[Pentaxor]

To paraphrase farfisa from a similar 85/1.4 thread: If the Samyang 35/1.4 is as good as the FA31, I'll buy two and wear them on my nipples.

don't forget the chains and fishhooks !

[RichyX]

Once again, I'm not sure why those prestige lenses are all MF, but Nikon and Canon manage to produce some very high quality, fast, AF lenses at f1.2! Sure they are crazy expensive but these lenses DO have autofocus and work just fine. Just saying.

As far as I know the only f/1.2 Nikon do is a manual focus 50mm.

[Damian]

To paraphrase farfisa from a similar 85/1.4 thread: If the Samyang 35/1.4 is as good as the FA31, I'll buy two and wear them on my nipples.

Bad luck for those with three nipples. That gets more expensive then...

So there's going to be a nipple piercing party? I'm in! Thankfully I will still only have to purchase one as I lost one of my nipples in a freak tree climbing accident when I was 18. Ya for uni-nipple. I always thought of it as a handicap but I guess I'm at an advantage here.

[Egg Salad]

Pics or it didn't happen!

[Rory]

I didn't say anything about cost / performance of a 50mm lens. I said I wanted a 50mm FOV (field of view). Remember the Crop factor. My 50mm 1.4 give me an FOV of 75mm. Not the best in cramped spaces as I recently found out in my 3 day stay in the hospital with my wife after her c-section. But that's beside the point. A 35mm lens will give me the field of view of a 50mm lens. That is the focal length, or should I say field of view I liked best on film. Yes, a 50mm lens is easier to make then a 35mm lens, but again, I said nothing about that and it has no bearing on what I want other then the final price of the product.

Easy killer. Jeweltrail was talking about 50mm compairisons. I didn't quote it, so I'm sorry you felt defensive about it.

As far as I know the only f/1.2 Nikon do is a manual focus 50mm.

Correct. Nikon never made a 1.2 autofocus. Canon does make it, but it doesn't do so hot when you open it up that much. I don't know what the original poster of that comment was going for. They never made a 35mm f1.2 anyway. So again, it's not a fair comparison.

[Jewelltrail]

Rory;1413363]Easy killer. Jeweltrail was talking about 50mm compairisons. I didn't quote it, so I'm sorry you felt defensive about it.

Rory, I mentioned the 50mm 1.4 Sigma & the 30mm 1.4, both of which are under $500, both of which are excellent and AF. BTW, the 30 1.4 is closer to $400 though--the 50mm 1.4 near $500. It would take some doing for Samyang to outdo these excellent lenses.

[Damian]

Easy killer. Jeweltrail was talking about 50mm compairisons. I didn't quote it, so I'm sorry you felt defensive about it.

Sorry, I thought you were referring to my post. My mistake.

[nater]

Rory, I mentioned the 50mm 1.4 Sigma & the 30mm 1.4, both of which are under $500, both of which are excellent and AF. BTW, the 30 1.4 is closer to $400 though--the 50mm 1.4 near $500. It would take some doing for Samyang to outdo these excellent lenses.

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is APS-C only, not full-frame like the Samyang is (if the Samyang was APS-C, it would be smaller and cheaper). The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 lens is full-frame, but as we know, 50mm, being close to register distance, is a much simpler lens to create, and I'm not sure why it would be compared to a 35mm anyway?

The closest, least expensive AF full-frame lens I am aware of is the Sigma 28mm f/1.8, which is $330, but even for someone such as myself (who owns the Sigma 28mm) doesn't mean I am precluded from being potentially interested in a 35mm f/1.4 (anymore than owning the Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 and Chinon 45mm f/2.8 precluded me from being interested in the Voigtlander 40mm f/2).

[Rory]

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is APS-C only, not full-frame like the Samyang is (if the Samyang was APS-C, it would be smaller and cheaper). The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 lens is full-frame, but as we know, 50mm, being close to register distance, is a much simpler lens to create, and I'm not sure why it would be compared to a 35mm anyway?

