The fastest native Micro Four Thirds lens is that $2,000 Handevision 40mm f/0.85 you can buy at Adorama (Click here), BHphoto (Click here) or in [shoplink 48562 ebay]European eBay Stores[/shoplink]. And if you wonder how the it is to look through such a lens just watch the video on top shot on the GH3!
41 Responses
Waving it around a convention centre with poor exposure isnt really a review.
While $2000 is very pricey, i would prefer to see someone who can either use or challenge the optic properly without giving me motion sickness đ
Having said that, this is just one more option for shooters of this system.
I guess the “reviewer” forgot not only forgot his tripod, but also forgot about the Voigtländer Nokton 42.5mm f0.95 which is HALF the price (size and weight) of the Handevision 40mm and $600 less than the Nocticron.
Of course whining about manual focus is a dead giveawayâŚ
Let’s see an actual review by someone with skill, where actual care is taken to setup and use the lens.
Price is not the main issue, if you are looking at these 3 lenses.
i think it is an important issue for me; though i find the Ibelux interesting due to specs, I find the Nokton interesting both in specs & price . The Nocticron sitting halfway somewhere between those two might be 2nd choice if its between those 3.
None of the three lenses are cheap, so of course price is an issue, along with other considerations, when deciding about purchasing any of these lenses.
Here are several reviews:
http://admiringlight.com/blog/ibelux-40mm-f0-85-vs-canon-fl-55mm-f1-2speed-booster/
http://admiringlight.com/blog/first-impressions-handevision-ibelux-40mm-f0-85/
http://admiringlight.com/blog/review-handevision-ibelux-40mm-f0-85-sony-e-mount/
thank you for the link, interesting, willl read it now.
Okay! Now THAT’S a review!
Thanks!
That lens is worse than I thought. Although, some of the the street shot samples had a very nice quality to them. Not $2000 quality.
Impressive.
I am sure we will see some review comparing it with the Voigtlander later.
I totally agree with the reviewer’s view .
Being a tele prime shooter , defocusing effect ( bokeh ) is extremely important to me .
I can’t see this 40mm F0.85 can contribute much in bokehlicious compare with the Nocticron , even with F0.85 but short of 2.5mm FL .
I assume no much different .
Without AF & IS , I still prefer the Nocticron over Ibelux .
Till Oly can come out another 75mm F1.2 / F1.0 that will definitely make up my day .
The video is not really convincing, if you cant stand purple fringing, alot of fast lenses wont be to your taste.Just for that he closed the lens down to f/2…..what I miss here is the ability to show the effect of such fast lens in portraits. Give me that lens and I will explore it more deeply then just this quick try-out on an exhibition stand (i know such is not an ideal place and the reviewer had no other choice). The price is indeed very high, but the f/0.85 designation is reason for this. What we see here is the lack of IBIS in handheld video mode. If he had an Olympus with IBIS, it would be completely smooth(I used the 45 f/1.8 for model video pictorials on an E-M5 and it looked flawless). I might prefer the Nocticron too, but in reality I would choose for a cheaper solution.
Tell me if you given a chance to pick between the Nocticron & this Ibelux ? Which one is your choice ?
It simple as that .
I agree the 45mm intend a very nice lens & I did owe it .
Wondering if Oly can make another similar lens with F1.0 or F1.2 .
As for the Nocticron , it’s currently a must have lens if you mind about your optics .
Logically, the Nocticron would be my choice, but since i saw the comparison on AdmiringLight with the canon 55mm L with SB, I found the Ibelux very soft background rendering to be a plus for moodful portraitphotography. I dont really care about better then good sharpness but more about rendering a moodful image.Possibly the Nocticron is as good in the background too, but I can be only sure in a comparison. Tbh I would be thrilled if I could get gifted either one haha
*Extremely* important? Have you ever tried a real camera then?
Isn’t putting bigger and bigger lenses on m4/3 cameras miss the whole point?
no it is not, its just nothing for the people who like to keep it compact.
If you don’t want to use anything else than Olympus 12mm, 17mm, 25mm and 45mm size objectives with f/1.8 (or f/2) aperture, then don’t.
There are three benefits with this kind objectives.
1) Motion stop capability in low-light
2) Separate subject from background when subject is further
3) Play around with blurred backgrounds and soft subject details
1-2 are valid reasons to buy this kind objectives. third is possible to do in post as long there is some kind small separation to begin with.
YepâŚâŚthats your M43 real expensive big camera’s with big lenses and poor picture quality for you.
Yep. If I want big I buy ff. But those guys will try and sell anything.
because you only consider your needs but let me help you see the light đ
I work as lead video and R&D for an AV company, we use cameras for many applications; robotized, video, stills, keying, cinemagraphs, underwater…
We could not care less about size, not a single second. Why m43? Because of sensor size (usable DoF at very large aperture is kind of a feature in itself) and mostly because of the versatility of the GH offering. They are light and even the big lenses are small so putting them on a robotic head is very easy and doesn’t stress the motors like a 5D will (or worse a D800, weight is just not well distributed on the D800), everything is smaller and less expensive (except lenses) and since most people using these cams in the consumer space do it for a budget reason we win as a company by selecting this line of product. I haven’t mentionned Jibs and steadycams which make the GH serie the big winner, we can build very effective stady cam rigs and Jibs DIY style and they will perform admirably with such light cameras, use an existing pro JIbb or steadycam rig and they become the most ergonomical camera to work with, for live events lasting hours this is a must, our cameramen thank us and so does their back.
