits) in post.

 

If "necessary", I can get a "swirly" bokeh even from a 56/1.2 APD

[Brightcolours]

Oh how ironic the world can be, while we're talking about large aperture F mounts.

 

Lenstips review of the Mitakon 85mm F1.2 in the Nikon mount... the Mitakon's vigneting..I quote:

 

"Employing the maximum relative aperture you have to take into account the loss of 45% of light (−1.73 EV) in the frame corners. It is not a low value but still the Mitakon is better than the Canon which lost as much as 51% of light. By f/1.4 the vignetting decreases to 40% (−1.49 EV). Once again that value is quite high but you should remember that the huge Otus by f/1.4 lost as much as 56% of light!" 

 

  Out bayoneted the Nikon F mount?  No........ how's that for a rabbit out of the hat-trick?

I think you are not taking into account lens design? The Canon lens is a very old design, going back to the end of the 1970's. That the current Canon with basically the same design, just a bit bigger back element, vignets a lot, it still vignets  less than the smaller mount diameter Canon FD relatives. There is more than one variable in vignetting.

The 55mm f1.2 lenses I have (you have) also a lot.

 

So yes, the 105mm f1.4 Nikkor vignets a lot due to the narrow mount's design limits. The Samyang 85mm f1.2 Vignets less than the Mitakon due to the wider mount diameter. 

[JJ_SO]

   Hey I guessed it first time.. 

 

  Background bushes seem to be the 105's Achilles heel;

 

 https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4063454

 

  Behind the sundial.

 

Well, it's a bit abusing the lens. Being portrait specialist, I think the best proportions in distance for headshots are different from the ones we see in the picture. I don't want to defend an insanely priced product of China, but with some effort you can find weak spots in each lens design.