Luc asked me if the Nokton and SLR magic f/0.95 lenses are the fastest you can get for MFT. Actually the answer is no! Kenko Ibelux for example will launch a new 40mm f/0.85 lens by end of this year (save this Slidoo search to get notified when it will be for sale on eBay). Price isn’t set yet.
And on eBay there are plenty of fast lenses and some of them you could use with adapters on MFT cameras (althaugh they will vignette and have a creamy image rendering). Right now for example you can find the [shoplink 37538 ebay]Zoomar IRAN f/0.8 (acution here)[/shoplink], the [shoplink 37539 ebay]Japanese Apollo 25mm f/0.85 (acution here)[/shoplink] and the [shoplink 37540 ebay]Leica Leitz 65mm f/0.75 (acution here)[/shoplink].
45 Responses
Yeah an freaking massive!!
My friend just called it the ”horse cock” of lenses hahaha!!
Nah. That would be the new SLR MAGIC Spotting Scope… 😉
It’s big because of APS-c… like SIGMA MFT lens, they are same as NEX lens versions.
it is big because of f/0.85 and not for c-mount.
Do we really need such extremely fast lens in mFT ?
F1.2 is sufficient in my opinion , lenses in mFT are all pretty impressive .
Is the SENSOR that badly need a big boast !
Going to very fast & fast lenses doesn’t improve a lot in image quality especially in low light condition .
All I want to have is a clean & clear picture at ISO 3200 F2.8 from mFT .
@Yun
“Do we really need such extremely fast lens in mFT ?” – yes, yes we do
“F1.2 is sufficient in my opinion” – well that’s your opinion others will disagree
“Is the SENSOR that badly need a big boast !” – really? the current range of sensors are great, have you not tried an epl5, OM-D or GH3?
“Going to very fast & fast lenses doesn’t improve a lot in image quality especially in low light condition .” You don’t shoot wide open for IQ, this is a tool to be used when you need strong subject isolation and low light shooting.
“All I want to have is a clean & clear picture at ISO 3200 F2.8 from mF” – and that would be nice, but others have uses for wider aperture’s that you clearly do not
Yun, broaden your mind, for the people who prefer image rendering at extreme fast aperture, lenses like this are good as extra choice.
Yun you need clean iso 3200 or clean iso 3200 at 100% crop? If its the first one you can get it with the current 16mp sensor. If its the secnd one then there isnt a camera that does that yet
One of the big advantages of m4/3 to me is the ability to have useable depth of field at fast apertures. Bring on the fast sharp lenses. I have several legacy 1.2 lenses and there are times I wouldn’t mind an even larger aperture. A cleaner high ISO would work too though.
The current SLR Magic T0.95 is bound to be faster than F0.95. The question is how much faster? My guess would be about a 1/3 of a stop. The Oly 75 1.8 is rated T2.0 by DXO.
The shutter speed I get on my OMD when I compare the SLR @ t1.4 with PL 25 F1.4 tend to imply it is a bit more.
Rob, what is the difference in shutter speed between Leica 25mm @F1.4 and SLR Magic 12mm @T1.6?
Do you want that in metric or imperial seconds?
Whatever’s comparable ;).
Very good. You missed the word equivalence.
lol
T is a little “faster” than f, but I don’t know if this difference means something in terms of image quality.
The current SLR Magic T0.95 is bound to be faster than F0.95. The question is how much faster? My guess would be about a 1/3 of a stop. The Oly 75 1.8 is rated T2.0 by DXO.
The shutter speed I get on my OMD when I compare the SLR @ t1.4 with PL 25 F1.4 tend to imply it is a bit more.
It’s a gorgeous looking piece of chrome and glass but I have a question. Two rather:
1. Why is the lens element so recessed back? It seems like the lens could be about an inch and a half shorter.
2. I would HOPE that it’s an AF lens, but that would be wishful thinking… Is it going to be a manual lens?
Clean and clear picture at ISO3200, F2.8 = ISO1600, F2.0 = ISO800, F1.4 = ISO400 F1.0… The best way to improve one’s equipment and photography in general is better lenses. They make bodies perform better and last longer. They last while bodies may change. MFT is the perfect format for fast lenses. We are there not yet, but moving into right direction.
-p-
Pekka Potka
“”MFT is the perfect format for fast lenses. We are there not yet, but moving into right direction””
While smaller sensors can have smaller “”fast”” lenses, their effect is not the same with regard to either DOF or total light. Also if DOF is your only criteria ,then the mFT also follows this effect when compared to smaller sensors
The Sony RX100 at least at the wide end is actually at an advantage as compared to the typical mFT zoom in this sort of range it is notably faster { wide end} here are some examples with the DOF/Total light apertures as they directly relate to FF for a fair comparison.