The closest, least expensive AF full-frame lens I am aware of is the Sigma 28mm f/1.8, which is $330, but even for someone such as myself (who owns the Sigma 28mm) doesn't mean I am precluded from being potentially interested in a 35mm f/1.4 (anymore than owning the Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 and Chinon 45mm f/2.8 precluded me from being interested in the Voigtlander 40mm f/2).

Thank you. Exactly what I'm getting at.

Jewelltrail, I'm not denying that the Sigmas are solid performers. But there's issues with their AF. I realize that not everyone has issues with it; however, that is what happens when a third party company is trying to reverse engineer an AF system. That said, the Samyang 85mm compared to the Sigma 85mm is a better tit-for-tat comparison. Both are stellar performers. Both are critically acclaimed. One is around $300, one is around $900.

Damian, no worries. I didn't quote what I was referring to. It's obvious where it could have been mistaken.

[Lowell Goudge]

Damien

At what distance do you want the FOV of a 50mm lens?

I ask this for one reason. IF lenses achieve focus by changing focal length. As an example, my vivitar(samyang) 85mm F1.4 at minimum focus is only about 38-40 mm

[Jewelltrail]

nater: The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is APS-C only, not full-frame like the Samyang is (if the Samyang was APS-C, it would be smaller and cheaper).

Please tell me upon which FF Pentax DSLR you plan to mount the Samyang? Also, APS-c lenses do not necessarily equal less $$. The Da 70mm 2.4 has an average price (our database) of $464 vs the Fa 77 1.8 average price of $626, for a price difference of $162. The $162 is not attributed to your argument; no, it is attributed to the difference in speed of the 2 lenses.

nater: The Sigma 50mm f/1.4 lens is full-frame, but as we know, 50mm, being close to register distance, is a much simpler lens to create, and I'm not sure why it would be compared to a 35mm anyway?

My mention of the Sigma 50mm lens was not for direct comparison--since you omit my words in context, I'll reintroduce them here for you:

Jewelltrail: Though different focal lengths, Sigma is making an excellent 50mm lens right now--it is thought of highly by many: for example: Sigma 50mm f/1.4: A new standard?: Digital Photography Review I would spend $500 for a good copy, because in portraits, I could put the speed & AF to good use.

Throughout the thread, I maintain, IMO, the $500 price tag of the Samyang is too high. Surely my opinion has validity, because many others feel the same way. My quotation shows a lens I do see worth paying $500 for, and why. Reread the quote, and you will see no comparison of the Sigma 50mm 1.4 to the Samyang 35 1.4.

nater: The closest, least expensive AF full-frame lens I am aware of is the Sigma 28mm f/1.8, which is $330, but even for someone such as myself (who owns the Sigma 28mm) doesn't mean I am precluded from being potentially interested in a 35mm f/1.4 (anymore than owning the Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 and Chinon 45mm f/2.8 precluded me from being interested in the Voigtlander 40mm f/2).

No one here is "precluding" your interest in anything. If you desire to shoot FF with another system & Samyang, that is fine, but this is still Pentax forums, and my discussion, as well as my camera, stays within these parameters.

I discuss the Sigma 30mm 1.4 because it is proven. For example, here are 72 owner reviews from the Miranda site, with an average rating of 8.9 out of 10: FM Reviews - Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM BTW, the average reported price of the Sigma, in these 72 reviews, is $380. Now, if Samyang is going to make a $500 MF lens @ 35mm 1.4, IMO, as well as in many others I"m sure, it had better be kick ass'n better than the AF Sigma 30mm f 1.4.

Finally, I have an important question for you. Is your interest in the Samyang 35 f 1.4 hinging solely upon its FF utility? If so, upon which C or N body do you wish to mount it?

[Jewelltrail]

Rory: Thank you. Exactly what I'm getting at.

