Will you do a review of the James Webb telescope ? Its maximum aperture is impressive but it seems to have terrible flaring and low value for money. Love the lens hood design though.
I don't know if you're still considering one, but I've heard users of the older Hubble telescope can solve the issue by using the lens at a point where the entire earth is in the way of the sun! Supposedly sorts the flaring right out. Thing is though the earth is then in the way of a lot of possible subjects. I can't say I've tried the same on the James webb telescope, I've heard it's far harder due to its distance and something about it not being in orbit of the earth? Never had that issue with any of my canon glass. Good job there's that hood! I've heard it even resists 80+°c temperatures! That aperture really is something also. F/20 at 131400mm is really good for portraits, it's bokeh is really nice too. Smooth and creamy. It's much better than the older hubble at 57600mm at f/24. That improvement alone makes it worth the buy in my opinion, if you can afford it. The Hubble is still good, though, as a budget option.
Great comparison video Chris. I'm still using the original 7Artisans 50mm f1.1 for Leica M on a Sony A7s. I like the way it renders on this system. For a gig photographer, often in dark clubs etc, edge to edge sharpness is not an issue and the lens flaws can work as a character feature, creating interesting flares and such with the stage lights. The trick to such lenses is to learn their strengths and weaknesses so that they work better for you.
I had the Laowa lens to test. The image quality is good, but the handling is very clunky. It is very heavy and long. The focus ring is relatively tight. Now I have the TTartisan. The image quality is very good and the weight and handling is much better. The focus ring is soft. The aperture ring is also very nice. Overall, I think the TTartisan is much better to use.
I know I’d be kinda hard given the cost, but making a comparison with an actual Leica Noctilux 50mm f/0.95 would put everything in perspective. We assume the Leica would perform much much better given its prestige, but does it really? Hopefully you can have the chance to make that comparison in the future! Awesome work!
@@MaestroDK you sure you watched it properly and at a better video quality? The last time I check the 58mm Noct was sharper at f/0.95 than most Sigma Art lenses.
I'd go for the brightin star .... in the center, sharpness at 0.95 is really good and on par with the Laowa (corners aren't important for portraits at 0.95) .. also in the flaring test I would say it was the best and hold its contrast more than any of the other... it has nice sun star (the largest yet the TTartisan looked more pleasingly)... 👌
I don't honestly think I'd purchase any of them until a few more of their weaknesses have been worked out. That said, if I had to choose right now, I'd probably take the TT Artisan first. The Leica mount is actually an advantage in that I could easily adapt it to other cameras as needed.
I mean they're a f/0.95 lenses, weaknesses are inevitable in the corners and softer middle at widest apertures. Many lenses can be designed to go to f/0.95 but engineers don't do it because people like you would complain about wide aperture sharpness :(
@@AAJJ007 I have a copy of the Laowa FFII 35mm f/0.95. It's got some nice character, but the vignetting is very pronounced, and it's a boat anchor weight wise. If I had to pick a Laowa lens right now for any mount, it would be the 6mm f/2 Zero-D MFT. That one looks very interesting indeed--light, super wide, almost no distortion, and great sharpness from corner to corner. At least that's what I'm reading. I would love to see Chris review a few MFT lenses like that one.
I received the Laowa lense today. I can't stop shooting with it. Its my favorite lense I own for the Z mount. I was iffy on this lense because I saw videos mostly on the Sony mount. On the Nikon mount, I think it's more than acceptable. I have some really sick pictures already. I'm not a pixel peeper. My daily is the Nikon D3s. I finally have a lense that is worth shooting on the Z6ii.
A well made comparison. The TTArtisan and the Laowa come out best in your test. However, it must be noticed that the image quality evaluation is only valid for medium distances (I guess the test charts are placed in a distance of 2-3m?). The results you are getting here are not necessarily representative for infinity nor extreme close-up shots. I own the TTartisan lens and like it a lot. However, this lens has been clearly optimized for portrait distances. Therefore, it really shines in your test method. But if you take landscape shots at infinity wide open, the image quality worsens dramatically. In this category other lenses might be better. On the other hand, why should on take any landscape shots at f:0.95? In my eyes it makes a lot of sense to optimize such an ultrafast lens for portrait distances, because this will be the mostly used distance.
