The store Genustech is already showing the new Mitakon/Zyoptics 85mm f/1.2 lens. And it says it will come for Sony E-mount too but I think that’s a typo because Zyoptics said it’s A-mount.
Reminder: Mitakon-Zyoptics already make a long list of Sony E-mount lenses. You can find them on [shoplink 35366 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink] and BHphoto (Click here).
75 Responses
If that’s an A mount, it looks very big indeed!
Well, a Canon 85/1.2 isn’t exactly small either, so it is pretty much to be expected.
Well, this is a Canon FD 85mm f/1.2 mounted on Sony A7 , Mitakon should be almost in the same size (without the adapter for sure)
It may be perspective, or angles, but the Mitakon shown seems to be considerably larger diameter barrel than the mount, whereas your Canon only seems marginal until you reach the focus ring (plus that is the E mount!)
It may well be that there is little difference in reality and it is about the size expected, but I only made a general observation, rather than be deeply concerned.
It’s not a lens I’d be getting anyway. Didn’t you know, A mount is dead….?!? LOL
:/
All this introduction to finish with A-mount is dead !
Sorry, it was a joke, given how obsessed people are with the subject.
Unfortunately, humour seems to be wasted on the internet…
I know it was a joke ;p
I know what LOL means ;p
Lol
Ah good! Now you just need to learn what :/ means!
:/ means :/
I think that says all we need to know, sadly. I won’t reply again.
Damn it.. They don’t make matchbox sized f/1.2 lenses any more…
im assuming no AF?
Fully manual lens. 🙁
No automatic aperture control, no EXIF no stabilization nothing. 😛
That’s the one thing I wish we could get on these manual lenses – EXIF data. Of course, I’m sure they’d cost more then, too.
Rokinon has a chip and camera controlled apertures on their Nikon mount manual lenses. Wish manufacturers would include that on all manual focus lenses especially considering these aren’t terribly cheap lenses at $900+. I am pretty sure this lens will go beyond $1k.
Apart from aperture value it’s not even that important… when Sony had the brains to read out the custom set IBIS focal length values and write it to the files.
Tbh I don’t get why so many people are that crazy about EXIF though. I mean if it’s your own lens/camera you can usually tell which lens and aperture you used (and SS will be recorded anyways).
You can order a chip on E-Bay for about $10 and some companies actually offer custom EXIF settings. Just have to search.
I did this on my A-Mount converter MC Rokkor 58/1.4. Although the seller that I bought from only allowed certain focal lengths, so the closest one was 60mm.
Then glue it on using a glue that turns into plastic. And you’re good to go. Assuming there is space to glue it onto.
This isn’t really a big problem when you are tinkering around with cheap old lenses.
This is a $1k+ lens by all accounts. They really should be offering this by default at such a price.
3999RMB 🙂 http://tieba.baidu.com/p/3700938982
Wow ! I take back my statement. If its around $700 then its a very good price. Considering their 50mm lens was around $900 MSRP I was sure this was going to be priced higher than that.
If you ask me, automatic aperture is way more important for manual lenses. That’s why so many manual lenses are practically useless when you don’t wanna shoot wide open all the time. Thats why Loxia lenses are that successful in the first place.
Where is the Alpha A mount A99ii relacement?
You want a replacement for a camera that is not released yet and that will probably never released? Interesting.
price? might buy one just for fun if it’s really a FF A-mount lens. Since my only 85mm is the SAL85F28, I wouldn’t hurt trying it before selling it.
LONG LIVE A MOUNT. TILL DEATH DO US PART!!!!
That can be arranged…
*Pulls out a 12 Ga Shotgun with explosive rounds*.
Do you feel lucky, punk?… 🙂
I would love to bring my AK47 to some usefulness.
if this performs as well as the Canon 85mm 1.2 then I’m getting it
I am excited about this lens.