Rory, since you feel Nater's post is an "exact" reflection of your feelings, then please read my answer to him, right above--this will save me time.

Rory: Jewelltrail, I'm not denying that the Sigmas are solid performers. But there's issues with their AF. I realize that not everyone has issues with it; however, that is what happens when a third party company is trying to reverse engineer an AF system. That said, the Samyang 85mm compared to the Sigma 85mm is a better tit-for-tat comparison. Both are stellar performers. Both are critically acclaimed. One is around $300, one is around $900.

Rory, I offer this question to you: How much better do you think the AF will be on the Samyang MF 35 f1.4? Yes, the Samyang 85mm is a Homerun, which is precisely my point, throughout this thread. Let me re-word it. in a new way, here for clarity, as well as emphasis:

How much is the Samyang 85mm 1.4?
How much is the Samyang 35mm 1.4?

Once again, the only comparison with lenses I'm making is between the Sigma 30 1.4 and Samyang 35 1.4. A great comparison already made, by Pentaxor, is for the Fa 43 Af lens. On which lens would you more quickly lay your money down? Yeah, I know the Fa is a 43mm, not 35mm--but the Samyang is MF, the Fa AF, and the Fa is legendary in many a Pentaxian heart. How may Pentaxian hearts are harboring legendary status for any Samyang hitherto made?

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Please tell me upon which FF Pentax DSLR you plan to mount the Samyang?

You could use it with film SLRs. Do you really expect Samyang to sell the lens at a discount on Pentax just because Pentax doesn't have a full-frame SLR?

[Damian]

Damien

At what distance do you want the FOV of a 50mm lens?

I ask this for one reason. IF lenses achieve focus by changing focal length. As an example, my vivitar(samyang) 85mm F1.4 at minimum focus is only about 38-40 mm

Between 4 and 10 feet mostly. But also everything above and below, just not as much. I have a Tamron 90mm for closer work and for that matter my 50mm 1.4 is great for closer work too. Both the 90 and 50 are alos great for portraits from further away. I'm mostly just looking for something for general purpose use that can get close when need be but I don't have to stand back 15' to get a group of people in. When I shot film, 50mm was ideal for most general purpose use. I still enjoy using my 50mm for all sorts things, just it's FOV is a little narrow when used indoors.

[Rory]

Rory, I offer this question to you: How much better do you think the AF will be on the Samyang MF 35 f1.4? Yes, the Samyang 85mm is a Homerun, which is precisely my point, throughout this thread. Let me re-word it. in a new way, here for clarity, as well as emphasis:

How much is the Samyang 85mm 1.4?
How much is the Samyang 35mm 1.4?

Once again, the only comparison with lenses I'm making is between the Sigma 30 1.4 and Samyang 35 1.4. A great comparison already made, by Pentaxor, is for the Fa 43 Af lens. On which lens would you more quickly lay your money down? Yeah, I know the Fa is a 43mm, not 35mm--but the Samyang is MF, the Fa AF, and the Fa is legendary in many a Pentaxian heart. How may Pentaxian hearts are harboring legendary status for any Samyang hitherto made?

Ok, so the Samyang 85mm is $300, the Sigma 85mm is $900. The Samyang 35mm is (allegedly) $500, the Sigma 35mm is........uh, that's right, there isn't one.

I hate to say it again, but if the Samyang had AF, I can almost guarantee it wouldn't be in K-mount. MF, they just slap on the mount throw a chip that communicates aperture, and away they go. They're in it to make money. If they had AF, they would most likely focus on Canikon only. I understand that wouldn't disappoint you in the slightest. I'm not trying to argue with you to get you to like it. But scoffing at it because it's a $500 manual focus lens is a bit silly. Leica, Carl Zeiss, Voigtlander don't have AF. Nikon still makes AI-s lenses. They wouldn't be doing that if there weren't a market for it. And all of those manufacturers in that focal length are more than the Samyang.