This is a Guest post from Tomasz Kałużny. The text and images are copyrighted and have been reposted on SAR from the orginal authors site Darkshape.
Samyang 135mm f/2 first impressions and samples
by Tomasz Kałużny
Today I had a rare pleasure to lay my hands on an extraordinary lens: Samyang 135mm f/2. Thanks to the guys at infoto.pl who made this possible. It’s one of the latest releases from Samyang and I have been waiting for this for quite some time since the lens had a pretty good word of mouth right from the moment it was announced.
But first things first. Since the last time I have seriously upgraded my camera. I went from a Sony NEX5n which I still love to the 24MP Sony A7 so the quality of the photos should be much improved. I will try to post a complex review of the camera in the near future, but I will just say it’s an amazing piece of gear and it surpassed my expectations in every aspect.
The Samyang 135mm is quite a bulky lens, but achieving such wide aperture at that focal length just takes its toll and there’s no way those laws of physics can be bypassed. The first thing you notice are just huge front and rear optical elements, which are a promise of good optical quality and the first photos you take just confirm that 100%. If I could summarize the experience in just one sentence, it would be: “that is the sharpest lens I have ever used”. I have seen a couple tests online prior to using it, but taking the photos myself and then seeing them on a large screen I just couldn’t believe my eyes.
Some of my samples, all taken at f/2 because stopping down is not necessary here (and several 100% pixel per pixel crops):
 |
| 100% crop |
 |
| 100% crop |
 |
| 100% crop |
 |
| 100% crop |
….and the chromatic aberration is basically nonexistent.
Every one of 24 million pixels is put to use by this lens. You can see on some of the crops that the detail is almost finer than the digital ‘grain’, I would love to see some samples from a Sony A7R or Nikon D600. I have not corrected chromatic aberration on any of the photos.
Using this lens I camer to had to remember to keep my exposure times short (as it is a tele lens) which was more than easy during the day, but in the afternoon I had too boost ISO100 to ISO800 to stay in the safe zone.
There is an old rule of thumb for exposure times. When handholding your shots your times shouldn’t be longer than 1/(focal length), so basically for this lens the value was 1/135s and 1/160s when you round it off to an existing value. You have to remember though that this applies to full frame, when using a crop sensor, you need to calculate the equivalent. So when using Sony NEX5n (crop factor of 1.5x) with this lens the safe exposure time would be around 1/200s as 1.5 times 135 equals 202.5. You have to remember that this rule just tells you what is the longest eposure time you can safely handhold, it does not mean that all of those shots will be sharp. Shaky hands can ruin everything, but if you are steady, you can just as well pull off a longer exposure time. But still I think this is very useful to keep that in mind.
* The lens I tested was a Nikon mount and I used an adapter to mount it. This does not change anything, but I thought some people might wanna know that.
edit 19.04.15 – I’m adding some more samples:
135mm f/2.0 for Sony A-mount (Click here) and Sony E-mount (Click here).
135mm t/2.2 Cine for Sony A-mount (Click here) and Sony E-mount (Click here).
And via Korean sellers on eBay:
[shoplink 33060 ebay]Samyang 135mm E-mount (here n eBay)[/shoplink]
[shoplink 33061 ebay]Samyang 135mm A-mount (here n eBay)[/shoplink]
35 Responses
Some cool shots in there. Nice work.
Thanks for sharing! It seems to be a really good lens.
Links to a few full size images would be useful, or maybe a few RAW files. Thanks
I have about 36 images posted to Flickr where you can see full size, I believe. These are my Sony A7 with the Rokinon 135/2 and most are wide open (I try and note the aperture in the comments): https://www.flickr.com/photos/jayhawk/sets/72157650755875875/
Thanks Sean. Some very nice images. I like the China Town picture. I have a hard time getting out of bed to take pictures at that time of the morning. The lens looks like a great performer, and I will have to take a closer look at one. I do prefer to buy AF lenses, but I don’t think that Sony/Zeiss will be coming with a 135 anytime soon. If the A Mount version wasn’t still screw drive I would go with that and use an adapter, but I’m not buying any more screw drive lenses for A Mount. Cheers
Lovely pics, all of them! Very well done.
Indeed it is a very sharp lens, I’ve seen very fine pictures taken with this lens (I’m looking forward to buy one in native E-mount), but not in this article. Nothing shows the sharpness of the lens. Next time try some human or animals eyes or/and some animals with furr…
I am suprised about lack of CA. I own 85mm samyang and CA is really bad at 1.4, bad at 2.0 and becomes not great at 2.8. At 4 is ok. If this 135mm has no problem with CA at 2.0 it would be great thing.
When people say “this is the sharpest lens I’ve ever used” it’s nice to put it in perspective. What other lenses has he used? Has he used Zeiss 135/1.8 or canon 135L? These claims are baseless without putting it in some context.
Agreed, his comment that he just upgraded from a NEX 5N to an a7II probably tells you all you need to know about his experience with premium optics or at the very least his experience that could even take advantage of truly premium optics.
The 5N was a great little camera and it’s still my back up camera. I used it during an event I worked this week alongside of my A7, in fact. Nothing has prevented me from putting nice glass on my 5N and it still performs quite well for an APS-C camera. I have shot my FE Zeiss 55, Contax G 90/2.8, the Rokinon 135/2, Voigtlander Nokton 35/1.2 II, Rokinon 8/2.8 (an extremely sharp lens) and the Sony Zeiss 24/1.8 on my 5N (and A7, except for the 24 and Rokinon 8/2.8). Good glass works just swell on the old 5N. I put the Rokinon 135/2 right up there with the Zeiss 55 in sharpness – even wide open.
thanks Sean for defending the great camera that 5n is! I used it with a lot of great and shitty lenses. didn’t use any zeiss lenses though, but even if they were sharper i think I couldn’t tell the difference on 24mpix. I do not write tests though, don’t shoot charts and don’t count lines per pixel or whatever. my experience is the only thing I can refer to.
