All Speed Fans can open their champagne bottle: Today Kipon officially released the world’s fastest lens for digital mirrorless system: The 40mm f/0.85 Ibelux! It will come with native E-mount and cost around $2,000. This is the worlds fastest native mirrorless system lens. You can only get faster with strange lenses like the [shoplink 23379 ebay]Leica Leitz 65mm f/0.75 (here on eBay)[/shoplink] or some [shoplink 23378 ebay]large format 0.75 XR lens (also to find here on eBay)[/shoplink]
The full press text and image samples can be read here (via MirrorlessRumors):
HANDEVISION — December 12, 2013
A mutual passion for photography and the art of image capture between two companies’ owner has led two special firms, Shanghai Transvision and German IB/E Optics, to collaborate on an industry-shaking new innovation. By merging Geman high-quality engineering standards with Chinese cost-effective production infrastructure, the new camera lens brand Handevision (“Han” means China in Mandarin and “De” is the word for Germany).
After many months of collaboration between engineering and production teams, final quality control assessments have concluded and the IBELUX 40mm f0.85 high-speed lens, the fastest lens in the world, is nearly ready for release. Available for sale by February, 2014, this lens will be available for Sony NEX, Fuji X, Canon EOS M and Micro 4/3 digital mirrorless camera mounts (MSRP is $2,080 USD).
While risky to start our launch with this ground-breaking high-speed lens, we hope to gain the attention and confidence of photographers around the world with our expanding new lenses. Our mission is to manufacture high-grade lenses of metallic construction with a clean, aesthetic finish. As a new player in the lens market, we believe we can expand our new brand internationally as our engineers, uninhibited by production costs nor by material restrictions, will be free to work creatively in seeking optimal image quality and artistic design.
We are currently working on our next project, the wide-angle IBEGON lens. With Sony releasing the new full-frame mirrorless A7/A7R camera, we have designed a high-speed telephoto APO mirror lens called the IBECAT, named for its sharp image capture, its lightweight construction and fast glass. Additional lenses are in development for full frame mirrorless cameras, including a tilt-shift lens and a compact fixed focal length lens.
We are focusing our efforts at expanding our line of full-frame mirrorless and DSLR detachable lenses in 2014 and are constantly developing ways to satisfy demand of professional photographers for faster, sharper lenses.
71 Responses
Is it fullframe?
Nope. APS-C. It’s an equivalent of 60mm f/1.2 on full frame.
It isn’t f1.2 on a full frame lens, if the max aperture is f.85 than sensor size isn’t going to change that. What the maker means is that the f.85 depth of field of this lens on an aps-c body is equivalent to the depth of field of f1.2 full frame since the large the sensor the shallower the depth of field at an equivalent, constant focal length.
I think everybody knows that’s what he means…
BTW this thing is 1.2kg, it’s half frame, only half a stop faster and a little longer (equivalent) than the 50mm T/0.95 but 1/3 heavier…they must’ve used too much steel in its construction…I understand brass and aluminum alloy, but steel? Only Soviet lenses used steel from what I heard.
Steel is cheap and feels “premium” contrary to plastic. That’s why Soviets used it (chap), and that’s why they use it (cheap + feels good enough for 2k$)
Yes, it’s DoF equivalent. In light gathering ability it’s not f/0.85 either, as you suggest, it’s impossible to build a lens with no losses in light transmission. This one got 20 air-glass borders, so I’d be surprised if in reality it’d be f/1.
Yes, true, we don’t know the t-stop but the light transmission is constant on aps-c vs ff body.
It’s equivalent to f/1.2 on FF in terms of the light gathering ability as well… which is different from the transmission or “brightness per area” you guys mention as being the same. When all else is equal, the SNR of an image is proportional to the number of photons in it. That’s why mFT is 2 stops behind FF in terms of noise at the same ISO and f stop and to level things off you need faster lenses.
The light loss due to the large number of elements is true. But zoom lenses also have lots of elements. Plus I counted about 16 air glass surfaces not 20.
