Today SLR Magic announced a new Full Frame E-mount lens. It’s the CINE 50mm f/1.1. Full details here:
–
PRESS RELEASE
NEW: THE SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1
Hong Kong, China (November 17, 2015) – SLR Magic begins it’s FE-mount lineup with the SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1 standard angle lens. The product will be officially introduced during upcoming InterBEE 2015 fair in Tokyo.
The field of view of this new lens corresponds to a 50mm lens in 35mm format and this fast standard angle of view opens up many new creative composition opportunities, particularly in the fields of portrait, interior, architectural and landscape cinematography and photography. Additionally, a fast max aperture of F1.1 makes the SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1 ideal for available-light photography.
We place our highest priority in the development on our lenses to fulfill the demands of professional cinematographers and photographers. The design and build of the SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1 is solid and reliable.
The SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1 (MSRP: $349 US/ $1,999 RMB) will be available from authorised SLR Magic dealers starting beginnng of December, 2015.
The SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1 will be first presented at InterBEE 2015 fair. There would be a demo at the ATOMOS booth in (No. 3404, Hall 3) during the fairs which are to be held in Tokyo from 18th to 20th of November 2015. For visitors at InterBEE fair, we welcome you to drop by and try.
Technical Data SLR Magic CINE 50mm F1.1
Lens Type:
Fast standard lens
Compatible Cameras:
FE-mount and E-mount cameras
Optical Design:
6 elements in 5 groups
Distance Settings:
Distance range: 0.50m to ∞, combined scale meter/feet
Aperture:
Manually controlled diaphragm, 13 aperture blades , Lowest value 16
Filter Mount:
Internal thread for 52mm filter; filter mount does not rotate.
Surface Finish:
Black anodized
Dimensions:
Length to bayonet mount: approx. 54.8mm (approx. 2.16in)
Largest diameter: approx. 63.00mm (approx. 2.48in)
Weight:
approx. 400g (approx. 14.11oz)
Andrew Chan
Product Manager
86 Responses
That is…so cheap…
True, the cost is very attractive. But for around $200 (or less) you can get a Canon FL 55/1.2 which will probably blow this lens out of the water. There appears to be no electronic connections on the picture above so adapting will be the same as with the Canon. There are no special lens elements listed in the specs along with no mention of special coatings. And SLR Magic lenses have been known to be soft wide open, whereas my FL 55/1.2 is stupidly sharp wide open. It will be interesting to see how it performs for sure. I’m hoping this lens performs very well, because the price is definitely nice.
Well hopefully it has nicer bokeh than the canon.
Wow, I never thought the Canon would be so capable. But then, this is native so it does get much smaller without the adapter that does nothing but take up space.
True, you wont have the space for the adapter. But I have shot adapted lenses for so many years I don’t even notice it anymore. I find the a7, battery grip, adapter and FL 55mm to be a nice, compact and powerful imaging tool.
349 usd? are u kidding me?
350$… let them make more lenses for that price.
I AM SO EXCITED ABOUT THIS LENS. I love my Mitakon 50/.95, but this is smaller and LESS THAN HALF THE PRICE!
I actually almost never shoot the Mitakon at .95 as it’s just too soft. This sounds perfect, and SLR Magic (in Hong Kong) is known to have much higher build quality than ZY Optics (in China). I love competition 🙂
At $350 (!!!) this lens will dominate. Everyone will need to own one, and so many more people will have access to achieving a higher level of photography. This is an amazing moment for the photography universe.
Everyone will need to own one
actually I don’t need this lens at all. But I want it, so I can say to all the Canon-fanboys: “My lens is faster – my lens is faster – my lens is faster – my lens is faster” 🙂
If it’s decent out of the gate then I’ll get one.
wow, if its sharp too, that would be insane @350
Could be a nice addition to the standard focal length lens offerings.
Who else shares a pronounced preference for longer manual focus throws than this?
Looks compact enough I could do street with it. Hope the T Stop is brighter than my Super Takamur 1.4
damnit, if it’s a CINE lens, why are the witness markings on the top instead off to the side like proper CINEMA lenses?
Fair point. I guess they just call it cine because of the gearing
It’s a start, and I assume the aperture’s declicked. But by not having witness marks on the side, and also not showing T-stop, it’s more appropriate to singer-person users or indie shooters
Your right the aperture is declicked and geared.
You’re right, it’s neither in T-stops nor is it marked properly. The only thing right is the gears.
I assume as it’s a cine lens the aperture will clickless? As a stills shooter I’d rather have clicks to be able to focus wide open and count the clicks as I stop down without taking my eye from the VF.
if it’s FF why the rear element is so small?
Actually, a Sonnar-ish design may explain that. The real sort of Sonnar-ish, not Sony’s random design. But can they push Sonnar to that speed…
Minolta 58mm F1.2 with/out speedbuster
13 aperture blades!!! WOW – this will deliver great bokeh, even when stopped down. If the sharpness is also good, this is a insta-buy.
