[shoplink 50596 ebay]
[/shoplink]
As you know Samyang often design Full Frame DSLR lenses and then offers it in different mounts like Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds. It’s not really the best solution for us because it makes the lens unnecessarily bigger. But on the other hand their lenses do deliver a very high optical performance for a very low price.
So it’s good to know that they will soon announce a new 135mm f/2.0 lens and you can read specs and see more images of the lens on [shoplink 50596 ebay]that eBay Hong Kong page (Click here)[/shoplink].
63 Responses
Very interesting! I take it that on FT/mFT this is a 270mm 2.0 lens. With the 2 x adapter it becomes a 540mm ~2.8 lens. Is this correct?
Nope…. 2x teleconverter means f2 * 2 = f4. But as far as I know there are not yet any universal teleconverters for mft?
Interesting lens nethertheless. If the quality at f2 is descent, i might just get one.
Well, I will get a Pentax version, use it on my K-30 as a ~200mm 2.0 (unique!!!), then put a Pentax>FT adapter, then a FT>mFT adapter and all this on the mFT body, getting 540mm f4. f4 is not that bad – if IQ is acceptable. What will then be needed is eyesight. Or, in my case, good glasses. 🙂
Oh… I didn’t think about doing it that way. Good idea. 😉
You will lose a lot of IQ doing that.
Too much “stuff” going on degrading the optical path.
Samyang do make 800mm f/8 and 500mm f/6.3 reflex mirror lenses
With those the aperture is fixed but if you need long lenses, these are cheap (reflex lenses are simple) and as good as Canon.
You do get narrow DoF and doughnut where out of focus
The Samyang reflex are T-thread (same as on many telescope systems) which means adaptors available for both M43 and Pentax, and all other common mounts.Focal plane of M43 is 2cm (?) nearer the lens than mirror systems and so needs an extension tube on the mount to put things right (often part of the mount but if you then use M43 on a telescope you need to remove the tube)
Good luck with your 540 mm F8.
Olly do have the 1.4X but its use may be limited to their PRO lens
Doubling the f-number is two full stops (2EV). Any 1.4X t/c adds one full stop (1EV).
Speed Boosters work the other way round to increase f-stop by having focal multiplication less than 1.
f-stop = focal.length / iris.diameter
so if we change focal length, we change the f-stop in the process
quite easy to work out, iris diameter (max aperture) remains the same.
2X teleconverter doesn’t mean 2x to f2. It means only you lose two stops of light, not that the aperture gets two times smaller or that depth of field gets changed.
The teleconverter only affects that it crops the light cone and re-distributes it back to larger area, causing light density to widen. Does exactly inverted action what speedbooster does (takes larger light cone and refocus it to smaller area, making it denser light).
There is difference between “2-stops slower” and “Two aperture stops smaller”.
Repeat after me –
On any camera it is a 135mm f/2.0 lens
Our sensor is “four thirds” size
“Micro four thirds” is a lens fitting system.
The 4/3 sensor has a 2X crop factor of the full frame of a 135mm compact film camera.
On a 4/3 sensor it will give the field of view of a 270mm lens on full frame.
Note term “field of view” (FoV), we are seeing a segment in the middle of the 135mm film frame (135mm film is a compact size much smaller than medium format)
The X2 teleconvertor (I have a Samyang reflex and t/c lenses) doubles the focal length but also doubles the f-stop number f/2.0 x2 = f/4.0 so now we have a 270mm f/4.0 lens.
Downside of a teleconvertor is they always lose sharpness and clarity so the have to be stopped down at least another full stop or more i.e. f/5.6 but better f/6.3 to f/8.0 so now we are shorter and slower than the Panny 100-300 zoom with many features lacking, notably AF and OIS. Tip – increase sharpness and saturation a little but leave NR alone for the camera to sort out by itself.
Btw manufacturer is Samyang (Korea) but get re-badged as Walimex, Rokinon and a few others according to market/distribution. Their wide angle lenses are respected but their reflex lenses are pretty good too, and cheap.
