REVIEW: Samyang 85mm F1.4 Aspherical IF

Entropy · 11-02-2010, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by RichyX

That's good to know.

I've seen images of the lens for other bodies and the A seems to be missing.

I believe on Nikon, you just choose the smallest aperture, it isn't explicitly marked as "A".

Canon has a completely different aperture control system, so I assume they also don't have an "A" position on their auto-aperture lenses.

So the "A" position on a lens is a Pentaxism.

Docrwm · 11-05-2010, 05:47 PM

The lens definitely has an A setting.

CY_OH · 12-10-2010, 04:28 AM

Just bought this lens in Seoul, Korea at Namdaemun for 360,000 Won (US$320).

Aperture ring has to be at A position and camera in Manual mode for aperture control and display.

One question I have is, where is the serial number on the lens? I could not find it anywhere.

**Lowell Goudge** · 12-10-2010, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by CY_OH

Just bought this lens in Seoul, Korea at Namdaemun for 360,000 Won (US$320).

Aperture ring has to be at A position and camera in Manual mode for aperture control and display.

One question I have is, where is the serial number on the lens? I could not find it anywhere.

It appears that none of the Samyang lenses have serial numbers. I could not find on on either my Vovitar 85F1.4 or the 8mm fisheye (pro optic from adorama)

CY_OH · 12-10-2010, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

It appears that none of the Samyang lenses have serial numbers. I could not find on on either my Vovitar 85F1.4 or the 8mm fisheye (pro optic from adorama)

Thanks. Mine is actually the Polar branded version but it should be the same.

RichyX · 03-31-2011, 06:19 PM

How much travel does the focus ring have?
Compared to a A 50mm f/1.4 or FA 35mm f/2 for example?

Laurentiu Cristofor · 03-31-2011, 08:46 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

It appears that none of the Samyang lenses have serial numbers.

That puzzled me too - I think these are the only lenses I've seen without serial numbers. Cost savings? No need to print or engrave a different number?

victorshoup · 06-17-2011, 09:27 PM

Just want to chime in...I own this lens, and it is nice. But compared to older Pentax manual lenses, the "throw" of the focus ring is not so large, and it is a lot harder to nail the focus, because of this.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 06-17-2011, 10:28 PM

For some reason, I find 85/1.4 lenses hard to focus, no matter the throw. I can focus fast 50s all right, but for some reason I always have more trouble with 85s, even when stopped down.

**tranq78** · 06-17-2011, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by victorshoup

Just want to chime in...I own this lens, and it is nice. But compared to older Pentax manual lenses, the "throw" of the focus ring is not so large, and it is a lot harder to nail the focus, because of this.

I'd like to comment on the focus throw.

Let's try to make an "apples to apples" comparison. The closest Pentax comparable to the Samyang is the A*85mm f1.4. The A*85/1.4 is the most modern manual focus 85/1.4 Pentax lens with an "A" setting, which is just like the Samyang/VS1. The focus throws are pretty similar on both these lenses, so neither one is better than the other's. They're both pretty much even (the Pentax's is a touch longer and that info is in my original report, but I don't think it matters much in everyday usage).

If you want to make an "apples to oranges" comparison, like comparing the Samyang/VS1 to something like the SMC Takumar 85mm f1.9, it's still not really clear if older glass has the advantage.

The Samyang has a larger diameter for a 1/3 turn focus throw. The Tak has a smaller body diameter but it has a 3/4 turn focus throw.

So here's the interesting part. When you measure off the actual distance of the focus throws, the Samyang's is approximately 9 cm versus the Tak's at about 7.5 to 8 cm. In other words the Samyang actually has a slightly longer focus throw. The Tak "feels" like it has a longer throw but that's actually an illusion because of the smaller diameter body.

Furthermore the Tak doesn't have the "A" setting which is an inconvenience (+1 Samyang).

I've got both the Samyang 85/1.4 and the SMC Takumar 85/1.9 in front of me right now along with a measuring tape.

And then there will be those that will just complain about long focus throws because it makes accurate focusing more slow.

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

For some reason, I find 85/1.4 lenses hard to focus, no matter the throw. I can focus fast 50s all right, but for some reason I always have more trouble with 85s, even when stopped down.