Also even with big lenses carrying a kit for remote location filming is a breeze, it can be done with a good backpack (rails included) rather than will a pelican case on weels.
Wi-fi remote applications are very good and we are praying that one day they will include very important features for our live applications (iris, pedestal and color control remotely, touch focus would be the icing on the cake) however even in their current state they let us rig a camera in very odd spaces (high up in the air or awkward to reach places) and do a recording of an event installation or show to use for making-of purposes or just for a special effect.
For many people like me lens size is almost irrelevant to our choice.
Yeah I think there’s a common misconception that M4/3 is ALL about smaller cameras and lenses. If size was so important they could have gone with an even smaller sensor. While I agree that the Micro Four Thirds Group must have decided that M43 was the minimum size they would use because of image quality/light gathering surface area, it’s also a question of how flexible, adaptable, and customizable the format is. The very ability to use a wide range of adapted lenses, no matter the size, is important. It also allows lens manufacturers to keep production costs down and that improves the selection for users. Honestly, as long as my camera body is compact I can deal with larger lenses, it’s still a smaller package than anything for 35mm.
Well… I’d say shooting video with this was a no-go just from the specs. You’ll need IBIS at least, but that won’t do it – probably an additional steady cam rig and you’re almost there. It’s better as a shooting lens, however I can see the purple fringing issue makes the largest aperture less appealing to use.
I think “review” is not a correct word for this piece of cr@p video.
A try out at a booth is not something that is worth sharing for valuation purposes. One needs to do a proper setup before any judgement should be made/given. This lens is a special purpose lens and would not be for a big buying public. I would rather have some renowed videographer give his opinion after thorough testing. That said I’m not in the market for this lens anyway since my focus is not on video.
I hate to say this but I think Ibelux should pay this guy to remove his clip as it does absolutely nothing for them, it does however certainly provide a very negative ‘review’ of the lens, sufficiently so in my eyes to put anyone off purchasing it.
Agreed. You need to be very bold to post a vid like that. But i guess the film-maker is.
Agree!
I like how he complained about fringing but didn’t even bother to white balance his camera. Also, every shot is out of focus so you can’t get any idea of the actual sharpness of the lens.
Splendid, this will inspire and enrich many artists here.
The “reviewer” forgot the Voigtlander 42.5mm/0.95, it only cost 850âŹ. And soon, Mitakon 42.5/1.2.
true
For a review of the Ibelux/Handevision 40mm f/0.85 from someone who knows what he’s doing, I suggest the review at LensRentals:
After all, this is the only existing MFT lens that will produce the look of an 80mm f/1.7 full frame lens. Whether that’s enough to justify the price difference to a Voigtländer 42.5mm f/0.95, which equals a 85mm f/1.9 lens, is a question everyone has to answer for themselves, but I’d expect the wide-open results of both lenses to be visibly different (let alone if we compare the Panasonic/Leica 42.5mm f/1.2).
This lens to good for puny sensor. Hulk smash puny sensor.
I don’t like repeats. I like repeats of unfunny sayings even less.
This is so funny, M43 with big fast expensive lenses to get some bokeh and upgrade the poor low light capability. No matter what you put on a M43 body it will always be worse than APSC. Why not just buy a cheaper same size APSC camera and get some real advantage???
The E-M5/10/1 have the same low light capability as the Fuji X-Trans, a sensor touted as having “incredible noise performance”. How is this possible? Its easy – Noise reduction is applied to the RAW files by the camera before you even get to see it, giving you the impression that the sensor has incredible ISO performance. If you apply the same amount of noise reduction to an M4/3 shot, it looks extremely similar, probably sharper.
On top of this, Olympus’ bodies have in body IS, granting even more low light performance to fast primes that other systems just can’t match, except for Pentax and -some- Sony models.
Yep, they cook the raws. So, instead of denoising them yourself, you let the camera do it. It looks good in tests, much less in real life because you have no control. Are you trying to sell something sweetheart?
APSC cameras are cheap, you’re right.
ok lets buy one lol
Many of the people posting here work for P or O. Others are dumb fanboys. A couple actually take photos. That explains đ
You know, I keep wondering why you and Tom seem to be around so much. Do you have some kind of inferiority complex that you are unable to address in real life?
This guy is kinda dumb, name me ONE m43 lens that has good performance wide open, or I should say that has equal or better performance wide open than closed a little. No Voigtlander, now SLR magic, no nothing, nada. The only lens that has almost equal performance wide open and closed is the OTUS line, and it’s made for full frame and it will set you back a fortune.