[shoplink 46675 ebay]
[/shoplink]
After launching the [shoplink 46675 ebay]Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 for E-mount (here on eBay)[/shoplink] Mitakon is seriously considering to make proper Micro Four Thirds version of it.
Don’t know how much sense it makes to launch such a lens. We already have superb (and also cheap) 50mm f/0.95 lenses…
For the record. These are the five f/o.95 MFT lenses we have now:
Nokton 25mm f/0.95 ([shoplink 36580 ebay]here one Bay[/shoplink]).
Nokton 17.5mm f/0.95 ([shoplink 36581 ebay]here one Bay[/shoplink]).
Nokton 42.5mm f/0.95 (not in Stock yet, save this search for notification).
SLRmagic 50mm f/0.95 ([shoplink 29455 ebay]here one Bay[/shoplink]).
SLRmagic 25mm f/0.95 (not in Stock yet, save this search for notification).
—
For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.
Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
82 Responses
nice they make it for the Sony A7 series….that camera needs seriously more lenses
Mitakon is 25mm SLRMagic OEM, still love my Noktons – 17,5mm and 43mm. If Mitakon wants serious sales they better make ultra fast 12mm. Would preorder/buy in a second if mechanics meet CV Noktons standards.
Mitakon is ZY Optics. I can’t find any link between Mitakon / ZY Optics / MX Camera and SLR Magic, except that MX Camera and SLR Magic are both in Hong Kong.
I am not sure I would consider the Nokton 25mm f/0.95 cheap for a lens that does the same job as a 50mm F1.9 on FF. It weighs more than double , has no AF , & costs 4 x the price of the Nikon 50mm F1.8g a lens that delivers superb results even on the 36mp D800.
I have never seen the appeal of using large heavy manual focus lenses on my mFT gear , if you are honestly so interested in gathering as much light as possible or chasing shallow DOF there are much better choices. I suppose the Nokton 42.5mm f/0.95 is a bargain compared to the Panasonic 42.5mm { if you do not want AF or OIS} though both are outrageously priced when compared to the likes of the £360 Nikon 85mm F1.8g which on either the the D610 or D800 has much better sharpness, better DOF control , less distortion and much less Chr. aberration than the £1200 Panasonic 42.5mm .
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Panasonic-Leica-DG-Nocticron-42-5mm-F12-ASPH-on-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D610-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-85mm-F18G-on-Nikon-D800E___1297_909_823_915_823_814
Just as an aside the D610 + 85mm F1.8 g costs £1754 meanwhile the E-M1 + 42.5mm Pany costs £2380 , the D800 + 85mm F1.8G costs £2320.
.
DOF is not everything.
no its not that’s why I specifically mentioned total light gathered and that is everything
Yes, you’ll have the same DOF ad a 50mm 1.8, but you are going to shoot twice faster! So it doesn’t do the same thing. People look for DOF only! Like if DOF is the only thing behind a great photo.
Agree. Imagine having a 0.95 light gathering lens, but with a DOF twice that to shoot low-light weddings and events. You can shoot at dusk without a flash! You can turn it to 1.4 to make it sharper, still very bright and have an even bigger, 2.8-equivalent DOF. That’s one of the genius of the mirrorless world. Who wants to shoot people moving around at weddings at either 0.95 or 1.4 with razor thin DOF? FF people with their fixation on equivalence still keep missing that one major advantage.
I agree!!! I shoot in theatre too. I own a FF and a mFT camera. With mFT i always shoot faster (very important when actors moving fast or dancing on the scene) or at lower ISO because I have a bigger DOF. And in theatre i don’t want super narrowed DOF, i want light! In many cases there are many people on the stage.
These FF equivalence idiots don’t realise that most m43 are format agnostic. I have almost all the formats now, having just bought a used Nikon V1 — 2/3″, 1″, m43, APS-C, 135 (an arbitrary standard that unknowing people erroneously call “full frame”), 645, 6×6.