Ah, you are experiencing the effect of focal length and shallow depth of field. Remember, the longer the focal length at a given f-stop, the shallower the DoF and therefore the harder it is to focus. There is a difference between a 50/1.4 and a 85/1.4. If you haven't done so suggest you get one of those Katz-eye focusing thingies, it will really help nail the focus.

So does anyone know what the fuss is all about regarding the SMC Takumar 85mm f1.9 and f1.8 lenses? I just got the SMC Tak 85/1.9 recently to see for myself, haven't taken any pics with it yet. And why doesn't the SMC Takumar 135mm f2.5 have the same reputation? If I apply the same logic it should be as well loved as the A*135mm f1.8, no?

excanonfd · 06-18-2011, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

For some reason, I find 85/1.4 lenses hard to focus, no matter the throw. I can focus fast 50s all right, but for some reason I always have more trouble with 85s, even when stopped down.

But this lens can't be stopped down, at least not like a preset lens can. This lens behaves like an M lens; diaphragm stays wide open, closes momentarily when the shutter release is fully depressed or when the green button is pressed to meter. Regardless of the lens' aperture setting, lens is wide open while focusing. I thought the minuscule dof might make focusing difficult but in the short time I've had this lens (one week), focusing was surprisingly easy and accurate. It might be a different story if and when I shoot portraits with this lens.

Originally posted by victorshoup

Just want to chime in...I own this lens, and it is nice. But compared to older Pentax manual lenses, the "throw" of the focus ring is not so large, and it is a lot harder to nail the focus, because of this.

Certainly. this lens' focus throw is shorter than my A50/1.7 but focus throw of 120~150 degrees seem to be the norm for the recent vintage of MF lenses. Actually, I quite prefer this amount of focus throw; long enough to accurately focus without the annoyance I sometimes feel with some lens' focus ring seeming to turn endlessly.

Thanks,

Pentaxor · 06-18-2011, 08:31 AM

personally, it would have helped if the Samyang has a much longer throw and close-focus. I struggled with the lens compared to my FA135 which has a shorter throw.

victorshoup · 06-18-2011, 07:11 PM

As it happens, I've just ordered a Super Takumar 85/1.9 from a seller on these forums. I'm looking forward to see if I have more luck focusing with that one. I have an old off-brand 135 that is really, really easy to focus compared to the Samyang 85/1.4...the feel of the focus ring is completely different.

Well, maybe I also just need much more practice on manual focus in general...

victorshoup · 06-19-2011, 04:53 AM

tranq78 raised an interesting issue. What matters more: the *angle* of the focus throw
or its *length* (which takes into account the diameter of the focus ring)? I could see arguments both ways, but I wonder if anyone has any particular theory or experience to judge? I did a quick google search, and didn't find any satisfying answers.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 06-19-2011, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by tranq78

Ah, you are experiencing the effect of focal length and shallow depth of field. Remember, the longer the focal length at a given f-stop, the shallower the DoF and therefore the harder it is to focus. There is a difference between a 50/1.4 and a 85/1.4.

No, it's not that. You forget that DOF gets shallower the closer you are to the subject and with 50s you have to be closer to get the same framing you get from an 85, so DOF will be thinner as well. For my use case, I get comparable DOF from a 50 and an 85 - differences are minor and are anyway smaller than my focusing errors with the 85.

One problem is that the 85/1.4 lenses are heavier so they are harder to handhold and any shake gets accentuated by the longer working distance. It may also be that I tend to frame even wider with my 85 because of the 1m MFD, so I then get less magnification and I make more focusing mistakes.

Originally posted by tranq78

If you haven't done so suggest you get one of those Katz-eye focusing thingies, it will really help nail the focus.

I use the magnifier loupe instead (O-ME53). I have little interest in the focusing screens because I also need to manually focus slow lenses (f/5.6+) and precision focusing screens get dimmer faster than the factory screen. The loupe works for all lenses.