Cool, really looking forward to seeing reviews. I’m interested, especially at that price point. And I really wonder how it will do optically compared to the Mitakon 50 f/0.95.
at that price I will buy 3 to make 3D pictures
The $349 must be a typo? The crop version, the SLR Magic 50mm t0,95 retails for $3000.
No it doesn’t, the crop version is close to $1000.
The Cine version is $3000.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1078019-REG/slr_magic_slr_5095m_cine_e_50mm_f0_95_m_cine.html
Even so, if the crop version 50mm f/0,95 is $1000, $349 for a FF 50mm f/1,1 still sounds very odd.
The cine version is FF, you said crop!
It is? Then why does the specs say the 35mm equivalent focal length is 75mm?
That, is the typo. It’s in M mount->impossible to be half frame.
That’s not even a typo, it says 75mm in E or X, 100mm in MFT. You need to improve on your reading.
Yes, 75mm in E-mount. What are you implying?
Every 50mm has the FoV of 75 in half frame, regardless of its coverage, is what I’m saying. If it covers even less you just get black to fill the sides of the 75.
Half frame? You mean APS-C? And MFT is not 100mm? Are you drunk?
APS-C is basically half frame.
You really need to improve on your reading.
You know what, just send an email to SLR Magic and ask them how much that lens covers. Go ahead!
As do you. There are apparently two different versions. The $1k lens you talk about is a crop lens. The $3k version I linked to is apparently for FF.
“There are two different SLR Magic 50/0.95. The bigger one (HyperPrime
CINE 50 T0.95) is designed for full frame and comes with Leica M mount – and it is significantly better.”
https://www.flickr.com/photos/hhackbarth/14888092253
lmao ”
S.Yu Freddo • 3 hours ago
No it doesn’t, the crop version is close to $1000.
”
I’ve never doubted for a second the crop version is much cheaper. It’s you who’s confused the two
Yes, the crop version 50 f0,95 is about $1000, which is triple the price of this new FF Cine 50 f1,1. Doesn’t that sound quite odd to you?
The present SLR Magic catalogue is a total clusterf*ck. They fail to mention straight forward if the lenses are FF or crop. Some Cine lenses have gears, others don’t. The rangefinder coupled M-mount lens is super expensive, and the E-mount lens is a simpler M-mount lens with an adapter but without the rangefinder coupling? Really?
Well they made it very clear here that this lens is FF, and cheap. If they made a mistake then it’s completely internal and there’s no use speculating until they say otherwise.
And the reason it says it’s in E is probably because it comes with an adapter, If you look at the picture that’s obviously an M mount.
SLR Magic and cheap doesn’t go along.
It is a typo.
And it says 1999RMB also, they’d need two typos for that.
I thought that was the rangefinder coupled M mount version?
That’s even more expensive.
Yeah I seem to recall a $4.5k RF version and a $3k non-RF, but both were FF.
Yup.
SLR Magic 50 t0.95 was an m-mount fullframe lens. It used special glass elements and according to some reviews, outclassed the Leica M counterpart. So the price, somewhat justified.
54.8mm x 63mm?
I thought FF lenses supposed to be HUUUUGE!
Too good to be true?
Bit expensive for me 🙁
Canon fd 50 1.2 sells for almost this amount, so I guess it’s more than a fair price
Of course that’s an old lens. I wonder if it has the same image quality as this. I actually owned the old fd 55 1.2 and sold it. It was cool- I just had some redundancy.
Actually now I remember why I sold it off. It wasn’t the “red ring”. Bad purchase on ebay.
What’s the point? If you’ve ever used a f1.2 lens wide open you know just how shallow the depth of field is… this would only be worse. With a 1.2 you can get a nose in focus and lose the eyes to blur… With this I guess you’ll get the pimple on the nose and lose everything else.
Depends on how close you step, or don’t want to step.
Or you can take a step or two back to increase the DOF on your subject… I’m sorry DOF techniques evade you, a little more practice will help you better understand it 😉
It isn’t a zoom lens so if you don’t want your subject to be lost in the photo there is a limit to how far you can step back, or did basic logic escape you.
If you are starting to compare a 0.95 lens to a zoom… we all get what you’re talking about.
In your case a f4 zoom will work like a charm.
In other people’s cases even a f2.8 zoom would fail. That is why the canon 85mm 1.2 & 200mm 2.0 or the
sony 135mm 1.8 are in much demand. As are the 24-70 zooms…
I was simply pointing out that the .95 lens will cause you to get full body shots if you step back far enough that the entire face is within the DOF when shooting wide open… If you want something more up close and personal this lens wouldn’t do it… and that was all in response to some goof that’s simple answer to the shallow depth of field was to step back further… There are limits to how far you can step back.
If you want something more up close, close it to f4. Dont see a problem here.
If you’re shooting headshots primarily with a 50mm lens than you simply don’t know what you’re doing, period.