I can tell you that if I try to shoot a large group portrait at an event with a 28mm at f2.8 when you have to capture the light and can’t use any flash because it’s usually candid shots, the second guy to the left + behind of the main person would already be blurry, and the ones at either edges even more so.
I stop down to f4 and I still can’t get them all in focus. So I have to go f8. But the lighting conditions want f2.8, f4 minimum! Then how? I switch to m43 and f4. That’s at the same ISO. If I need to be really sure I get them all I just bump up the ISO one notch and shoot at f8. Easy peasy.
*most m43 _users_ are format agnostic
Fascinating, this redefines basic physics.
Perhaps you should stick to folding paper ,rather than lying about being a pro shooter. At F2.8 a 28mm on FF shooting a large group focused at say 15 feet { you are talking large group right?} you will have around 20 feet of DOF to play with at F4 you will have from about 10feet to infinity seriously just how big a group do you shoot
Really? Shooting a wedding at dusk with a manual f0.95 lens? Amazingly dumb.
Why do people waste money on tools they cannot use? I’d say, educate yourself first, then open the wallet.
You have no clue about the advantages of having a bright lens with a deeper DOF because you’re a gear fondler, not a photographer who actually uses his tools.
Super narrowed DOF is for the one that can’t know how to compose a photo. So everything in background is deleted. And you don’t have to paid attention to background too. I find boring pictures where background is totally blurred. I do the same thing in studio. Why do it in outdoor session?
Same here. I prefer environmental portraits where you can see the environment behind the person for context. Otherwise you might as well just shoot the person behind your house and it would not make any difference.
I totally agree
Here you are then, masters of light: throw away your pointless toys and stick to a compact camera. They are even smaller and cheaper, you know, and they keep everything in focus.
Unfortunately for you, as I have said countless of times before, I actually do own other compact sensor cameras — 2/3″, 1″, m43, APS-C. On my table right now I have the Nikon V1, Canon EOS-M, Olympus EM5, Ricoh GRD and an old but still super Leica Digilux 2. And I actually do use them instead of m4/3 as and when I think they make more sense. Haha. Just. Bwahahaha. Idiot.
As opposed to infinite DOF P&S shots ? obviously the pinnacle of art photography . Luckily there are small P&S cameras that can deliver results as good as mFT at least at low ISO and as a bonus you get more DOF at the same nominal aperture , win win.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-versus-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GX7___957_901
The smallest mFT cameras with built-in EVF
Only charts??? is for you photography only a chart? Why should i buy a Medio format seeing this chart??
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-versus-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GX7-versus-Hasselblad-H3DII-39___957_901_457
Why spend 15.000$ instead 800$?
Have you ever tried m.zuiko 75mm f1.8? It has an bad bokeh right? You can get a really nice bokeh with mFT too. With the advantage to shot faster at the same DOF in a FF. On a mFT you going to miss only a super narrowed DOF as we wrote. In advantage of many other features. Weight, faster etc etc. And super mega narrowed DOF in many cases in pointless. In many case is boring. Try to do sport with a extreme narrowed DOF. Try to shot in theatre, try to shot a group portrait. Try to shot a squirrel that is running to you. Try to do many things and you’ll learn that DOF is one of many many things that compose a pic. And not the most important.
Oh dear clutching at straws lol, the older generation of MF cameras such as the one you list { which predates the start of mFT ! } were designed specifically for low ISO shooting. Even so even, this antique sensor still has better color depth , DR a, DOF control , & resolution than the current gen mFT camera.
There is no DOF advantage ,you either stop down the FF lens and shoot at a slower shutter speed with the same DOF or worst case scenario you stop down and up the ISO to match the shutter speed and get the same DOF and noise . The 75mm F1.8 is an excellent option the thing is it is half the price if the Panasonic 42.5mm. Are you sure that most mFT cameras are a good choice for shooting fast moving animals
All things that are not listed on your chart. The point is that you are showing specs only. And DXOMark show only a part of a camera. Not the way as the chip processes the image (very important thing in digital era).