06-17-2011, 11:06 PM	#130
tranq78 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,005 Original Poster	Originally posted by victorshoup Just want to chime in...I own this lens, and it is nice. But compared to older Pentax manual lenses, the "throw" of the focus ring is not so large, and it is a lot harder to nail the focus, because of this. I'd like to comment on the focus throw. Let's try to make an "apples to apples" comparison. The closest Pentax comparable to the Samyang is the A85mm f1.4. The A85/1.4 is the most modern manual focus 85/1.4 Pentax lens with an "A" setting, which is just like the Samyang/VS1. The focus throws are pretty similar on both these lenses, so neither one is better than the other's. They're both pretty much even (the Pentax's is a touch longer and that info is in my original report, but I don't think it matters much in everyday usage). If you want to make an "apples to oranges" comparison, like comparing the Samyang/VS1 to something like the SMC Takumar 85mm f1.9, it's still not really clear if older glass has the advantage. The Samyang has a larger diameter for a 1/3 turn focus throw. The Tak has a smaller body diameter but it has a 3/4 turn focus throw. So here's the interesting part. When you measure off the actual distance of the focus throws, the Samyang's is approximately 9 cm versus the Tak's at about 7.5 to 8 cm. In other words the Samyang actually has a slightly longer focus throw. The Tak "feels" like it has a longer throw but that's actually an illusion because of the smaller diameter body. Furthermore the Tak doesn't have the "A" setting which is an inconvenience (+1 Samyang). I've got both the Samyang 85/1.4 and the SMC Takumar 85/1.9 in front of me right now along with a measuring tape. And then there will be those that will just complain about long focus throws because it makes accurate focusing more slow. Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor For some reason, I find 85/1.4 lenses hard to focus, no matter the throw. I can focus fast 50s all right, but for some reason I always have more trouble with 85s, even when stopped down. Ah, you are experiencing the effect of focal length and shallow depth of field. Remember, the longer the focal length at a given f-stop, the shallower the DoF and therefore the harder it is to focus. There is a difference between a 50/1.4 and a 85/1.4. If you haven't done so suggest you get one of those Katz-eye focusing thingies, it will really help nail the focus. So does anyone know what the fuss is all about regarding the SMC Takumar 85mm f1.9 and f1.8 lenses? I just got the SMC Tak 85/1.9 recently to see for myself, haven't taken any pics with it yet. And why doesn't the SMC Takumar 135mm f2.5 have the same reputation? If I apply the same logic it should be as well loved as the A135mm f1.8, no? Last edited by tranq78; 06-17-2011 at 11:11 PM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Rokinon/Samyang 85mm - still good?	dugrant153	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	02-15-2011 12:37 AM
Samyang 85mm vs DA* 55mm at F1.4	gnaztee	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	10-29-2010 02:21 PM
Portrait with new Samyang 85mm f1.4	James S	Post Your Photos!	4	04-20-2009 03:23 PM
Samyang 85mm f1.4?	mikengstrom	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	56	01-10-2009 05:51 PM

11-02-2010, 02:39 PM	#121
Entropy Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Owego, NY Posts: 976	Originally posted by RichyX That's good to know. I've seen images of the lens for other bodies and the A seems to be missing. I believe on Nikon, you just choose the smallest aperture, it isn't explicitly marked as "A". Canon has a completely different aperture control system, so I assume they also don't have an "A" position on their auto-aperture lenses. So the "A" position on a lens is a Pentaxism.

11-05-2010, 05:47 PM	#122
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	The lens definitely has an A setting.

12-10-2010, 04:28 AM	#123
CY_OH New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 13	Just bought this lens in Seoul, Korea at Namdaemun for 360,000 Won (US$320). Aperture ring has to be at A position and camera in Manual mode for aperture control and display. One question I have is, where is the serial number on the lens? I could not find it anywhere.

12-10-2010, 08:24 AM	#124
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,886	Originally posted by CY_OH Just bought this lens in Seoul, Korea at Namdaemun for 360,000 Won (US$320). Aperture ring has to be at A position and camera in Manual mode for aperture control and display. One question I have is, where is the serial number on the lens? I could not find it anywhere. It appears that none of the Samyang lenses have serial numbers. I could not find on on either my Vovitar 85F1.4 or the 8mm fisheye (pro optic from adorama)

12-10-2010, 10:14 AM	#125
CY_OH New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 13	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge It appears that none of the Samyang lenses have serial numbers. I could not find on on either my Vovitar 85F1.4 or the 8mm fisheye (pro optic from adorama) Thanks. Mine is actually the Polar branded version but it should be the same.