Images seem to be offline
Funny, but this is NOT a FF lens. It’s made for APS-C.
I wonder if anybody with a NEX would prefer to spend 2000€ for a lens instead of buying an A7(r) together with a lens a little slower.
APS-C lens only then?
Taking photos in low light? Yes.
Ultra thin depth of field? No thanks..
Ultra thin DOF? Yes please over hear!!!
Another Chinese fast prime.After Mitakon, another Chinese satellite.
So APS-C only, but from the press release it looks they’re also working on FF lenses too – so good news, it’s always to have more options
Damned, only APS-C. 😉
Interesting what they say in the documentation: “This delivers a look at APS-C like you would know from your F 1.2 lens at full frame sensors.”
Now the second hand MC Rokkor 58mm f 1.2 I fot on eBay last years really seems a bargain. 🙂 For 2000 US $ in total, you can buy a brand new A7, second hand Rokkor 58mm f1.2 and an MD to E-mount adapter.
40 mm is a strange length at APS-C.
I commend the effort, but I really don’t like the sample images. Bokeh is not nice in my eyes…
It’ll be interesting to see what their fullframe offerings are.
“World’s fastest lens” ??? Not even close.
They are saying they are the fastest current production lens. There have been faster lenses made, do not know if any are currently available as normal retail lenses. Of course these are not ready yet either.
“fastest native mirrorless System lens”
Chasing after ultra fast apertures is pointless with current digital sensors – due to the fact the pixel structures on the sensor block the light cone from an ultra fast lens causing what is known as “pixel vignetting”, whereby you lose light and reduce the amount of background blur.
The 7D loses 2/3 of a stop at f/1.4, I wonder how much of the light from a f/0.85 lens would actually reach the 7D sensor, or any other 18-20MP APS-C sensor.
The samples look nice if you’re into ultra shallow depth of field, but it’s nothing you couldn’t do with a full frame camera and f/1.4 lens.
I don’t get it what you mean. Do you have any link to a more scientific Explanation, what you are talking about? Why would a 7D lose 2/3 of a stop!?
With today’s digital sensors light has to hit the sensor at close to a 90 degree angle or its efficiency goes down.
With large apertures the extra light is coming in at a wider angle.
This issue is the primary reason why it is hard to make very small lenses – the longer the lens the closer all the light is to 90 degrees.
This is a gross oversimplification.
Microlenses solve most of this problem in most cameras. Telecenterism is another way out, and the one chosen by m4/3. You simply need a large mount relative to your sensor.
If you look at the systems built for digital, and not carrying over tech and mounts over from the film era, most of them are built to eliminate this as far as possible. Thus Canon, Nikon and Sony are compromised. m4/3, Leica S and a couple of other aren’t.
Sony should be better than it is. They can’t do anything about the Minolta mount, but the E-mount has been compromised to give bodies a smaller size. Unfortunately that means Sony can’t easily produce more tele centric lenses. Short sighted frankly.
Curved sensors are another option, but that’ll require special lenses or corrective elements.
interesting comment. Checked out a paper written at the Stanford lab though it doesn’t discuss aperture it does mention the phenomena you speak of. Oblique angles are considered but nothing I noticed mentioned the aperture. Thanks 4 your input. There are several conclusions and tentative ameliorations mentioned.
This is why Sony now tilts their pixels…
“The 7D loses 2/3 of a stop at f/1.4” – so be it. But it still gets more light than it would with f/1.8 lens. So it’s not pointless – advantage is still in there, and it’s still worth to get a brighter lens.
(light loss doesn’t kick in suddenly at f/1.4 aperture, it’s always there, bigger or smaller, but always there, so buying brighter lens always brings and advantage)
So if I were to mount a canon 85mm f1.2 lens on a 7d and set it to f1.2, I would lose about 2/3 of a stop according to you. As I stop down, does the light loss decrease and if so at what aperture is all the light reaching the pixels (f4, f11, f22…)?