Everyone with an A7 really should try to get hold of the 50mm/0.95 Mitakon. It’s an absolute beast, so sharp at 0.95. Compared to the Leica 50/0.95, hard as it is to believe, the Mitakon has far better control purple fringeing at f/0.95 – the chief problem with the Leica. It’s almost unbelievable that it outperforms the Leica but it does, I bought one and it’s the best lens for the Sony system I think. The Leica has slightly superior performance towards the edges at f/0.95 though across the majority of the frame the two are as sharp as each other. Considering the cost of the Mitakon it’s astonishing.
Leica of course are always struggling with the fact they have to design for a rangefinder. This means an unusually obsessive desire to control distortion and field curvature to make focusing possible with a rangefinder. And with such extreme lenses as those that go to f/0.95 there will always have to be compromises somewhere – that is my best guess as to why it is Leica, with all their technology and know how and money made a lens that is in real terms inferior to Mitakon. Of course there might be times that distortion and field curvature are bad things though with a 50mm lens I think they’re generally not the most important issues.
Designing for the A7 made Mitakon free of this consideration. I genuinely think in years to come we’ll talk about this lens. Downsides – quite large and heavy though not too bad considering the aperture. It has a slightly inferior T stop compared to the Leica – at 0.95 it lets through slightly less light though it has the same shallow depth of field at f/0.95 and arguably nicer, at least softer bokeh. That light transmission will be a result of Leica using the best glass and coatings given the cost of the lens. But somewhere some design consideration made them accept atrocious purple fringing which makes the lens less pleasing to use at f/0.95 in anything but soft light… which is the whole point of buying it!
So if Mitakon pull off the same trick here I expect a great lens. Time will tell, did they get luck with the 50mm design or do they really know what they’re doing?
Would you choose the Mitakon 50mm .95 over the Zeiss 55mm 1.8?
I own the Zeiss 55 1.8 – they’re quite different lenses really even if on the surface you might think they cover the same range.
The 55/1.8 is one of the sharpest lenses you can find – the only other 50mm range lenses that hang with it are the latest Leica Summicron 50/2 and Zeiss 50/1.4 Otus. Both of course are far more expensive and in the case of the Otus far larger and heavier. And neither has auto focus. One thing that is particularly good about the 55/1.8 is it’s performance at infinity – it remains sharp at f/1.8. If you want a super aharp 50mm with AF, get the Zeiss.
Now 0.95 lenses are a different thing. They will never be as sharp as the f/1.4 or f/1.8 or f/2 lenses (in the designs mentioned above) but we must compare like with like. I don’t own the Leica 50/0.95 but borrowed one for some quick comparisons plus you can find detailed comparisons online – the Mitakon is considerably superior in purple fringing and about equal sharpness at 0.95. The rapid fall off in bokeh is identical to the Leica though there is a tiny bit of light loss in the Mitakon. I am sure this is down to the superior coatings in the Leica, though for me I wanted f0.95 for the subject isolation and the Mitakon equals the Leica; truly I couldn’t tell them apart.
Compared to the 55/1.8 it is not as clinically sharp especially at infinity. It is also of course manual focus. So honestly, I find myself using them in different places – the 55/1.8 is nice to have when you want autofocus but I am using it less and less. I came to the Sony world from DSLRs so for me a 0.95 lens was always an impossible dream, to now have one, that strange medium-format look to things, well I find it addictive. Canon made one years ago that was soft wide open though with an interesting rendering. I find the Mitakon quite liberating given its sharpness at f0.95 and I’m using it on an A7r.
The Zeiss 55/1.8 is almost certainly the best fast AF 50 in the world when you consider sharpness, size, weight, price, bokeh – it’s really lovely. My advice would be if you want AF just buy one you won’t be disappointed. If however you want to push yourself a bit and try something unique go for the Mitakon.
I have read of a few people having issues with the Mitakons coming apart – mine so far, after about 2 months of regular use, feels solid as a rock but I guess it might be an issue down the line.