Yes.. in theatre when i shot a 1/500, iso 1600 and f2.0, i have to shoot at 1/500, 6400 iso and f4.0 on a FF. Where is the advantage of a FF? Tell me! Noise??? Yes, mFT at 1600 are very unusable right? On a e-m10 at 1600 pics are cleaner that a canon 6D at 6400! I Own both and i shoot with both in theatre.
Try to compare m.zuiko 75mm with canon 85mm 1.2 (I have both). While Canon is going to focus, i have already done at least 3 photos with the m.zuiko!
In this forum, try to search a video that show how E-M1 and GH4 are at least as well as the Nikon D4s in sport situation with fast object like a motocross. So yes, I think it’s a good choice!
TheCamera Store TV Autofocus Shootout: GH4 is damn close to the $6,500 Nikon D4s!
Buena vista
The problem is that in real life use you do not have a brighter lens an F1.8 lens on FF gathers the same total light as an F0.9 on mFT. Add in the extra size weight and cost of the Nokton 25mm f/0.95 and you are reducing the main strength of mFT namely size and weight.
And as for your condescending “not a photographer ” nonsense you sound like one of the FF trolls who tells us ad nauseum that the best FF cameras have better DOF control ,higher resolution better DR blah blah than our toy format. I have no DSLR of any kind I am a mFT user ever since the day it became available. None of this changes the facts and as I say if light gathering and DOF control are so vital to creating your no doubt masterpieces then there are far better options some of which just happen to be cheaper.
That’s the problem: YOU don’t own anything other than m43. _I_ do. YOU can only say what you _think_ is correct. I can say what I think is correct via empirical evidence. Aka, I have actually _shot_ the two formats side by side.
Now, whose word would ring truer? A theorist? Or a scientist?
Wrong. If I take that f1.8 lens you mention and put it on an APC or 4/3 camera, does it’s light gathering somehow decrease? No. You are mixing what the lens does and the camera’s sensor. The f0.95 lens is faster.
Well, mFT dude, in any case, I apologise unreservedly for the harsh wording earlier. It’s only photography and really there’s no reason for my behaviour. I could have worded it better, sure.
How hard is it to grasp a little physics? “A bright lens with deeper DOF” is worse than a slower lens with a larger sensor, on all accounts.
And yet, you school us with your fantasies and even “insult” other people. Here is one for you: yer mum shoots jpg.
How many times do we need to educate idiots like you? How can you pretend to want to school anyone when you are three times more dense?
Go back scrubbing the loo…
“yer mum shoots jpg”? THAT’S an insult to you? What are you, a brain damaged dweeb in school?
Would you rather have a proper insult? Your knowledge of physics seems on par with your attitude (which is poor and funny, in case you wonder)…
“I have never seen the appeal of using large heavy manual focus lenses on my mFT gear…”
Try it sometime. It may be an enlightening experience.
Yep, compared to native AF mFt lenses you get the privileges of paying more, carrying more , losing AF. For what exactly compared to larger formats ?
Size matters. I refuse to carry a huge, 2 lb.+ camera body. I use a number of adapted FF lenses, so lens size is less of an issue.
Autofocus isn’t necessarily an advantage.
Sometimes it is, sometimes it’s a detriment.
http://camerasize.com/compact/#472.352,557.399,ha,t
GX7 w/ PL25mm f1.4 & Nikon D810 w/ Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART Lens
Compare it to a 50mm F2.8, you will see…
What do you think about GX7 with nokton 25/0.95 (50/1.8 FF DOF)?
And here we have one of the equivalence deniers , careful you dont fall of the end of the earth , the world is flat isn’t it lol ?
Shooting with a manual focus lens is significantly more engaging. Same reason people like to drive manual transmission cars.
I’m not fond of the size of the voigtlanders, personally, but they’re also quite a hit for video shooters.