I find this review to be a bit misleading (although I appreciate the effort). I have tested and used the TTA and the Mitakon side by side. Not just close up but also mid distance. The Mitakon has visibly smoother bokeh and less field curvature (which means that the edges are still blurred, while they sharpen up with the TTA - usually not something that's desired). Also the Mitakon has a longer actual focal length than the TTA. I would guess around 52 vs 48. The TTA has a neutral color rendition and the Mitakon had a slight yellow-greenish tint which is easily corrected with white balance. The Mitakon is optically superior apart from sharpness (which you also stated). It has an incomparably longer focus throw and a shorter mfd. When you use the TTA with a helicoid adapter though, the mfd is even shorter than the Mitakon. My two cents for those that are considering those two :)
Amazing comparison. I did enjoy how you did comparisons between each of the lenses in a number of different test to really allow me, as the the viewer, to really see what lens shines and where versus the weaknesses of each. I was considering the Brighton Star lens because it's such an inexpensive entry into the 0.95 club, but after watching, I'm weighing the IQ vs cost on each of these. If the Loawa lens didn't have such dreadful star effects, it'd be a no-brainer as it really seemed to shine in other tests, but the performance there really gives me pause.
A very enjoyable review. An interesting alternative is the Voigtlander 40mm F1.2, a very usable super fast lens which is usably compact, or the new excellent Voigtlander 50mm F1, but it’s less affordable
I've owned a Laowa Venus Optics 12mm 2.8 lens and it's truly a genius lens. It's also the only lensbrandname I know in this list. So probally will want it the most.
Great to see this comparison. Would've been great to get some basic comparative light transmittance information. Assuming the distortion/vignetting tests were all lit exactly the same, even just getting the shutter speed metered by the camera would give a rough idea.
Excelent job as always Chris 👌 Btw, I'm expecting Samyang to introduce some kind of ultra fast lens and I wouldn't be really surprised if they manufacture something even faster than 0.95 just to get bigger attention. Edit: from this selection I would go for Laowa
I'd rather have Samyang produce a better quality zooms and any other lens that are actually useful. Samyang at this moment has to update all their old AF lenses and fix their inconsistent quality control issues. Based on their recent releases, I think they are now a promising optics company.
@@NikosPer f-number is just a mathematical calculation of the focal length of the lens divided by the perceived aperture diameter (seen by the sensor, not the actual diameter). Of course a lens can have a smaller f-number than f/1.0 if the perceived aperture diameter is bigger than the focal length. These lenses have approximately 52.63 mm maximum aperture diameter (47.37 mm for the Laowa). T-stop might be the one you meant as it is the definite measurement of light enters a lens, but I don't know for sure. There is a lens made by Zeiss that has f/0.7 aperture (Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm f/0.7) made exclusively for the Apollo mission for its brightness though, and later modified to shoot Stanley Kubrick's Barry Lyndon for an indoor scene completely lit only by candle lights.
Usually if TTARTISAN have a lens on multiple mounts they gonna be priced equally except the Leica M mount version will be more expensive.. as an M mount lens it can be adapted to any mirrorless system and even being used as AF lens ... that will require extra cost but add a great feature however I don't know if these adapters effect the IQ
I would like to laowa in a Brighton Star price 😁 But if I need stop down to have expected quality, I'm thinking that my 55mm f1.8 Zeiss wil do the job I believe.
Chris, is it my impression, or at 08:06 the F4 stop didn't change pictures for Brightin Star? Or is it really super similar and perfectly aligned? Thank you for all the material.
Not everyone is looking for a sharp lens from centre to edges, in fact for portraits soft edges with strong bokeh is more the look folks are looking for nowadays, even low contrast can be welcomed for some situations. Having optical flaws like the original old glass they are trying to replicate is more the point to these lenses i suggest. I think all the flaws and characteristics are what make these lenses good for portraits and specifically outside daylight with all the lens flares.
Very well done comparison as always. No surprise that the Laowa lens has the best closeup image quality as they make several 2x macro lenses that also focus to infinity. My very biased opinion is that the Laowa was the best overall lens as I own and love my Laowa 2x 100mm macro lens. I wonder why they use manual aperture as my Canon EF version of the macro lens has electronic aperture, so you control the aperture with the camera and you also get all the EXIF data.
Is it just me or does the TTArtisan have a pretty significant midzone dip visible at 5:43 ? When you pause the video as it is panning between centre and corner, the TTArtisan looks a lot softer than Mitakon. This is something I feel should be mentioned as well.
Since we can not use your email for a non-business communication I am writing here since my idea is close to the subject of this video. I would suggest you test a KMZ Zenitar 1.2/50s lens made for an APS-C censor. It comes with NF and EFS mounts but can be adapted to any mirrorless camera since it is a manual focus lens.
do these lenses work for R7 camera because the RF fits on the R mount right? I thought canon restricted anyone from making lenses for their new R mount.
Tks for sharing mate. After watching your comparison multiple times, I still can't decide between the Mitakon Vs TTartisan :( Mainly use for portraits, weddings and backlight a lot. Which one you prefer out the 2?