RX100 FF equiv F4.8- F13 28-100mm
12-50 FF equiv F7- F12.6 24-100mm
14-45 FF equiv F 7- F11.2 28-90mm
12-35 FF equiv 5.6 24-70mm
The Sony RX100 matches the colour depth and DR of the E-M5 while being at roughly a 1 stop disadvantage at high ISO. So at least at the wide end the Sony is actually at an advantage with both DOF and total light when compared to all the mFT standard the zooms { as it has just over a one stop advantage thus closing the gap} other than the 12-35mm F2.8 where it is loses out by half a stop { the F2.8 is half stop slower in equiv terms , while the Sony is one stop behind in high ISO} . At longer focal lengths the Sony gets slower so any advantage over the mFT zooms fades. I am only looking at an mFT with the typical kit lenses. If you move towards primes then the advantage moves back to mFT. If as very many people do my intent was to buy an mFT with kit lens for a small lightweight set up for travel etc then I would strongly consider the RX100 as it is a very small unit.
Anonymous, you are right, if all you need/want is a kit lens and don’t want to add a prime. My personal experience is that OMD-Em5 kit lens is used only for its macro function, and I use primes for everything else.
Hi Marco. while I suspect that most if not all of us here are at the more enthusiast end of the scale with a selection of lenses to our names.Just as with low end DSLR camera purchasers many will never buy another lens beyond the kit that comes with it. Making a do it all compact such as the RX100 a decent lightweight alternative that will be more than capable enough for many.
JP
Joe, I agree, but I’d like those people not to compare systems that are so different. It’s like comparing a Hasselblad to a DSLR, for example. Both take photos, but the approach and need of the user is different. Same for compact (high end) cameras and a system like m43 or NEX. More photographers/enthusiasts tend to add a back up body to their gear, and I agree a small rx100 is lighter and more pocketble than whatever mirrorless with a kit lens.
Ah, and you really think you have to tell pekka potka about that?
Maybe you should try to realize that your equivalence argument is totally understood by virtually everyone, that it works fine but not in the way you think it does, and that you are an annoying idiot for beating a dead horse. Now please go back to your ‘full frame’ friends and go wank over unusably shallow DOF with them.
“””Ah, and you really think you have to tell pekka potka about that?”””
The ignorance of some mFT users knows no bounds he made a point that there was some inherent advantage in mFT regarding fast lenses when there is not, any smaller system with a suitably fast lens will be at the same or better level.
“”Maybe you should try to realize that your equivalence argument is totally understood by virtually everyone””
You have obviously not read the numerous posts by some of the mainly Olympus fans here or on forums such as DPreview
“”that it works fine but not in the way you think it does, and that you are an annoying idiot for beating a dead horse. Now please go back to your ‘full frame’ friends and go wank over unusably shallow DOF with them.””
It works exactly that way ,the RX100 at the wide end will out perform any mFT zoom other than the 12-35mm { even here it will only be at a half stop disadvantage} with regard to both DOF control and ISO as the mFT zooms are slow enough to lose the 1 stop high ISO advantage that the E-M5 holds over the RX100.
Your crude and abusive language simply indicates that you are an immature cowardly keyboard tough guy.
“The ignorance of some mFT users knows no bounds he made a point that there was some inherent advantage in mFT regarding fast lenses when there is not, any smaller system with a suitably fast lens will be at the same or better level.”
No it won’t. Just like how 135 format has an advantage over smaller formats when it comes to resolution and dynamic range (provided the same level of technology) so does mFT over smaller formats. Smaller formats do make it somewhat easier to create faster optics, but that doesn’t scale very well beyond f/1. Additionally, smaller formats can allow for similar results in a more compact package when the scene is well within the capabilities of that smaller format.
Application and conditions determine the best compromise and what is technically best has very little value as long as both application and conditions are well within the comfort zone of the setup you are using.
With regards to the rx100, one can put a fast prime on a mFT camera, whereas that is no option with the rx100, so no, that comparison doesn’t work. Both can be a very good photographic tool but in somewhat differing circumstances.
Not to mention.. when you say that the ignorance of *SOME* mFT users knows no bounds, then even by your own words, most mFT users are not that ignorant. Hence, when talking to mFT users, assuming their ignorance knows no bounds is most of the time going to be wrong. Writing with that assumption is rude, just as arguing on one side that 135 format has an inherent advantage over smaller formats while at the same time arguing that mFT does not have that same inherent advantage over smaller formats is dishonest.