So your suggestion is not to buy a nokton/mitakon for that special moment and instead go into another format and buy a big’n’heavy body and a lens that will not match my mFT stuff only for DOF reasons?? You must be joking…
The 85mm on the Nikon bodies mentioned above will outperform in every single way any combination of mFT lens and camera available. I think his only point is that relatively speaking these lenses are far from cheap or small compared to what other formats offer. I tend to agree if I wanted shooting in very low light or chasing ever shallower DOF i wouldn’t choose mFT
“will outperform in every single way any combination of mFT lens and camera available”… blah..blah… Maybe you guys are thinking about a pixel-peep contest… No way I would consider a FF DSLR again. MFT is good enough for me, but there is a ‘price’ for that of course… we all know that. “Relatively speaking” is nothing for the ones that don’t have and don’t want to have the big body.
You are right , if you are happy with the very real loss in image quality of mFT for the advantage of size and weight then it is a good choice no doubt. Problem here is that a lot of blind mFT fanboys think that mFT is just as good , you know the type who think equivalence is a swear word.
In every single way? How about video?
Depends on what you mean by “outperform”. M43 has a lot of excellent AF telephoto lenses, and they all focus faster than the 85mm 1.8G with zero backfocusing issues, and they get 5-axis IS from an OM-D, while the Nikkors get exactly zilch. The 45mm zuiko is cheaper and a fraction of the size.
They focus faster than Nikon DSLR? That’s interesting. And what happens when the subject is moving?
I said they focus faster than the Nikon 85mm 1.8G. Have you shot one? You’re not going to get any action shots from it. The Zuiko on the other hand has more than adequate AF speed for this (it should, its internal design has only one moving lens group just for this purpose).
Outperform in all aspects of image quality, the current gen FF bodies deliver, higher resolution, better DR ,better high ISO . When mounted on a FF body the Nikon lens delivers better DOF control, higher resolution, lower CA & distortion than the overpriced Panasonic lens. The Olympus 45mm is a decent performer for its price but it is a cheaply built low grade bit of kit liable to fall apart. It is also an F1.8 which does the same job as an F3.6 on FF.
People love to use the DXOMark like they even know what 1/10th of what goes in them mean. SLRGear shows that the 45mm Zuiko and Nocticron are more resolving wide open than the Nikon is at F/5.6. Still not saying it’s bad, but the fact remains this lens is slow to focus, prone to backfocusing issues and flare, has zero ways to get stabilization, and the build quality is even worse than the O45.
GH4 + 42.5mm Nocticron should be compared to D4s/1Dx, not to a freaking D610. With DFD you get autofocus performance basically on par with the pro DSLR bodies, which also works for 4k video, and you get amazing stabilization which no fast DSLR lens can come close to. The GH4 is a cutting edge pro tool through and through, the D610 is a D5200 that costs $1000 more just for a bigger sensor. Hence the price difference.
I would compare GH4 + Noctoy to a D3200, and the D3200 pukes on it, at least for stills. Everything else is either lies or ignorance… But go on, keep us amused.
“GH4 + 42.5mm Nocticron should be compared to D4s/1Dx, ”
LOL , Sure they should if you ignore one rather important factor, namely image quality .The D610 has full weather sealing, superb image quality, excellent DR , high ISO etc. Excellent ergonomics, dual memory cards. I would take the AF claims of the GH4 with a huge pinch of salt.
The thing is you can just as easily get the cheapest DSLR/SLT from Nikon or Sony and get better still image quality than the GH4 .The Sony A3000 with a kit lens costs £220 and it may well be a junk body but even it delivers better image quality than the £1300 GH4 body only .
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH4-versus-Nikon-D3300-versus-Sony-A3000___943_928_906
Hopefully Mitakon comes in with a “budget” range of optics. Their current offerings — which are just “boring” f1.4 — are less than half the price of the 0.95 Noktons.
*current SLR offerings
I have serious concens about making high quality bright lenses for Sony (F)E mount. Due to the incredibly small mount diameter (compared to sensor size) I hardly think one can resolve even the edges (not speaking about the corners) for such big apertures.
