Love your reviews Christopher. You always show image quality comparisons on the same things. Many reviewers show you and image and say it looks great but you have no reference. Keep up the good work. I was going to buy the 100mm for my R6 but after this I think I'll hold out for a bit
@@bl00me18 the are countries where you can see blue sky, where the light is so bright in fact, you can shoot living animals in the wild! hooray for not murdering for the sake of art.
In comparison to the other two more expensive macro lenses at a more normal distanceI l prefer this Laowa to the other two for its excellent control of CA while the slightly darkened (but still excellently sharp) corners would be less noticeable in that range of shooting. An good buy at $500 despite having no electronic image corrections.
It looks like the Sony A7RIII is adding some sharpening to the raws as part of the digital corrections; I can see some slight haloing around the high contrast edges on both the Sigma and Sony that is not present on the Laowa. This could explain why the Laowa looks quite different to the other two.
yes agree, except sigma has massive CA. So bad, that correcting it would take colour away from the image. It would be too much work to correct that on every image but only at affected apertures (ie lens unusable outside of macro work)
I find the reviews of Christopher Frost often quite stange and actually very biased. I cannot help myself but current high-street prices were not quoted but the introduction prices. The here and there a few niggles I cannot agree on. However, in the end (when considering so many misinformation or misrepresentations), then I only can disbelieve those reviews here because they then seem biased. What is even more annoying, Christopher Frost does not come forward to explain or correct a statement.
Update: The Leica version is the L mount, not the M mount, therefore rendering the technique I've mentioned below inapplicable. 😔 If I were to buy this lens for my Sony, I would get the Leica M mount version, and use the TTARTISAN M-to-E adapter so that I can assign the focal length to the EXIF and allow the IBIS to function without meddling with the camera menu.
MY MAN CHRIS. Can you please, for the love of the macro shooters, use a different macro subject to test sharpness. At least use a dull brown colored coin that doesn't have such horrid reflections. Those insects were a much much much better and much easier to see subjects.
I have to agree. This coin is not really usable. Please invest in a microscopy test chart. A cheap one will for under $100 will do for macro lenses, while test charts high end microscopes can be more than $10,000.
@@victorlim5077 also seems it's made purely for mirrorless, for shorter flange distance. If they keep the 100mm at $500 I don't see why anyone would pick that over this 90mm. Either way, amazing options! Love it! They should make a 24-70 2.8 haha, I bet it would be amazing
@@coltoncyr2283 they're both just as sharp and their weight is almost identical - if this one were significantly lighter I'd be tempted to get it, but I'd rather get the extra working distance at minimum focus that the 100mm affords.
Didn't watch this video before buying the lens. I have enjoyed it a lot, but I did feel a bit cheated about the F2.8 at first, because the extent of the focus breathing makes the effective focal length a lot longer when zoomed in to 2x magnification, which means the F2.8 is effectively a significantly smaller aperture I think. In terms of the image brightness it only functions as F2.8 when focused on a distant subject.
That's normal, this isn't something with this lens, every macro lens will behave like this. Nikon even shows the effect with their macro lenses. When I set my Z 105mm to f/2.8 and focus at the closest possible point, 1:1 magnification, the Z8 will display it as f/4.5. Both the aperture and even focal length of any lens, is always measured at infinite focus, though the effect of aperture only really becomes apparent at macro level magnifications. The heavy focus breathing is what gives macro lenses their magnification ability.
I must tell you, absence of any of the coatings from the regular lens manufacturers means this thing accumulates a lot of dust and other disturbance very quickly and is not very easy to clean
Thank you so much Chris ! As a Laowa 65mm x2 Macro lens lover and everyday user (on Fujifilm X-H1), I'd love to know which system would be the best to squeeze the best of this gem ? I'm considering buying a new camera, but can't decide between high-res 61mp full frame, or the new Canon R7 (with its very demanding 32.5mp APS-C sensor), and if it will pair well with this lens. If you got some thoughts about it. :)
I managed to catch Tokina 100mm f/2.8 for Nikon F for $347 in a "opened box" condition and it has autofocus as well (for Nikon F models with AF motor), and with Nikon extension tubes I still keep my AF and magnification over 2x. This lens is really good, but there's numerous other options (be aware that Tokina 100mm may have severe LOCA, at least I found couple messages in reviews on 1-2 websites about that, in my case there's definitely LOCA at f/2.8, but nothing severe).