Please God! one expects to have to explain equivalence ad nauseum in the mFT forums particularly to Olympus fan boys. I hoped for a little more common sense here.
To put it simply do you believe that the 25-600mm F2.8 lens on a Panasonic is the same as a 600mm F2.8 on FF { if such a beast existed}.For a lens to be truly equivalent to another on a different format it requires 3 components in order to deliver the same image [ otherwise its not equivalent}
1. Same AOV { given the crop factor this one is achievable}
2. Same DOF {oops f/0.85 on APS does not give the same DOF as f/0.85 on a FF body}
3. Same total light {oops f/0.85 on APS does not give the same DOF as f/0.85 on a FF body}
It is ironic that people never fail to do the first part of the calculation and multiply the focal length by the relevant crop factor. Yet the non-believers/denialists invariably forget that multiplying the focal length to get the effective AOV has a similar effect on the effective aperture.
I’m not sure where all that fits in – my question was posed to the guy who said lenses with super fast apertures have a 2/3 light loss due to the pixels on the CMOS sensor. I had never heard that before and wanted clarification on whether, according to him, this diminishes as one stops the lens down or is constant.
what are you taking about?
The faster the lens (and shorter the focal length) the more the light will be projected at the image-plane at an oblique angle. The more oblique it is the less chance it will travel all the way down into the pixel well. Sensor technologies like ‘offset microlenses’ and ‘backside illumination’ are attempts to overcome these issues.
APS-C is what I want ! but A mount? forget it there has been no suport since A77 and 16-50(the only lens ever relesed for the A77) I think serious aps-c a mount support died with the A77 arrival.In the 2 years the A77 has been around it has only about 5% of the support for the A7. for my purposes APS-C a mount is what I want. Is sensor size was everything we would all still be using 10″x 8″ Plate cameras. As one of the few photographers around today who has used one (and just about every format available)I can tel you there was a reason most non studio photographers gave up there medium format and adopted 35 mm. I recently went with my partner to a makeover and photo shoot. These studio workers I expected to use FF but no on 3 separate occasions at different studios I have seen 4 professionals ALL using APS-C cameras. such as Canon 7D. So not everyone is convinced that FF is necessary even for pro studwork never mind semi pro Sport and wildlife where my A77 is great. There have been some good new lenses announced recently. but not 1 for me camera.
I don’t get it, why is it important, that a lens is released for one specific camera Body? There were quite a few lenses released that work on the A77, including the 18-135 (APS-C), and several FF lenses (which produce on APS-C cameras really great images, because we are not using the corners) like the Zeiss 50 F1.4, updates to the 70-200 and 70-400, and so on.
I get that you prefer aps-c cameras…but you are only interested specifically in aps-c lenses? It doesn’t appear that Sony is abandoning aps-c cameras, but I could see them only putting out full frame lenses so all users can use a lens (at least on a- mount).
Fun fact: The Metadata shows that for some of the samples they actually used the Hasselblad Lunar. 🙂
Yep. Finally, a perfectly loony lens for the Lunar.
Konica 60/1.2 would eat this lens for breakfast. Much smaller as well (1.2 kg, wtf?) but not in the sane price category anymore, this is the cheap alternative (lol)
If you’re willing to sacrifice some IQ then an OM 50/1.2 and a Zhongyi Lens Turbo gets you just about the same amount of light and a more common FoV at a much lower price and weight. I really don’t get how they managed to build something this heavy.
Heavy is good, the current E-mount Zeiss feel too light, their feel-in-hand doesn’t seem very convincing considering the price, but both the OM and the Zhongyi are better built than native E-mount gear, and somehow they manage to build something twice as heavy at the same specs…maybe they really want it to last through the ages.
has the blue spot problem withe the adapter been resolved? Otherwise I don’t see the point…
I’ve never actually handled one, what I’m saying is that this alternative works in theory.
Even if you get a Speed Booster instead, you still save half which is $1000 which is not a small sum.
Sounds like an interesting company. If I was Sony I would buy them out NOW, and get them to make autofocus lenses for them.
