Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Rimfiredude · 08-11-2015, 06:10 AM

Has anyone played with this lens "50mm .95" yet?

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by Rimfiredude; 08-11-2015 at 08:58 AM.

plantej · 08-11-2015, 08:18 AM

I have an A6000. But I am not technically savvy with it.

Rimfiredude · 08-11-2015, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by plantej

I have an A6000. But I am not technically savvy with it.

I mean the lens. 50mm .95.

alamo5000 · 08-11-2015, 12:22 PM

What kind of lens is it? It would be fun to play with an f.95 lens...

**savoche** · 08-11-2015, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by alamo5000

What kind of lens is it? It would be fun to play with an f.95 lens...

B&H link: Mitakon Zhongyi 50mm f/0.95 Lens for Sony E Mount MTK50MF095BK

coboren3 · 08-11-2015, 12:30 PM

Is 0.95 f-Stop practical? Working exposure settings being what they are, a combination of quick shutter speeds and smaller f-Stops, where would there be a need to shoot wide open (@ f0.95). Depth of field would be very shallow in low light levels to use the faster shutter speeds.

fuent104 · 08-11-2015, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by coboren3

Is 0.95 f-Stop practical? Working exposure settings being what they are, a combination of quick shutter speeds and smaller f-Stops, where would there be a need to shoot wide open (@ f0.95). Depth of field would be very shallow in low light levels to use the faster shutter speeds.

It would be practical in low light. Sometimes you just need a wider aperture.

coboren3 · 08-11-2015, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by fuent104

It would be practical in low light. Sometimes you just need a wider aperture.

A 55 mm lens set to 0.95 (for the sake argument let's say 1) f Stop and focused @10 feet has a depth of field of 4.56 inches (a calculated value). I would think that this would be very noticeable even in a low light situation. Most of us would want a bit more sharpness and stop down to f2, which is an f -Stop setting on most other 55 mm lens. So if f2 is used why buy a $850.00 lens that another less expensive lens can provide the same function, that is shoot at f2. If shutter speed is an issue, (example ISO 800 @ f1 = 1/1000 sec. noise notwithstanding) f2 yields 1/250 sec. should be sufficient.

Blue · 08-11-2015, 06:40 PM

Originally posted by coboren3

A 55 mm lens set to 0.95 (for the sake argument let's say 1) f Stop and focused @10 feet has a depth of field of 4.56 inches (a calculated value). I would think that this would be very noticeable even in a low light situation. Most of us would want a bit more sharpness and stop down to f2, which is an f -Stop setting on most other 55 mm lens. So if f2 is used why buy a $850.00 lens that another less expensive lens can provide the same function, that is shoot at f2. If shutter speed is an issue, (example ISO 800 @ f1 = 1/1000 sec. noise notwithstanding) f2 yields 1/250 sec. should be sufficient.

There is a big difference in the amount of light hitting the sensor/film plane with an F1.4 lens compared to an F2 lens. Like wise there is a lot more light hitting the sensor/film plane with an f1.2 lens compared to an f1.4. The reason for that is that it is not linear!

Winder · 08-11-2015, 07:00 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Rimfiredude

Has anyone played with this lens "50mm .95" yet?

Using Sony A7 II + Mitakon 50mm F0.95 for Wedding Photography – Wedding Photography Melbourne

**jpzk** · 08-11-2015, 07:35 PM

I sure would like to "play" with such a lens !

@winder:

Very nice images taken with that f0.95 lens !

For comparison purposes only (not trying to invade the thread) ...
I had read about the film "Barry Lyndon" a while back and, to my understanding, the "operator" was someone by the name of filmmaker Stanley Kubrick who had in fact modified a made-for-NASA f0.7 lens:
Here is a short clip about this lens and the film itself:

You Tube

and a still (below) of a candlelit shot from that same movie:

So, I suppose there is a need, albeit limited to a very few, to use a very fast lens such as the one you are discussing here for specific purposes.

fuent104 · 08-11-2015, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by coboren3

A 55 mm lens set to 0.95 (for the sake argument let's say 1) f Stop and focused @10 feet has a depth of field of 4.56 inches (a calculated value). I would think that this would be very noticeable even in a low light situation. Most of us would want a bit more sharpness and stop down to f2, which is an f -Stop setting on most other 55 mm lens. So if f2 is used why buy a $850.00 lens that another less expensive lens can provide the same function, that is shoot at f2. If shutter speed is an issue, (example ISO 800 @ f1 = 1/1000 sec. noise notwithstanding) f2 yields 1/250 sec. should be sufficient.

