[shoplink 41641 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Zyoptics (know also as Mitakon) officially announced the new crazy fast 135mm f/1.4 FE lens! This makes it the fastest Full Frame lens yet available after the [shoplink 41643 ebay]Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 A-mount lens[/shoplink].
You can preorder the lens now at zyoptics.net/product/pre-order-mitakon-speedmaster-135mm-f1-4/. The lens costs $2999 and will ship in early 2016. Only 100 pieces will be preoduced so if you want one get it now!
Source: Weibo (via Mirrorlessrumors and Xjrumo).
Low resolution image samples:
74 Responses
Definitely a unique lens. The old me would have been quick to order one.
Being an owner of a 200/2, I can say that under most circumstances the difference between 1 stop aperture at long lengths is not noticeable unless kept side by side because the background is going to be very blurry anyway.
Those two should be almost identical, apart from the obvious FL difference.
To elaborate: Standing shoulder to shoulder, pointed at the same subject, the 135/1.4 and the 200/2 will have the ~same DOF. But the 135 will have it with a wider field. For the 200 to have the same field, they will have to back up, and when they do, they will not have as shallow a depth of field.
But the 200 will be more impressive to the clients. Plus it says Nikkor on the side. This will result in the perception of more shallow depth of field even though you have backed up.
Absolutely. Or you use the 135mm on a crop. Which is why I said apart from the obvious FL difference.
Exactly why I elaborated on what the 135/1.4 can do that the 200/2 can’t, rather than vice-versa inverse canonical relation can-catch-me-as-you-can-can can. What?!?
Why would you compare two lenses of different focal lengths by standing “shoulder to shoulder”? You’re shooting different scenes that way. Not a valid comparison.
Framing has to be equivalent to compare. You either put the 135 in aps-c or stand closer than the 200. Either way the smaller F gives shallower DOF under equal everything else… but that never meant people chose a 24/1.4 instead of a 85/2. Choice of focal length depends on the composition.
The focal length makes all the difference. The 1.4 will definitely have a more rapid DOF fall off, so it’ll be better when distance to bg is limited. However, the 200/2 Canon that I have is a monster of a performer. It’s better than the 135/2 Zeiss which is better than the 85 Otus… it’s something to behold. This 135/1.4 would not have anywhere near the same IQ.
AMount has best viewfinder and grip combo available for this large fast lens. Yet they deny us just like with the 85/1.2. I already have extra large lenses that are uncomfortable to use on tiny EMount with flimsy mount. Will avoid this lens specifically for that reason.
Release for AMount and I’ll buy both the 135 and 85 right away.
They should really post more example shots…
Why buy for EMount and prevent use on other cameras? Silly. No glass in that extended tube.
Make this for AMount where it belongs. Or buy for some other mount and future proof.
They’re DUMB mounts. No electronics. No aperture linkage. Ridiculous this isn’t available for AMount.
$3k seems a bit excessive
Problem is I don’t think there are any other 135mm f1.4 lenses out there, at least not for the current big brands, so I guess the price is a result of bragging rights and to help them make a profit with a small production run. That being said, we all know there are plenty of alternatives that are probably just as good, if not better, for like half the price.
Nikkor 200mm F2.
ZA 135mm f1.8
not really… both 200mm f2 and 135mm f1.4 both physical aperture of about 100mm in diameter. 135mm f1.8 has a physical aperture of 75mm in diameter so background blur wise it doesn’t match the other two. However ZA still has much better value for the buck compared to the Mitakon.
For only 100 made?
135mm f/1.4 @ 3 meters is only 1,5 inches DOF
If you only hoping for 1000 lines per picture height. Like, 1.5mpix.
That looks enough to shoot your banana 🙂
Sooo…the perfect lens for people that can’t spell ‘composition’
huh? 3k USD? I was so excited when i heard about this lens, but at 3k….. nope. i would give them my cash if it was only 2k
Size&Price&MF. Maybe Sony/Zeiss 135 1.8 or sony/minolta 135 STF are still better choices.
Availability too… With only 100 made you won’t see them around.
Now with a speedbooster…
I don’t see the benefit of having telephoto lenses like this without autofocus. Sure, for landscape and portraits, it’d be fine — but for sports photography in low light, where the 1.4 aperture would suit, the lack of autofocus is a deal-breaker.