What the FE world doesn’t need more of is manual focus. It can already use practically every manual focus lens in existence.
Sony has the people and manufacturing abilities to make such a lens in-house. An AF system will probably not work at such a wide aperture.
AF system is not a problem at all. Problem is in image quality. What this lens delivers is below even lowest Sony standards. That’s why you’ll never see something like that released from any of the “big” manufacturers.
It may seek at an unacceptable level with such shallow DoF at max aperture. The fastest AF lens that I know of is Canon’s 50mm f1, but it was eventually replaced by an f1.2 which I hear has very slow AF.
Manual focusing with peaking & magnification is probably faster and more accurate. I definitely would not expect the current a- mount AF system to be able to autofocus anywhere near f.85!
Get a camera with decent focus. My 851.4 on D800E acquires focus perfectly. This setup could easily handle F1.0 or faster.
Where people mostly have issues, are the fools who think they can focus re-compose and get pinpoint accuracy.
The Canon 50/1.2L focuses fast like most DSLR lenses. It’s the 50/1L and 85 1.2L that focused slow. The 85 1.2L II focuses faster, more like an AF-S 50 1.4G rather than a D, I suppose.
1.2kg? phew ….
Kipon? The Chinese adaptor company?
Superb !!!! maybe blow away OTUS !!!
Not a slightest chance. That’s 3rd party lens where you can see issues even on a tiny web-sized miniatures. I’ll be amazed if at f/1.4 it’s gonna be better than SAL 50 F1.4.
Maximum aperture is distinct from what goes into image quality: sharpness, chromatic abberation, resolution, vignetting, color saturation /rendering.
Nice for candle videos.. or yet another meanness lens.. Why they (anyone) don’t build 35-105 for example? or 83.5 macro or 30-100 macro or 68.9 macro or … whatever.
Interesting focal length choice for that overkill.
+1
Anyone else think this lens looks sexy? I love the overall design- classic. In fact, I think it looks better than anything else offered in e-mount as well.
Those pictures look stunning. This is what I’m talking about….give me more!
It does, doesn’t it! Zeiss really let me down by making light, toyish lenses for mirrorless.
My only issue is that statement “chinese cost effective infrustructure.” Oh, you mean child labor. They probably pay the kids in rat heads to assemble this stuff. That’s my only problem as I”m sure manufacturing these lenses are quite expensive.
This stands in contrast to the discussions on the (made in Germany) pricing of the Zeiss Otus lens.
I’ve come to appreciate the process of lens design and manufacturing after learning more about what it entails. I don’t think the Otus is really all that expensive when you consider the manufacturing process and labor. I’d rather contribute to a system that cares for their workers when I can then cheap chinese labor.
+1 for fair labor and craftsmanship
Please, life in China is much cheaper than in Germany. In China you can get away with lunch under 5 RMB, while in most parts of Europe, even the most poorly paid workers eat a few Euros every meal. Even with decent pay(these are engineers we’re talking about, not slaves, if they don’t get decent pay, I trust that they’d have better places to be), labor costs are still much lower than in Germany.
Buy the German lens, and those Chinese kids will then get paid nothing.
Whether they get paid nothing or something would be considered a secondary case. The real question is how ethical is it to pay them a non-livable wage? To me that is of primary concern, and should be for any business operation looking to take advantage of the situation. Still a nice lens, and I’m not saying they’re workers aren’t being paid fair. You just have to wonder.
Oh if they don’t have a job they can’t afford to buy rice? Let them eat cake.
Like the way they “processed” the pictures. Sony should hire this photographer for their next product sample photos.
It’ll probably look just as terrible wide open as the Voitlander f/1.1.
This is the worst MTF Chart i ever seen lol (for a “”high quality”” lense).
That circular bokeh in the christmas tree shot is almost identical to the bokeh I get when using the Lens Turbo focal reducer at 50mm f1.4 . It’s the one thing that I don’t like about using the adapter, although it only appears at certain distances from the subject.