I’m sorry you have such strict limits to your creative process. That little ring on the back of the lens, that’s called an aperture ring. If the DOF is too narrow, you turn it a little bit and suddenly you have more DOF 😉
Then, if you decide you want a unique capture like the samples already posted here, you can open it right back up again, something you can’t quite achieve with an f1.4 lens.
If you can capture what you need using 1.4 or 1.8 then what is the point of spending the thousands more for a .95… There is none unless you just want to try and show off to the other people that you have an expensive lens… very much like people getting Leicas when they were well below the quality you could get with other digital cameras.
Did you not even read what I wrote? There’s definitely a noticeable difference between f1.1 and f1.4 for some subjects, whether it’s worth it or not depends entirely on the photographer and the intended use.
I personally wouldn’t spend a lot more on a lens just for a stop of aperture, but I can certainly see why others would, to deny it’s usefulness is blatantly ignorant and it has nothing to do with “showing off”.
Also, if you think Leica’s cameras are “below quality” than you seriously have no idea what you’re talking about. People don’t buy Leica’s strictly for IQ, they buy them because they enjoy using them and they enjoy the look of the photos they get from them, which is absolutely different than many other brands, especially when coupled with good Leica lenses.
Much like super expensive fast lenses, I personally wouldn’t buy a Leica, but I again can easily understand the appeal.
Not sure I understand your comment… On the one hand you state, “People don’t buy Leica’s strictly for IQ,” but then you say they enjoy the look of the photos they get from them… It sounded like you agreed that Leica’s are below the quality you can get with other cameras yet then say people like having sub-par images…Not sure I understand that.
And I do have an appreciation for some Leica lenses, I have an Summicron on my Sony right now because it gives me a sharper image than what I was getting from the Sony lens I was using… But I don’t for one minute think that their cameras were as good as other manufacturers because they aren’t and a while back they were considerably worse than most other major brands.
An images qualities don’t have to be top notch to be enjoyable to look at or to possess certain traits. I shoot very often with a variety of vintage lenses, the one’s I like the best usually aren’t the technically superior ones for example.
Again though, people don’t buy Leica’s for the utmost image quality, they buy them for the quality of the camera itself and for the experience of using a range finder.
I understand completely when you are talking about film because the camera isn’t the critical part, the film is. But when Leica went digital all that changed. If I was going to shoot film I might actually dust off an old Leica in the closet but if I’m shooting digital it would make no sense.
This taken at f/0.95 @ https://www.flickr.com/photos/53587535@N05/22419981641/in/dateposted/
Really beautiful shot. Quite a dramatic transition.
And that is my point… even though you were trying to get her in completely in focus she isn’t. DOF is just too shallow a lens like this is going to fill an extremely limited niche.
Then sure this lens is not for u, but for people who like bokeh and art feel of DOF. Cheers.
I sure understand where you are coming from. You have a valid point when one is very close to the subject. Even then, nailing focus on the eyes with a DOF of a few cm can be a dramatic effect.
However, it is one thing to have shallow DOF at a short distance. Even my iPhone can blur the background when focused on something a few inches away.
What gets really trippy is when one looks at a photo of an object, let’s say 20 feet away, that has a shallow DOF. That’s when our brains don’t compute. It’s not unlike a tilt-shift lens. We are not used to seeing larger objects (like a person), a distance off, with a shallow DOF. It makes the brain curious.
If I shoot my 50 1.8 at a person 50 feet away, there isn’t much of a compresson/shallow DOF effect. But, shoot that same shot with a 50 .95 and things get kinda cool.
Shot at T0.95 (about f/0.92) with the SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 50mm T0.95:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/hhackbarth/14721193666/
great focus! Not a huge fan of the bokeh, but not turned off by it either. How’s it been for other shots?
https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=8538812%40N06&sort=date-taken-desc&view_all=1&text=0.95%20hyperprime
Only if it worked as Loxias…
At this price would be a no brainer.
And if it is a modified rangefinder lens I hope that it can close focus.
Loxia 50mm is f/2, and also 6 elements. I guess stopped down to f/2 (almost 2 stops), this SLR Magic is going to be close enough.
One problem is that it has no electronics to automatically engage stabilization with correct FL and provide EXIF. And no weather seal.
I can at least hope that this will be sharp. The big thing to me on this is that somebody is making a native FE lens. 3rd parties are realizing that we are a market to be catered to. If/when Canikon enter the FF mirrorless, we will really see some 3rd party offerings!
At this point it shouldn’t be a surprise, developing for E-mount you can make lenses for SL/X/m43/EFM-mounts, systems without the range of lenses that Canikon have, so anyone can easily sell new lenses in a range that doesn’t exist in the first party.
Mistake, it’s 349 BTC!
C’mon Sony.
I’m crying here.
I want that new Axxx-series APS-C mirrorless camera already!
Boo-hoo! :'(
😛 Seriously though. Give it to mehhh!
$350 for a FF f/1.1 cine lens? Hell yeah.
You don’t think the bokeh from the FL is nice? Odd, I find it quite pleasing. But bokeh is a very subjective thing.