1. This wasn’t made for sports.
2. Collector item lens
3. Better image quality stopped down than f2 or f2.8 lens wide open.
How do you know it performs better stopped down at f2 compared to a f2 lens wide open?
How do you know it has better image quality than any other decent lens at any given aperture. Is it absolutely necessary to give an opinion even when you have no idea? How many lenses have better image quality than zeiss 135mm 1.8 for example?
This is is just a lens for lensfreaks like me. It will kinda suck to focus with for almost anything at 1.4
#3 only if it’s a very remarkable lens. Prime vs prime of the same build quality, the larger f# lens should beat the smaller. (I can always optimize a better IQ lens with a larger f/#.)
Wrong, usually the other way around. The faster lens is better stopped down a little than the small one wide open. The only exceptions I’ve noticed are 50/0.95 vs. 50/1.4s. So if you push it too far and you’re up against mature tech then it’s slow better than fast.
I’ll stick with my 135mm 2.0 from rokinon 2.0 for $599 thank you very much
To much? Hmm..yeah. See the thing is…and follow me here…Zeiss knows how to balance out the qualities of lens. Like a fine wine. I’ll spare you the details. Besides, If I was going to dump 3k I’d just go for the Nikkor 200mm F2.
why would the moderator delete messages which are perfectly fine ( i was replying to that message stating he would buy a nikkor 200mm f2 for that price ) ??!!!
I decided I don’t want it. Thanks.
That lens on that camera reminds me of a fat guy in a little suit.
Or Shriners in little cars.
Or Michael Jackson’s nose in the middle of his face.
“The lens costs $2999 and will ship in early 2016. Only 100 pieces will be preoduced so if you want one get it now!”
Quick! Sell 100 lenses and run before everybody discovers it is not worth $3K. 😉
Here’s an idea: let’s make a super impractical lens (ok, fine, some of you MF masochists might enjoy 1.4 on 135… who am I to judge?) and then take the most hideous images of the product itself and then take even worse “sample” images of the said product in action. Good lord, pay $50 to some half decent looking gal to pose 100′ away from a flower stand or better yet, in front of a brightly lit building at night so people can drool over the low-light goodness and creamy goo in the background and fork off $3k for an “artsy” glass. May I suggest “Marketing for Dummies” by Alexander Hiam…available NOW at a retailer near you?
bwahaha . Brilliant. I had a nightmare last night and that communist’s face was in it!!!
lol I nearly fell off my chair when reading this. That guy is scary, for sure !! haha
Spot on critique. Is the professionalism of Mitakon evident when looking at that pile of mess on the table besides the lenses? Half arsed samples taken with the lens because they cannot be bothered to do any better. I would like to see a web article tour of Mitakon lens production line some day if they dare. Do not read my comment wrong. The reality still stands that they offer some unique products even tho they lack the marketing skills.
How come you’ve used words “Mitakon” and “professionalism” in the very same sentence at all?
It’s a DSLR lens with an extension tube. I see no reason to buy it in E mount.
Yes, would be bloody stupid to buy it in E-Mount. Everyone will be smart enough to buy it in Nikon or Canon mount.
However if you buy it in E-Mount you will be probably the only idiot doing so, which leads you to the proud ownership of a truly unique lens. You just need to wait 20 years to auction it off at Christies for big $$$.
Easy, isn’t it? But shhhhh, don’t tell anybody!
To Dr. Liu: No way!
What’s with all the soggy cheeks here? Since when was innovation or trying something off the mainstream a bad thing? Whatever the price or quantity, this was an experiment from a company trying to gain tracks and recognition in the industry. The moment photographers lose sight of ambition and thinking out of the norm is the moment photography loses its soul. Lose your ball and chains, no ones got a gun to your head.
A limited run of 100 pieces from nothing less than Mytakon Zyoptics…. you must be kidding.
As a collector items this dude has not value, ZERO.
As a must have photography tool…. sure you can get a few accolade on flickers comments…. did not think about that!