Can you please explain your words total light.
Total Light = Exposure x Effective Sensor Area
does that mean the image gets darker as the sensor gets bigger? what does the resulting number mean? My light meter says it is the same exposure. There is no sensor size switch.
100 iso at 250th f2 = exposure. for all my cameras.
What does exposure x 864mm2 or exposure x 225mm2 hav to do with the picture?
I have a pair of 25mm/0.78 Canon “TV-16” lenses I’ve been trying to mount on something for a few years. They’re C-Mount, and at infinity there’s only about 5mm between the rear element and the focal plane. This means just about anything with a shutter is going to be a problem.
Hasn’t kept me from looking, though.
Cut a hole in the shutter. Or glue soft felt on the back of the lens!
😀 good one on the felt!
Who is Luc? Anyway, as I wrote many times, I don’t think people usually buy this kind of speedy lenses because of their razor thin depth of field. These lenses are useful in low light, as Pekka Potka wrote. If you are a night wanderer, than this kind of lens is for sure an interesting tool.
Yes there are numerous night scenes that are just perfect for shooting at F0.85 lol
Dsghty: after sunset comes the night, and usually on planet earth there’s less light. You can use city street lights, true, but sometimes they’re not enough (small villages, in woods). I don’t know what’s the difference between an f0.85 and an f0.95 picture, since I have only taken photos at f0.95 using SLR and Voigtländer lenses. Have you ever tried?
Great a disproportionally huge lens that is MF and gives us the same DOF as a FF F1.7 lens and will no doubt be in the $1000 range. To put this into perspective the Samyang 85mm F1.4 costs $329 with a Nikon af confirmation chip
What a *ridiculous* comment to leave on this forum. Anyone here should already know that MFT has double the DOF of a FF system on any given lens.
The pursuit of thin DOF is NOT why we buy this system, much less these lenses. These are about increased light gathering – compared to other lenses within THIS system. But actually, the MFT doubling of DOF helps these lenses remain usefully in-focus where a FF at 0.85 would only be able to focus on the third eye lash of the near eye).
Sorry for feeding the anonymous-coward troll everyone, I just had to do it.
+1
+1
“””What a *ridiculous* comment to leave on this forum. Anyone here should already know that MFT has double the DOF of a FF system on any given lens”””
That statement is nonsense, there is no DOF advanatge for mFT , the best FF DSLR’s still hold a 2 stop advantage over the best mFT. Meaning even if a FF user has to up the ISO to maintain a needed shutter speed all he needs do is stop the aperture down by 2 stops, giving equal DOF, equal AOV and equal total light. This is of course a worst case scenario for many shooting situations even stopping down the FF camera by 2 stops will maintain an adequate shutter speed and therefore maintaining the FF advanatge. As all cameras are effected by diffraction at the same DOF not aperture it is no prob;em.
Think about it for one second,there are some fans amongst us that will not allow any suggestion thta there are better options than mFT there are ! { though not for me I am very happy with mFT}.As you move down the sensor size leagues you invariably sacrifice varying degrees of image quality for the major advantage of a significant decline in size and weight. If F2.8 was F2.8 across all formats why are you not using a Panasonic FZ200 with its F2.8 600mm equiv
where is this fz200 2.8 600mm I want one
Oh my, another DOF wanker. Go play with your fully framed friends and don’t come back until you realize to ask about things you don’t understand instead of spewing stupid and wrong assumptions.
Now with the uprising speedbooster stuff, i prefer get a focal reducer, because its easier that way to stay closer to a lens original dof rendering.
“And on eBay there are plenty of fast lenses and some of them you could use with adapters on MFT cameras (althaugh they will vignette and have a creamy image rendering). Right now for example you can find the Zoomar IRAN f/0.8 (acution here), the Japanese Apollo 25mm f/0.85 (acution here) and the Leica Leitz 65mm f/0.75 (acution here).”
1. Infrared lens. Totally useless with a stock m4/3rds cam.
2. At best f/1.2 (I have a copy). Some over enthusiastic worker put the 0.85. LOL.
3. Door stop. It is an X-Ray collimating lens. Real fuzzy and utterly useless.
Good to see the Handel lens for NEX as well. On an APS-C sensor, the FL and aperture will be interesting.
However, with the Speed Booster, I am already getting these speeds (f/0.9) with multiple lenses.