I liked the part where you tested the lenses on different days with different scenes and forgot to do a particular test with one lens lol. Some people still take you seriously 😂
The bokeh comparison made me wonder something. Do you use your camera's electronic front curtain? Beyond 1/1000th of a second, it starts affecting bokeh. Not sure if any of your bokeh tests ever use that fast of a shutter speed, but it's something worth noting for that test in particular if you do.
Might not happen that soon. 0,95f is very thinn, without a constant tracking AF it would be nearly impossible to accuratly focus, actually using a manual focus you can anticipate the movement of the subject and make the focus more accurate that way, rather than rely on a AF system. I thin even with current mirroless cameras, the AF would struggle to give an accurate results for 0,95f
There's something wrong here, TTArtisan 50mm f0.95 cost ≈218$ for x mount whereas it cost 755$ for M mount. Is there something special about M mount other then mount?
I can't really see the point of such a fast lens, especially with that sacrifice in IQ. The razor thin DOF on a manual focus is also super hard to get right. With how good high ISO capabilities are on modern bodies, there's no need for such a fast aperture. These lenses are just a novelty, in my opinion.
Obviously you never tried one, haha. I thought I'd regret buying 7Artisans 50mm f/1.05 (not in the list but still so fast) and yet it's my fav street lenses amongst all native primes especially for mono photography. It's just different but I'd say it's way better than all listed 0.95 here
Well out of these all Mitakon and Laowa are the lenses that were designed to be useful at those apertures. As you mentioned the Mitakon design is outdated,so it looks less sharp, I also own II version of this lens and while it issint the sharpest lens in the world, it is fairly good for ~20-30mpx sensors. Laowa lens is much much newer design and I would say it is fully usable wide open. Now everything else than these lenses are strickly for artistic usage, meaning that you will get unique look using those lenses, but in exchange of a sharpness and flare resistance. So I would say if you only go after the shallow DOF, you better of looking for a nice vintage 1,2f lens, the nikkor 55mm 1,2f is pretty amazing lens for a descent price, there are canon or other lenses as well. Those will give you even more unique results, because the background blurring of those lenses are less milky and buttery.
The question is HOW can they make a F 0.95 lens to be so cheap? Like most 2.8 lenses out there are basically costing 2000 quit if you're lucky and no less then that. So how can these lenses be so much cheaper? And also another question. Most f 2.8 or lower (I am always confused which term to use) lenses are humangous because of the glass they need, so why don't these lenses need as much glass to be this bright? And then, F 0.95, is that actually lighter then f 2.8, or can't it actually get any lighter then that?
Well that is not a lens, that is a marketing campaign :) Considering the price the weight and the purpose, its a collectors item rather than the useful thing :)
Chinese begins to enter the camera lens market...I hope Japan will hear the calling and do the same. Cosina has made . 95 under Voigtlander and for MFT only. I wish Japan will make FF 0.95 for other mounts as well. It will beat China hand down about quality.
This video shows that just because you can make a f0.95 lens doesn't mean you should make one... there's nothing inherently impressive about 0.95, but making large aperture lens that's also optically superb takes an immense amount of work. There's a reason why even the RF50mm f/1.2 is more expensive than any of this junk.
I never found a fast fifty any useful tbh. most fast af 50s are incredible heavy, so they’re not everyday lenses. And bokeh isn’t that impressive either, compared to greater focal lengths.
Well, you need to know why you buy these lenses. For instance the difference from 0,95f to 1,2f is twice the amount of light, basically instead of using 1/50 shutter speed you will use 1/100 with 0,95f lens, this alone is pretty huge deal. The look of that shallow DOP is another talk. While I do agree that 1,2f is probably the best sweet spot, the 0,95f also has its uses...
@@S3l3ct1ve people out here expecting f1.8 image quality at 0.95 in a under $1000 lenses.Every reasonable size lens is going to perform like this at 0.95.
@@ilmari9120 Have fun buying cheap novelty rubbish only to leave it at home never to be used again. Don't let me judge how you waste your hard earned money mah dude 🥱those manufacturers know for a fact these lenses aren't up to par for f0.95, but they still sell it as such because people go such head over the heels for it.
I love you videos, I appreciate the passion in every review you made. But did you change your avatar to Syria/Yemen/Palestine/Congo/Sudan/Afghanistan flag when they were at war? I know it's your right to do whatever you want, but please leave politics out of this. War is bad, but it seems like Ukrainian blood is more precious than any other people somehow...
Кристофер, я разочарован в тебе. Война на Украине выгодна только США и они сделали все, чтобы её развязать. Жаль, что вы такие глупые, что не понимаете это. Я думал вы мудрее и можете на ситуацию посмотреть со стороны.
Don't take it so serious. Many unaware people are affected only by one or other side propaganda. But at the end, all of us want peace... For better understanding I'm recommending everybody to watch 2016 documentary from french producer Paul Moreira, Ukraine: The Masks of the Revolution.