This link has some good comparisons of Mitakon and Leica and comes to the same conclusion that I did – they are as sharp as each other. If you look closely he focused them slightly different in a couple of comparisons so you can’t compare the bokeh very well but the sharpness is there to be seen.
http://www.talkemount.com/threads/9773/
My hope is Zeiss responds with a 1.0 or 1.2 AF lens 🙂
I want to believe that this lens won’t give us significantly better results wide open compared to Sam 85 1.4 in terms of DOF and sharpness. So, why carry a significantly heavier lens and pay 3 times (I guees)??? 🙂
The rendering will be different. My friend has a Canon 85mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.2. His f1.8 lens is a superb copy while his f1.2 lens isn’t terribly sharp.
However the images from the f1.8 version don’t look nearly as nice as the f1.2 version especially if clicking something like portraits with a nice creamy background.
Of course. Stopped down to f5.6 both lenses are tack sharp but not too many people buy these lenses to be used stopped down.
The Canon 85mm/1.2 is outstanding wide open for an 1.2 aperture. Especially at the time when it came out. But it is not as sharp as a good f2.0 or f1.8 lens wide open. I used the FD version for many years.
exactly brendon, but I am not sure that difference between 1.4 and 1.2 will be visible… however, I believe we need to see real world samples, character is important…
yes, but the gap between 1.4 and 1.2 is not that different compared to 1.8 and 1.2… But rendering will be different as you’ve said..
I was looking for a Canon FD 85mm 1.2 but if this one is at least close to the Canon performance and having a good price tag , it would be great to buy it instead !
I can use it on E-mount with LA-EA3 adapter
A Chinese forum says that the price is 4000RMB 🙂
That would convert to 650$, 799$ on the official site and probably 899€ in Europe. Damn you curency screw-up.
Great to see A mount get some love.
Now how about an FE Sony/Zeiss 85mm f1/8 with autofocus and a Loxia 85 1.4 without,
And an FE 135 f/2 please.
Oh, and uncompressed RAW firmware for me and Anton
Good that you show some love for Anton. However, I have to correct your first sentence: The camera business is about everything but love.
I would like to see a Loxia 85/2.0 instead of 1.4. For me f2.0 is totally sufficient to render the background blurry in portraits. I owned a Canon 85mm/1.2L in the film days. For portraits the DOF was too shallow. You have one sharp eye, the other eye a little blurry, the eyebrows are blurry and the nose way too blurry. At farther distances it looked beautiful wide open, but not for portraits. Let alone the huge size of 1.4/1.2 portrait tele lenses.
PS: Same is true for 50mm/1.0. I have used a Noctilux for one week (loooong time ago). At long distances is renders an incredible beautiful and unique look. The closer you go to the subject, the weirder it looks.
I’m in the for the Emount version. Where do I pay for my copy?
First it looks like something from 1980.
Then, it does not have AF and for portrait work, these days is an handicap.
You will waste so many shots OOF that is not anymore acceptable for today standards.
1980 lenses are much better built than 2010 lenses.
Yeah right….
Also cars.
Maybe built with more metal instead of plastic. However, Performance may not be as good. Alot of people like Metal though.
The ratio of in-focus shots to out-of-focus shots has not changed in my experience. This may not be true for sports and super-tele wildlife. But it is definitively true for portraits.
The drawback of MF is, that it is slow compared to AF. Very limiting for fast action. But it is very smart, because the photographer is an integral part of the focussing system.
The drawback of AF is, that it is dumb compared to MF (Assuming the average MF photographer has some kind of intelligence). No AF system will be smart in the near future. And even if we assume that there will be human-like AI in future AF systems, such a system will still never know on what you want to focus on. That would require a connection to your brain.
Maybe hat means a really intelligent camera could make the human photographer behind the camera superflous.
And the sun rise in the morning and set late in the afternoon.
If you give a f*ck, then why posting in the first place?
There’s already AF system with face recognition so that AF point lands on person’s face, not the most foremost object/subject like nose.
Very useful, no doubt.