Really… if you want to spank 3 grands on some luxury that may actually give you some better life experience, go on an holiday trip, upgrade to leather seats for you next car (you will enjoy that a lot more), maybe that anti skid option on your new car may save your life, or 1 full year of tennis or ballet classes for your kids.
Their 50/0.95 is a masterpiece. Not sure why you need to slam them.
masterpiece? had it for 2 days and returned it… a good condition rokkor 58/1.2 is much nicer
The Fuji 56 1.2 is nicer and cheaper for my camera system of choice.
You’re so generous. I wouldn’t give a crap if it was 1k 😀
With only 100 made, they probably own most of them for a very long time if they think it could move at 3K a pop. Sony Zeiss 135mm 1.8 is a surely.
And I guess 70% of them will ended in Dubaï, like all the collectors cars that runs for a million.
Not everything that can be made should be made! (If nobody said this before I calim first, feel free to quote me)
Just because you don’t need it, doesn’t mean no one else does.
I had bad experience with this brand. I ordered their 85mm f2.0 and 135mm f2.8 lens, really cheap $150 for each.
The 85 have the right box but wrong lens, it was a 35mm inside. I returned this lens and ask for a refund.
The 135 have visible dust inside the lens and some oil in aperture blade. The lens is heavy because of full metal construction. I bought them new from authorize dealer and the seller said that it is quite normal condition for this lens.
Yes, it was the cheap line products, but if their quality control that bad… $2999 is a bit overconfident.
I think there is only one thing that can be forgiven for such 3k price is autofocus addition. But it hasn’t…
Of course nobody really needs these extreme, impractical lenses, but no one gets hurt if they exist either. Back in the day I asked myself whats the point of a Nikkor 13mm/5.6 or the infamous Nikkor 6mm/5.6 fisheye monster, but on the other hand, I always found it kinda cool that they exist.
They are technological statements, useful for brand image and marketing. If we put it this way, than I totally don’t get why Zyoptics does such a sh*tty marketing job. The pre-order page doesn’t even show a product image. And then these crappy samples.
No complains about an expensive state-of-the-art lens, but their product marketing and presentation of a $3k lens is just plain embarrassing.
(To be fair, it’s not Hasselblad-embarrassing, but still embarrassing)
“but no one gets hurt if they exist either” The company can if it is operating on a shoestring budget.
The Nikkor 6mm was ment for industrial use. The Nikkor 13mm was used in scientific research. Some people don’t understand crap about the optics industry.
Yes, agreed. I’m a photographer, I don’t understand crap about the optics industry.
Thanks for the useful information.
Diminishing returns.
Not really worth it.
3K for this? No thanks.
Betamax players are pretty rare, does that make them collector items?
Between this handle and your other one here defending the lens, I’ll be helpful to you so that you can pass the info from the troll department to your executives. Build a 135 1.8 and sell for $750. If you cannot do that without going over budget, then you’re in the wrong line of business. Love your Lens Turbos though.
my canon 135mm f2L on the metabones speedbooster, in aps-c mode, gives me the same lens, with better optics!
This is NOT the fastest full frame lens.
The Zeiss Masterprime 135 and 150mm f/1.2 (t1.3) also covers full frame!
$26,820.00 for the 135mm Masterprime! 🙂
Haha yes, the price is a bit crazy. But when you consider those lenses beat even the Otus line in image quality and sharpness…
Not sure if Masterprimes are better on FF corners than Otuses. Afaik it’s coincidence they cover still FF.
If this was a limited run from Zeiss, with impeccable build quality and top notch coatings, $3k would be a steal (something like that I’d expect to be closer to $10k). Most reviewers of the 50/0.95 report that it produces rather lovely images, but the build quality is terrible. But for $900, most people don’t care that much about build quality or coatings… it’s a good price for an enchanting, if somewhat novelty lens. $3k puts it in a whole other category of purchase, even for professionals, where expectations are much much higher. Limited run or not.
If I see you with one, I will make fun of you. It is my right as a human being.
I’ll take three……. I could get a Af 135mm 1.8 used in mint condition for 1300 a rokinon 135mm 2.0 for about 400 or 500 and a sony/minolta 135mm stf for about 800-1000, so on a good day I could have all three of these and still have 400-500 left over, enough to buy a used a6000 or a really good hooker.