Originally posted by Zygonyx My A*135/1.7 costed me less than half this new 1.4 , and is already too often laying on the shelves
Well, it's f/1.8
It's one of the A Star lenses I didn't buy when the price was not so crazy (along with the 200mm Macro), and that probably I will never own...
I think there is still a use for such fast lenses, even for the f/1.4 Chinese monster, it's just different than in film times.
Those looking for strong separation between planes and indistinct, creamy background would still profit from this kind of objectives, even if the sensor delivers very good high-ISO performance.
I've used with satisfaction one of my two old f/1.8 135mm lenses, and I'm even more satisfied by the quality of a Tokina-made Soligor C/D 2/135mm.
I guess I would be thrilled by the performance of your A Star... but we can't have everything in life
I will keep my eyes open for a second hand Samyang 2/135mm (which, sharpness wise, should trump the A*) or a Laowa 105mm Smooth Trans Focus. Both would be a great addiction to my "portrait lens" line-up.
I used the words "sharpness wise" instead of a less specific quality like "better". I'm quite sure the Samyang would be sharper at the same aperture, but I'm not sure at all it would be generically better. The more I use fast vintage lenses and I enjoy their qualities, the more I understand that the value of a lens is given more by something very subjective like its overall rendition, than by "numbers".
I value "3D pop" and OOF rendition more than absolute sharpness, and I've been very impressed by what the subjects of my portraits care for, and what they don't even notice.
Sometimes I might pixel peep on screen at 100% magnification, or look at a print through a loupe, but those with no technical awareness go straight for the picture with the smoother, creamier background, if the subject/s look more or less the same.
Given the ironic comments I often read about super fast lenses, I can give myself only two answers.
The first is that some photographers might have different tastes and priorities.
The second is that a few of them could be just commenting "in theory", basing their opinions on "numbers", and maybe some of them have never shot pictures with such beasts, let alone having the time and the technical background to know a lens, get around its shortcomings, and find what it can give if properly used.
Sometimes what looks like plain old common sense proves to be highly contentious, in the real world.
Cheers
Paolo
Last edited by cyberjunkie; 11-15-2017 at 05:39 AM.