You may be right in general but let me add some considerations. The Samyang 135 with the adapters and on mFT will be f/4.0 at 540mm while the Panny 100-300, being 5.6 at 300, will be about 5.2 at 540mm. This is only one Samyang advantage. Another advantage is that the Samyang 135, being FF, will use only a very small part of the circle, the central one, where IQ is, as a rule, at its best. So, I am not AT ALL sure Panny 100-300 can beat the Samyang 135 at 540mm. If for sharpness you have to increase f with the Samyang, you have to increase it with Panny as well. A further advantage is the manual focus, although this may sound absurd. Because with MF you hit or miss – and its your eyesight to blame. Whereas with the Oly 70-300 – that I use with AF – I often get focus failures. The focus hits a tree or a blade of grass instead of the landscape at infinity. On the other hand, I have the Samyang 85 mm 1.4 and I can tell you that it is a terrific lens, better IMO than the otherwise good and expensive Oly 75mm. If long range and fastness are needed, the Samyang 85 1.4 gives 340mm f2.8 with the 2x adapter. But I have not yet tested that combination, although I have all the components. High time I do it. Whatever we say now, is a guess. The Samyang must appear and be tested, only then will we know.
Multiplying by 2 gives a decent idea of magnification. I agree the rest of the optical factors are not the same. It’s just a quick way for MFT/full frame users to judge approximately how close another system’s lens will get them to their subject.
No, it is a 135/2 lens. Mounted on a 43 sensor, it is equivalent to a 135/4 lens on FF, DOF-wise, noise-wise, shooting-speed-wise etc.
Look at the weight of that thing! (830g)
Interesting FL & aperture but I still prefer such lens come from Oly or Pana .
At that range I’d certainly like some built-in IS at least. But that’s what I get for using Panasonic 😉
You are right , only Pana can provide IS in such FL .
Let’s wait & see what Pana come out for it’s next lens .
Btw , no lens road map or lens rumors from Pana for 2015 , wondering what Pana is planning .
Honestly if the lens is fast enough, lack of IS is less of an issue. It’s certainly never been a problem with my Olympus 75mm f1.8 on my Panasonic cameras. But yeah – any longer ranges than 75mm, hand-held shots would probably start to suffer without it, no matter how fast the lens. I think the Lumix lens range is great right now. Maybe they’re considering a long-ass zoom with OIS to rival that big one Olympus just released? Apart from that I feel they have it covered. They could make improvements on some older models, make them faster, quieter and sharper.
Yes, LEICA sealed for older models as well .
funny how as soon as I get a GH4 I start wanting weather-sealed lenses haha!
It’s interesting how they want to sell us Full Frame Lenses (with corresponding) weight as MFT lenses just because they have a different mount. The idea behind MFT is higher portability and weight savings. Therefore: cheap for them to make and useless to us.
I’m sure their statistics will tell them that they don’t sell many MFT lenses … leading them to conclusion that they can’t make any money making native MFT lenses … If they actually release real MFT lenses with support for autofocus (at this focal length ideally with IS) than that is a real news story that would get my attention and I’m sure would see their MFT lens sales explode.
The problem is it is very very very cheap R&D for them to release a m4/3 version of this, thus they don’t need to get many sales to justify it.
A 135/2 for 43 would not be smaller than this anyway. Only wide angles allow smaller sizes because the flange distance is minimal, and the bajonet is broad enough (unlike in the flawed Sony A7 series).
It would be a smaller and lighter by 50-30% and that is huge as instead over 800g it would be just 400-500g.
But no electronic pins = no deal.
I am afraid this is a marketing legend, it would not be any smaller unless they compromised the design – and then fix it with software, like many m43 lenses.
I guess I don’t really understand lens design, but if Olympus, for example, could make compact manual focus ‘full frame’ optics in the OM days, why can a computer-aided lens design today, without the bulk of autofocus mechanisms, not be a similar size? I appreciate that the lens here is f/2 rather than my OM 135mm which is only f/3.5, but am open to being illuminated.
I love their native m4/3 7.5 mm fisheye! Wish they’d make more of the smaller lenses. That said this could be a killer lens even for m4/3 if you get the Nikon mount version and a Metabones Speed Booster. That way the extra glass (and weight) is at least put to use.
And if I remember correctly, new Speed Boosters are actually optimized for sensor stack in MFT cameras, so that combo will probably provide better image quality than MFT mount version from Samyang, since this lens is designed for FF DSLRs.
Or they could do it, by implementing metabones clone in that lens. Making it some f1.4
The Ebay link shows the Samyang 13mm for Canon EF-mount for EOS
Bad link? – please correct
There isn’t one for m4/3 yet, but you can guarantee it would be exactly identical aside from the mount.
Anyway, I would not recommend buying an EF mount or m4/3 mount. Nikon F mount is the only way to go for Rokinon/Samyang, as it keeps the most doors open for the future.
HULK bring M43 users to Canikon reeducation camp! Repend from punyness, ascend to photographic greatness!
Intern all mirrorless users! Good old a@s r@pe w/ 70-200 f2.8 will covert them…if not…ga— OMG— s…lel, that s right fagts!
