+- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com)
+-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Just Talk (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: new Samyang 135mm f/2 (/showthread.php?tid=1285)
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - Klaus - 01-12-2015
http://www.samyang-lens.co.uk/samyang-135mm-f20-ed-umc-lens.html
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - dave9t5 - 01-12-2015
Mounts? We got mounts!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Category_Photography&sts=ma&ci=15293&N=4294205295&Ntt=rokinon+135mm
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - davidmanze - 01-13-2015
Mounts agogo!
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - Guest - 01-13-2015
Wow.
It makes complete logical sense to share the basic lens across DSLR mounts, I'm surprised that they just extended the tube down for the mirrorless APS-C/m43 mounts. At that size and weight I certainly don't want one.
Now if they had built in a focal reducer and made it a ~100mm f/1.4....I'd be all in.
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - Scythels - 01-13-2015
You don't want the size and weight yet you would accept more weight...
Designing focal reducers is a complex process, and the price with one would be a fair bit higher.
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - Guest - 01-13-2015
Quote:You don't want the size and weight yet you would accept more weight...
Designing focal reducers is a complex process, and the price with one would be a fair bit higher.
Yes.
This is my exact 'Full frame vs. Cropped' argument. Why carry lenses designed for a different format, just re-badged for the smaller one?
I will carry weight if it is warranted, like for a 100mm/1.4 lens or something exotic. Or, alternately, I would buy a 135mm f/2 which was more compact and a lot lighter, as it would be if it was designed for the Fuji X/m43 format.
But to just take a lens with a too-big image circle and extend the tube down to the mount doesn't make much sense IMO. I'd rather pick up a Leica M 135mm, or in this case I'd even rather buy a Nikon/Pentax version and adapt it to Fuji X.
As for price, yes I understand that even designing a (non-focal reduced) Fuji X variant will cost R&D money.
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - popo - 01-13-2015
http://lcap.tistory.com/entry/Samyang-135mm-f2-vs-Canon-EF-135mm-2-L
Some tests here.
Looks very promising compared to the 135L for two major things I care about: LoCA and general resolution. If this is verified at other tests (I'm in no hurry) I would replace my 135L with one. Note I *only* use my 135L for astrophotography so considerations may vary from "normal" users of a 135mm lens.
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - Klaus - 01-13-2015
His 135L was clearly a bad one - see point A in the 2nd test. There is no way that the center of the image is worse than the borders C/D/E.
That being said - I continue to be surprised by Samyang.
Hopefully they got their quality control right though - they struggled with this in 2013 at least.
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - popo - 01-13-2015
Good point, but the relative absence of LoCA on the Samyang is a major point for me. Needs a harsher test to be sure though.
new Samyang 135mm f/2 - Scythels - 01-14-2015
It seems to have some focus shift due to badly corrected spherical aberration. All other aberrations seem to be quite well controlled. After their new 50mm and now this I am beginning to think that samyang is designing their lenses with a workflow very dissimilar to other manufactures and strong weighting to off-axis (corner) performance.