03-31-2011, 06:19 PM	#126
RichyX Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 84	How much travel does the focus ring have? Compared to a A 50mm f/1.4 or FA 35mm f/2 for example?

03-31-2011, 08:46 PM	#127
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge It appears that none of the Samyang lenses have serial numbers. That puzzled me too - I think these are the only lenses I've seen without serial numbers. Cost savings? No need to print or engrave a different number?

06-17-2011, 09:27 PM	#128
victorshoup New Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 12	Just want to chime in...I own this lens, and it is nice. But compared to older Pentax manual lenses, the "throw" of the focus ring is not so large, and it is a lot harder to nail the focus, because of this.

06-17-2011, 10:28 PM	#129
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	For some reason, I find 85/1.4 lenses hard to focus, no matter the throw. I can focus fast 50s all right, but for some reason I always have more trouble with 85s, even when stopped down.

06-18-2011, 12:07 AM	#131
excanonfd Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 1,421	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor For some reason, I find 85/1.4 lenses hard to focus, no matter the throw. I can focus fast 50s all right, but for some reason I always have more trouble with 85s, even when stopped down. But this lens can't be stopped down, at least not like a preset lens can. This lens behaves like an M lens; diaphragm stays wide open, closes momentarily when the shutter release is fully depressed or when the green button is pressed to meter. Regardless of the lens' aperture setting, lens is wide open while focusing. I thought the minuscule dof might make focusing difficult but in the short time I've had this lens (one week), focusing was surprisingly easy and accurate. It might be a different story if and when I shoot portraits with this lens. Originally posted by victorshoup Just want to chime in...I own this lens, and it is nice. But compared to older Pentax manual lenses, the "throw" of the focus ring is not so large, and it is a lot harder to nail the focus, because of this. Certainly. this lens' focus throw is shorter than my A50/1.7 but focus throw of 120~150 degrees seem to be the norm for the recent vintage of MF lenses. Actually, I quite prefer this amount of focus throw; long enough to accurately focus without the annoyance I sometimes feel with some lens' focus ring seeming to turn endlessly. Thanks,

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-18-2011, 08:31 AM	#132
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	personally, it would have helped if the Samyang has a much longer throw and close-focus. I struggled with the lens compared to my FA135 which has a shorter throw.

06-18-2011, 07:11 PM	#133
victorshoup New Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 12	As it happens, I've just ordered a Super Takumar 85/1.9 from a seller on these forums. I'm looking forward to see if I have more luck focusing with that one. I have an old off-brand 135 that is really, really easy to focus compared to the Samyang 85/1.4...the feel of the focus ring is completely different. Well, maybe I also just need much more practice on manual focus in general...

06-19-2011, 04:53 AM	#134
victorshoup New Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 12	tranq78 raised an interesting issue. What matters more: the angle of the focus throw or its length (which takes into account the diameter of the focus ring)? I could see arguments both ways, but I wonder if anyone has any particular theory or experience to judge? I did a quick google search, and didn't find any satisfying answers.

06-19-2011, 11:58 AM	#135
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by tranq78 Ah, you are experiencing the effect of focal length and shallow depth of field. Remember, the longer the focal length at a given f-stop, the shallower the DoF and therefore the harder it is to focus. There is a difference between a 50/1.4 and a 85/1.4. No, it's not that. You forget that DOF gets shallower the closer you are to the subject and with 50s you have to be closer to get the same framing you get from an 85, so DOF will be thinner as well. For my use case, I get comparable DOF from a 50 and an 85 - differences are minor and are anyway smaller than my focusing errors with the 85. One problem is that the 85/1.4 lenses are heavier so they are harder to handhold and any shake gets accentuated by the longer working distance. It may also be that I tend to frame even wider with my 85 because of the 1m MFD, so I then get less magnification and I make more focusing mistakes. Originally posted by tranq78 If you haven't done so suggest you get one of those Katz-eye focusing thingies, it will really help nail the focus. I use the magnifier loupe instead (O-ME53). I have little interest in the focusing screens because I also need to manually focus slow lenses (f/5.6+) and precision focusing screens get dimmer faster than the factory screen. The loupe works for all lenses.