Yup, also, not stopping down the lens at all “because it doesn’t need it” is just plain wrong.
Thanks for the review. Almost too sharp for portraits? Though some like to see skin texture outside of older ladies and men in black and white with super contrast.
This getting-lenses-in-Nikon-mount-for-resaleability, is there any truth to that? Haven’t looked into it so am not aware. Yes, you would reach Nikon users as well as any kind of mirrorless user but there would be more Nikon F variant lenses than native ones and if I were looking for this lens second hand and it was 20USD more in E-mount than Nikon F mount I’d probably get the E-mount version because I know how solid Samyang’s fastened adapters are. Wouldn’t really consider the best strategy for selling it as I was buying it but do believe E-mount will be around for some time so would like to think I’d find a buyer, in the case that I should wish to sell it.
If you didn’t get it in Nikon F mount for resaleability then it would be nice to hear why 🙂
Getting Samyang lenses like this in Nikon F or Canon mount makes sense for more that just resale. These mounts can be adapted to any mirror-less system with cheap adapters and the lenses are also lighter and smaller. I have a Rokinon 135 mm F2 and use it both on my Sony A7 and my M43 camera (makes a great 270 mm F2 equivalent). If I bought the E-mount version I could not do this. E-mount is great but there are other systems out there now and in the future that may look better some day. Full manual lenses have compromises but their biggest strength is adaptability so why give that up and get locked into a propriety system when you don’t have to.
Informative replies, both of yours.
A minor niggle can potentially be the adapter but having used a couple I’d say it shouldn’t be that hard to find something that doesn’t alter focus distance or sits slightly loose. If Nikon F happened to be a screw type mount now..
The benefit of the Emount version is that you avoid after market adapter. In general, adapters suck. http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters
If you have one camera system, aren’t thinking of switching it and don’t put the highest emphasis on resell possibilities/value I’d agree that native mount might be best. It depends on how much worse an adapter would make the lens for your application.
“Smaller and ligher lenses” is a truth with modification since you’d need to attach an adapter either once and gain no size/weight advantage or more often, in which case you’d need to transport the adapter as well as the lens (two pieces are more flexible than one though).
Don’t just get Nikon F mount for resaleability, but also for great adaptability! You can use Nikon F with almost any camera! And with mirrorless cameras, you get to use them with focal reducers too.
Sorry but the argument of portraits being too sharp belong to the film days. Now a simple 20 second PS job can make sharp photos as soft as you want them. 😛
I have a bit of a hard time seeing film as too sharp for faces. Re lens: If the intended use is mainly portraits then I’d get something far cheaper and not spend 20 seconds/image taming pores. If intended use is mixed, incl. portraits then I’d only take black and white images of old people.
Well I would take a sharp lens over a soft lens anyday unless the sharp lens was prohibitively expensive like the Zeiss 135mm f1.8.
And if you need a high contrast edgy portrait then a soft lens won’t help.
Basically couldn’t get it with Emount lens, but still when I have choice I pick the Nikon version as I have a perfectly good Nikon adapter always at hand. (And I do have a Nikon camera as well)
Good sharpness, nice bokeh but not “spectacular” in my opinion. Great control of CA, but colour seems too cold, as if shot with strong cooling filter. All in all, i think its worth matches its price. Would not compare it to ZA 135.
If only it had AF and the bokeh is not to my liking. Worth 550? Yes.
+1 For a 135mm AF is far more useful than say on a 35mm lens.
I guess AF is great when I am shooting at f/5.6, sure. But when you shoot a 135/2 wide open then I’d never be content with AF to help ensure that eyelashes are perfectly in focus. I’d love DMF in a 135 to get quick AF and then tweak it to perfection. But without DMF, I’d take manual focus over AF completely.
In E-mount the computer will do the job perfectly. We have the “Eye focus” function. Try it on a6000 and a7ii, bam!
Agreed completely; DOF is super thin and the only way to make sure the eyeballs and not lashes or ears are in focus is via focus magnification for MF. If things are moving however AF will be more useful.
Dustin Abbott’s test sure make the Samyang look better than the Canon 135L. Here’s his conclusion: “My results from this comparison definitely reconcile with my field observations. The Samyang 135mm f/2 is optically superior to my beloved 135L is every way. It exhibits better sharpness and resolution, much better contrast at wide apertures, and less chromatic aberrations. The bokeh looks just as good.” and “It has the ability to produce images that are amongst the finest possible with this focal length.” http://dustinabbott.net/2015/03/samyang-135mm-f2-ed-umc-review/
Pretty much anything beats the Canon 135L at this point- including the Olympus 75mm 1.8. Canon should be ashamed of themselves for not having updated that lens.
Manual focus is ok. I would gladly pay a little extra if it had electrical contacts for metadata record.
I didn’t say I didn’t stop it down at all. I just didn’t stop it down much for the sample photos. I always step down my lenses to see how the optics change and if there is improvement, and what aperture opening is the best. In case of that lens the contrast, sharpness etx are as good at f/2 as they are at f/5.6 (or very close) so I happily choose shooting at wide open for more appealing bokeh.
The cine version will get into my kit! Looks great!
This may be a dumb question but what is (if anything) the difference between this and the Rokinon 135 f2? I see that the Rokinon is the only one currently available via Amazon and BH. Anyone have experience with the Rokinon?