The situation you are describing is not really low light, if you can shoot at 1/250th at f/2. Ive been in situations in which ISO 5000 and f2 resulted in a 1/30 shutter speed, which was not enough. At f/1, I could have shot at 1/120, or maybe 2500 ISO. depth of field isn't always the biggest concern. Sometimes you just need to have enough light to expose an image.

---------- Post added 08-11-15 at 08:00 PM ----------

Also, who cares what other people buy? If there's a tool out there that someone is happy to buy, why does anyone else care? If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.

rawr · 08-11-2015, 08:47 PM

Lenstip.com have reviewed the Mitakon 35mm f0.95, Mitakon Creator 35 mm f/2 (full frame), and the interesting Mitakon Speedmaster 85 mm f/1.2 (full-frame).

They seem well put together lenses but not optically remarkable in any way. But give the manufacturer a few more years, and I bet the vII versions of these will be better.

Rimfiredude · 08-12-2015, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by Winder

Using Sony A7 II + Mitakon 50mm F0.95 for Wedding Photography – Wedding Photography Melbourne

Your captures make me want to purchase an A7 just so I can use the lens.

normhead · 08-12-2015, 07:57 AM

The images look great. I've always enjoyed natural light photography... so one of those would be nice, although it's only a stop better than the 55 ƒ1.4, which is almost a stop better than my 50 1.8. I think were I doing such images, I'd try the DA* first. After all, using an ƒ.95 wide open on FF is going to be two stops less DoF compared to 55 ƒ1.4 on APS-c.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DFA 50mm from B&H: US$342.95	drypenn	Pentax Price Watch	2	01-23-2015 12:43 PM
Pentax DA 50mm f1.8 lens for $129.95 and free shipping	bmw_328ci	Pentax Price Watch	3	12-12-2014 01:34 PM
Full Frame Mitakon 50mm f/0.95 lens to be unveiled on April 20. Costs $799!	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	17	04-24-2014 05:30 AM
GH2 test : World Premiere !!! SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE T0.95 / 50mm	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	01-02-2012 06:12 PM
The Pier: Test shots with Noktor F0.95 50mm	TOUGEFC	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	6	06-26-2010 01:40 PM

08-11-2015, 08:18 AM	#2
plantej Veteran Member Join Date: May 2015 Location: Pacific Northwest USA Photos: Albums Posts: 583	I have an A6000. But I am not technically savvy with it.

08-11-2015, 08:59 AM	#3
Rimfiredude Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Washington Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,176 Original Poster	Originally posted by plantej I have an A6000. But I am not technically savvy with it. I mean the lens. 50mm .95.

08-11-2015, 12:22 PM	#4
alamo5000 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 2,962	What kind of lens is it? It would be fun to play with an f.95 lens...

08-11-2015, 12:29 PM	#5
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	Originally posted by alamo5000 What kind of lens is it? It would be fun to play with an f.95 lens... B&H link: Mitakon Zhongyi 50mm f/0.95 Lens for Sony E Mount MTK50MF095BK

08-11-2015, 12:30 PM	#6
coboren3 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 66	Is 0.95 f-Stop practical? Working exposure settings being what they are, a combination of quick shutter speeds and smaller f-Stops, where would there be a need to shoot wide open (@ f0.95). Depth of field would be very shallow in low light levels to use the faster shutter speeds.

08-11-2015, 03:57 PM	#7
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	Originally posted by coboren3 Is 0.95 f-Stop practical? Working exposure settings being what they are, a combination of quick shutter speeds and smaller f-Stops, where would there be a need to shoot wide open (@ f0.95). Depth of field would be very shallow in low light levels to use the faster shutter speeds. It would be practical in low light. Sometimes you just need a wider aperture.