But that was not what I meant. I said the camera does not know if you want to focus on that face, or if you want, what part of the face. Another example would be two or more faces. You know what face you want to focus on. The camera does not. You have to adjust the AF system or point it in the right direction (in case you have set it to a fixed AF point before). Mastering all that functionality may be less efficient than MF in some cases. That is no theory, that’s my personal experience. I even use hyperfocal distance in some cases, which means fix focus and stopped down aperture.
This brings me to another “speciality” which you can find especially in Sony mirrorless cameras: The absence of shutter release priority. (Shutter release priority means you prefer to take the picture even if the AF is not finished or unable to focus at all.) It is available in most serious cameras, but not Sony mirrorless. So, this might be another reason to prefer good old MF on your shiny new A7 (or whatever Sony mirrorless). 😀
Look, if your REALLY going to go there..1.2…then just go all the way. Give me the 85mm .95. If Mitakon wants to be on the map, this will put them square in the middle. I want it all. Actually, I want a 135mm .95 AND DON’T SAY IT CAN’T BE DONE. 1.8’s and 1.4’s are so yesterday. A full wall of .95 lenses please. 24, 50, 85 and 135 and DONE DONE DONE. YOU WANT BLUR…I’LL GIVE YOU BLUR!!!!
With a 142mm entrance pupil… so about twice the diameter of a 72mm threaded lens… yeah pass. There are some 135mm f1.5’s floating around, but they are truly rubbish. I will stick to my ZA 135.
Do you really want .95 so much or it’s sarcasm?
A-mount doesn’t allow f/0.95 lenses
“…A-mount doesn’t allow f/0.95 lenses”
Why? As far as I know the Leica M mount is smaller and allows 0.95 lenses.
not only diameter matters, but possible backfocus.
The Canon 50mm/0.95 is from 1961. 0.95 is soo yesterday! It is less then 1/3 stop wider than 1.0. And 1.0 is even more yesterday. F 0.7 is the way to go.
When I think about it, even 0.7 is yesterday. Stanley Kubrick used a
Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7 in Barry Lyndon in 1975. So, we should go for f/0.5 in 2015.
it’s BOKEH.
OMG this looks so much better than the crappy Samyangs(of course it’s a Leica look), I would never buy a Samyang but this is something I might consider.
85mm f/0.95 and 135mm f/0.95 will look like a mug attached to your camera :/
Interesting 😉
IS works assuming it is a 50mm lens when the camera doesn’t detect any FL. So you may get less than reliable results when you attach this 85mm lens.
Also EXIF information I admit is not terribly important but if I am paying around $1000 or its whereabouts its something that most people would expect.
Does anyone have any experience with the mitakon 85 f/2? Looking at flickr photos, it doesnt appear to be to bad of a lens for $200.
Mitakons are all steals at their price.
Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 is a great sharp lens, if you don’t mind manual focus and controls then get any Mitakon lens they are awesome.
The only negative is you will not be able to know the aperture used in lightroom because there is not electronic contacts between the lens and camera
He was talking about mitakon 85 f/2.
I have it in EF mount with an adapter on an A7. It’s quite a good lens. Occasional aberrations in poor conditions, otherwise if you’re okay focusing manually, it’s a pretty good deal. It’s very well constructed.
Sony doesn’t offer a single f/1.2 lens for A-mount but Mitakon does…
It does come in Full Frame E-mount (FE) @ http://www.zyoptics.net/product/zhongyi-mitakon-speedmaster-85mm-f1-2-lens-dream/
Precise focusing would be difficult with this lens. I have Helios40 in front of the A7 for portraiture work now, and even with f1,5 only every second picture comes out perfectily in focus, and focus depth is approx 5cm then. So why would I need a portraiture lens with even wider aperture? Mitakon 55 f0,95 is far more interesting for general purpose.
I don’t have any problems with portrait focus at f1.4.
All hail 1.2!
Hmm .. on their website there is a Sony FE mount but no Sony A-mount available for pre-order !
http://www.zyoptics.net/product/mitakon-zhongyi-speedmaster-85mm-f1-2-lens-dream/