Obergruppenführer, the Tokina optics was great back in the days it was introduced, but there are better options nowadays. I believe you can find them in this channel.
Which lens is sharper, the Laowa 90mm or the 85mm? If you had to choose between those two lenses for a mirrorless camera, which one would you choose and why? Would it be nice if you do a video comparing those two lenses.
How do you compare the 90mm vs 100mm for overall sharpness. Comparing your videos it seems like the 100mm is sharper but has more vignetting than the 90mm. I’m excited they are both available with L mounts for my Sigma fp L. I want to try some macro photography but also use their superb sharpness for photographing my paintings which are 30x40 inches. Any advice on which might be better? Love your videos!!!!
Hi Chris, any thoughts on which Laowa macro lens would best suit the Canon R7 with its 32 mp crop sensor? I've watched all your excellent Laowa videos, but the R7 is more dense than the cameras you were able to use. Thanks in advance!😊
Christopher, any chance you could review the Sony E mount 50mm f/2.8 macro lens? It seems it's one of the only 50mm E mount lenses you haven't tested, and also one of the only E mount macro lenses you haven't tested.
I owned the Laowa 100mm f2.8 and satisfy with it, so is there any reason I should switch to this one? Seems only get shorter, weight is about the same.
Thanks for this review. I'm shopping for a macro lens to use with a Canon R5. I'm considering this lens and the Canon RF 100 macro. I'll likely use the lens for macro only. Tell me, when setting an exposure that is stopped down, say to F8 or so, is it possible to keep the viewfinder sufficiently bright with the R5 to see focus adjustments? Also, will the R5 meter show the impact of different exposure settings?
Sure are interesting lens. But I don't understand why the company LAOWA buy, He built a 90mm, 2x macro, when he already has the 100mm f/2.8 Macro 2x. In my opinion he could have built a 150mm f/2.8 macro 2x, I would have liked it better. The company Laowa, has many focal lengths for macro photography. I think if they would build a 150mm and a 200mm f/2.8 2x Ultra APO macro, that would be the best. I would buy them immediately. In one place I was disappointed, it was that I bought Online for the Nikon D800, the Super Macro 105mm 2x, . In the photos it showed the digital contacts for the f-Nikon system. Yesterday I received it, but it did not have the digital contacts behind the lens, and I was disappointed to the max. However with or without, I know how to set in the Nikon Menu the lens to be recognised by the D800. Thanks for this video review.
Just from it's looks it seems to have a decent long throw on the focus ring which I think is one important factor for a manual focus macro lens. How did you find the manual focus adjustment?
Yes the focus ring turns slightly more than 180 degrees as you go from 20.5cm to infinity. I've found it pretty ergonomic but I don't have any other manual lens to compare to. Zooming the display on the camera to see the subject bigger helps a lot.
Hi, I have the Sony A7RIV and Sony A7RIVA with 61 megapixels sensors, so not all Lenses are sharp enough and have the resolution power for theses Cameras, I hope you will upgrade to a higher megapixel Camera for your test reviews, thank you.
This was exactly the Lens Review I was waiting for from you :) What about the minimum Focus distance? How near do I have to get to my subject at 2:1 magnification? Will you do a comparision to the 100mm Laowa? Thinking about selling my 100 Laowa and getting this one just because of the smaller size.
Minimum focus distance (subject to sensor) on Laowa's website is 20.5 cm but minimum working distance (subject to lens) is about 7 cm, at 2x magnification. The itself lens is 12 cm long. The lens marking seen at 0:22 is 0.205 meters, ie 20.5 cm. QED ;-)
what is that phone-like soft image sharpening with artifacts? sony in camera processing? looks like photoshop sponge filter with gaussian blur ontop of it. my nikon camera looks worlds better at 100%.
This is a very sharp lens. Weather sealing would have been a major plus. Reverse-engineering AF for Canon and Nikon would make this lens a no-brainer, though that would likely greatly raise the price.
We need to stop manufacturers from giving lenses ridiculous names. Otherwise soon we will have a Laowa 150-600 mm LF SD LT SUPERZOOMER ZOOMERBOOMER f5.6 - 7.1....