08-11-2015, 05:20 PM	#8
coboren3 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 66	Originally posted by fuent104 It would be practical in low light. Sometimes you just need a wider aperture. A 55 mm lens set to 0.95 (for the sake argument let's say 1) f Stop and focused @10 feet has a depth of field of 4.56 inches (a calculated value). I would think that this would be very noticeable even in a low light situation. Most of us would want a bit more sharpness and stop down to f2, which is an f -Stop setting on most other 55 mm lens. So if f2 is used why buy a $850.00 lens that another less expensive lens can provide the same function, that is shoot at f2. If shutter speed is an issue, (example ISO 800 @ f1 = 1/1000 sec. noise notwithstanding) f2 yields 1/250 sec. should be sufficient.

08-11-2015, 06:40 PM	#9
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by coboren3 A 55 mm lens set to 0.95 (for the sake argument let's say 1) f Stop and focused @10 feet has a depth of field of 4.56 inches (a calculated value). I would think that this would be very noticeable even in a low light situation. Most of us would want a bit more sharpness and stop down to f2, which is an f -Stop setting on most other 55 mm lens. So if f2 is used why buy a $850.00 lens that another less expensive lens can provide the same function, that is shoot at f2. If shutter speed is an issue, (example ISO 800 @ f1 = 1/1000 sec. noise notwithstanding) f2 yields 1/250 sec. should be sufficient. There is a big difference in the amount of light hitting the sensor/film plane with an F1.4 lens compared to an F2 lens. Like wise there is a lot more light hitting the sensor/film plane with an f1.2 lens compared to an f1.4. The reason for that is that it is not linear!

08-11-2015, 07:00 PM - 1 Like	#10
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by Rimfiredude Has anyone played with this lens "50mm .95" yet? Using Sony A7 II + Mitakon 50mm F0.95 for Wedding Photography – Wedding Photography Melbourne

08-11-2015, 07:58 PM	#12
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	Originally posted by coboren3 A 55 mm lens set to 0.95 (for the sake argument let's say 1) f Stop and focused @10 feet has a depth of field of 4.56 inches (a calculated value). I would think that this would be very noticeable even in a low light situation. Most of us would want a bit more sharpness and stop down to f2, which is an f -Stop setting on most other 55 mm lens. So if f2 is used why buy a $850.00 lens that another less expensive lens can provide the same function, that is shoot at f2. If shutter speed is an issue, (example ISO 800 @ f1 = 1/1000 sec. noise notwithstanding) f2 yields 1/250 sec. should be sufficient. The situation you are describing is not really low light, if you can shoot at 1/250th at f/2. Ive been in situations in which ISO 5000 and f2 resulted in a 1/30 shutter speed, which was not enough. At f/1, I could have shot at 1/120, or maybe 2500 ISO. depth of field isn't always the biggest concern. Sometimes you just need to have enough light to expose an image. ---------- Post added 08-11-15 at 08:00 PM ---------- Also, who cares what other people buy? If there's a tool out there that someone is happy to buy, why does anyone else care? If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.

08-11-2015, 08:47 PM	#13
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Lenstip.com have reviewed the Mitakon 35mm f0.95, Mitakon Creator 35 mm f/2 (full frame), and the interesting Mitakon Speedmaster 85 mm f/1.2 (full-frame). They seem well put together lenses but not optically remarkable in any way. But give the manufacturer a few more years, and I bet the vII versions of these will be better.

08-12-2015, 05:10 AM	#14
Rimfiredude Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Washington Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,176 Original Poster	Originally posted by Winder Using Sony A7 II + Mitakon 50mm F0.95 for Wedding Photography – Wedding Photography Melbourne Your captures make me want to purchase an A7 just so I can use the lens.

08-12-2015, 07:57 AM	#15
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	The images look great. I've always enjoyed natural light photography... so one of those would be nice, although it's only a stop better than the 55 ƒ1.4, which is almost a stop better than my 50 1.8. I think were I doing such images, I'd try the DA* first. After all, using an ƒ.95 wide open on FF is going to be two stops less DoF compared to 55 ƒ1.4 on APS-c.