You might be right. Their 35mm and 55mm are both superb lenses with great colour, but those are just f2.8 and f1.8 respectively. Hardly compelling, and makes you wonder why Zeiss can’t go at least f1.8 on the 35mm and f1.4 on the 55mm. What’s the 24mm and 85mm going to be, f4.0 and f2.8? The only attraction of the full frame FE mount to me are to mount my old m42 Zeiss glass.
because when they’ve sold someone the f/2.8 they can still sell them a f/1.8 in the future – but not the other way around.
why take your money once if they can take it many times?
Exactly how many identical image quality mFT cameras are there?, how many kit lenses oh sorry did you mean Sony lol
none is right. M4/3 did (and still is) doing the same thing by selling slower lenses first. Sony is coming out with a Zeiss 50mm f1.2 within the next 6-12 months. Check their roadmap, faster lenses are on their way, it just takes time.
Can’t believe Sony is that less concerned. They are planning that mount for the long term. e.g. konkav Sensors might enable smaler mount diameter.
Concave sensors do solve the problem just for a certain focus dintance so their usage would be indicated just for fixed lens cameras.
Long term… just like the NEX E-mount?
I won’t buy another 100mm equivalent lens for m43 system.. Anyway, the more choice, the better.
Sounds interesting but I’d prefer something with AF.
F1.4 seems to be the missing aperture for m43. Just the one lens, the go to 25mm. Fast AF, fast aperture, sharp, small enough, light enough, cheap enough.
all lack af, love to see a 150mm f2 lens
Here you go:
don’t forget to add the necessary adapter to its already huge size and the impaired AF even on the E-M1 and at $2600 its not exactly a bargain
backa didn’t ask for a bargain nor mention anything about size requirements. These can be had for around $1500.
Sure if you are buying second hand / used stuff lets see a link to a new one that costs $1500 you Olympus fanboys are ridiculous. These are the type of huge heavy expensive lenses that helped kill off FT. Huge lenses on huge cameras with small sensors make zero sense
If he doesn’t care about size ,cost , AF . or adapters there are plenty of choices in the 135-200mm range most cheaper than the Olympus and nearly all smaller
You sure pegged me. I own one Olympus lens and zero Olympus cameras, huge fanboy. Sure there are plenty of other options. But the Olympus 150mm f2 is a pretty special lens. It is one of the sharpest lenses ever made for any system. I’m never going to buy it, but it is a damn fine lens and a shame that it belongs to a mostly defunct format. Sure it is expensive and focuses slower than molasses, but when it works it is fantastic. I know, I’ve actually used it before. Have you?
Does it only work on “evil” mirrorless cameras? Are the nice ones out of luck?
I prefere the “wider” angle of my nokton 42.5mm f0.95 just amazing !
Boring- moving on. We have enough adaptable lenses, three .95 Voigtlander lenses and a superb Lecia 42.5 .95. Another one???
At half the price of the Voigtlanders the Mitakons would be interesting. But their E-Mount linked above is only slightly cheaper.
There is no 42.5 Leica .95. There’s a Panasonic Leica 42.5 1.2.
I love how spoiled we are that another F/0.95 lens is met with boredom and derision
Yes, let’s stop making things because some of you think it’s “boring”. You must also all drive the same “boring” car and eat the same “boring” food. One thing is for sure, you probably won’t be any help in R&D. Another note; it’s called competing for your money.
Still boring. Now a .75- we’re on to something.
I doubt R&D is taking seriously these fora, unfortunatly. Anyway, this just looks to be a 50mm with a m43 mount, a classic 50mm focal lenght on 35x24mm, therefore a less classic 100mm angle of view on m43. I know “the more the better” say, but thisdoes not make it an interesting thing to me.
I drive my little cool car every day, it’s nice that car companies produce a lot of cars, someone will buy them, if they need a new car. I won’t buy a new car simply because mine works well, it looks nice and I have fun with it. It’s not boring. 🙂