Slightly ironic as this was likely shot with a manual leica film cam.
Big. And odd field of view to me on m43 system.
I see no real oddness here, we talking about super tele close to ZD 150. its big okayyy but its f/2
I’d like to see a comparision between the two lenses. There was a time I was going to buy the ZD150mm and use it for some concerts, but it would have been of limited use.
i never handled such fov for closer range subjects…my max fl i could felt comfortable with is max 100mm…but that was before image stabilisation.
No way such long tele lens is suitable for portrait works .
Your dream 100mm lens ( 200mm FF ) already hit the limit for portraits , no more longer than that otherwise …
in the classic range its indeed not a 1st choice. But out of the box thinking can help making you more free in choosing the FL .
There are quite some photographers who can see the charm of 300mm fov, maybe not on MFT but the rendition of 300mm on a 24×36 for full body shots can be very nice. This is for dedicated shootersonly ofcourse
suitable or limits depend on your own limits btw
I think Pana will come out it’s 150mm F ?? soon .
I really hope is F2.0 .
did you see how big the zd 150 f/2.0 already was? dont think they cant suddenly shrink it without losing the speed.
Oh its the MarcoTheFgt again, pls Italy is already ful of gay artisans, you don t want to continue tradition, switch to Canikon or ….
HULK know how to take care of M43 and mirrorless users, better repent or run Marco!
Photog captured decisive moment in this one, M43 and mirrorless users will be subject of next one, lel
Why the photo Hulk?
What is so interesting from photo showing how a mass of 35mm shooters comes to worship the m4/3 shooters and attends to swap program where they can buy a m4/3 for -10% of the price when they bring their 35mm?
I don’t see anything funny in that? Now look that man, he is so happy when a gentleman is handing out m4/3 camera to him.
Looks like they’re about to pass through a TSA body scanner.
Why Samyang, why? I will have to turn to another system now. I’m so DISAPPOINTED!
Voigtlander, please bring us an 67.5mm/0.95
that would be interesting
I’m still holding out for my dream Oly ZD 150/1.4 super telephoto. 😉
buy when will it be avaiable 🙂 that would be one interesting lens for some people. The ZD 150 was already unique for specific user wishes.
😉 Oh, I’m just playing around, but it is a sweet dream lens. If Oly ZD is serious about sliding the max aperture scale on their upcoming lenses toward the brighter side, this would be a blockbuster lens.
The 35mm fantasy are always (incorrectly!) stating that the 4:3|µ4:3 platform loses two stops compared to 35mm. If Oly ZD slides the max aperture two stops forward, then the patents for the 12/1.0 and 14/1.0 may very well become a reality. If that is so, it would be even easier for Oly ZD to produce a 25/1.0 or 20/1.0 normal|subnormal lens. They have already released a 150/2.0 for the 4:3 platform. Is it that much of a stretch to design a 150/1.4 super tele optic? I would also love to see a 75/1.4 and a 50/1.7 (or 50/1.4!) macro.
i bet coming next year 🙂
No AF, not interested!
Give me a lens with decent aperture *and* AF and keep that lame garbage….
Oh and yeah, custom designed lenses please and not refitted oversized APS-C or FF doorstoppers!
what a lame reply lol
I vote this one for the know-nothing-snob award 2015
I agree. BTw: Samyang not always makes such lenses. I have their very good 7.5 mm f3.5 fisheye and it is small too. No need for A|F here. In the case of a 135 mm I agree: AF needed and for m43s it would have been much smaller. No buy here either…
I gotta agree with this particularly for a lens with this long of a focal length. This lens would be fine for video, and super still life but anything else, forget about it. Focusing with a lens like this would be a nightmare on any subject that is just slightly moving out of the focal plane unless you are one of those old timers that had to shoot sporting events with MF lenses.
Anyone else enjoying seeing the hulk guy need to be more & more offensive as he fails so terribly at trolling.
How could you not even manage offend M43 users on some small-time website watched by a bunch of passionate M43 supporters. Loosing at its funniest.
probably he has some personal grief and maybe teenager too
He’s the new kid on the block. The more experienced trolls, such as myself, just smile at his antics.
So the only digit Samyang actually quoted on the
teaser (???mm T?.?) – it being a T stop – was wrong!!
Perhaps there will also be the cine version they implied?
Don’t you guys worry about the size, a dedicated m43 lens would not be smaller at all, unless they seriously compromise on optical corrections. I know it is a widespread myth, but the image circle has very little impact on the lens size.