About the auto focus, are you just watching it on the back LCD? On a bigger screen it's clear that SONY keeps up better, but as you said, not scientific.
Basically, I agree very much with this test! I do, however, agree with some of the other commenters that the Sony lens DID focus a bit more accurately and smoothly than the Samyang. Is that worth the additional price of the Sony?... Well, NOT for MOST photographers and videographers. BUT IF SOMEONE KNOWS THEY NEED THAT SMOOTH FOCUS, YES GET THE SONY. The shot into the sun (something I wouldn't ever do normally) again the Sony had better contrast. Again, not worth the cost for me. I'm IMPRESSED with the Samyang!
@@DrBluntPK I was considering Sony's 70-200 f/4 because I also have the 85, but Tamron is due to launch a telephoto zoom soon and who knows. Maybe it'll be one of those.
I found barely used (looked as just unpacked) Samyang 35 - 1.4 and 14 - 2.8 with update adapter, all together for 950€ (around 1050$), and just ordered today Samyang 85 - 1.4 for 510€ - 555$ (vat excluded), I'm sure that 85 GM ISN'T worth alone as these 3 Samyang lenses for almost the same price...
These lenses are primarily aimed at portrait photography, but you didn't take any portraits. It's important to understand how the lenses resolve facial features, how they render bokeh, how well they establish separation between a foreground subject and the background at different apertures, etc. The color cast is a significant issue if you do portrait photography, because you don't want someone's skin to have a yellow cast to it (as with the Samyang lens), nor do you want to have to color correct every photo you take. Based on this review, I can not tell how these portrait lenses compare for portrait photography.
It's pretty easy to set up a color correction profile which you just apply to all shots taken with the lens. In any case, if you're shooting professional portraits it's highly unlikely that you won't be doing any color correction on images from a shoot, and you'd only need to correct one of these and then copy that across to the rest of the images (like one would do for pretty much any portrait shooting session). I agree on the other points, though I don't expect that the lenses would be wildly different here (based on the flower photo).
Emanuele Farnesi how so? He doesn’t shy away from detailing the negatives of the samyang, but makes the fair point that sometimes you get diminishing returns by shelling out for high end lenses. For the price of that Sony lens you could get two or three cheaper but still high quality lenses. Sure those lenses may not be the ultimate best lenses in their focal length, but if they’re good enough for what you need to do then clearly it makes more sense to buy them over one very expensive lens. If you are one of the few photographers/cinematographers who will actually benefit from the more expensive lens, then it might be worth shelling out the extra cash. For the rest of us, probably not worth it.
@@TheWhyteBear It's always the case that you pay more for a premium product. But that's not the issue here. There are lots of cheaper alternatives to Sony's lenses, with various trade-offs. The question is how do those trade-offs affect the people who use the lenses for the things they've been optimized for. An 85 1.4 is optimized for portraits. 85 puts you at the right distance to easily direct a model, while working in just enough background to fill the frame with the model's eye at the 2/3 vertical line. The 1.4 really only makes sense if you want to shoot in low light, or if you want significant subject / background separation. Otherwise, you're just adding size and weight to the lens. So this is a lens aimed at portrait shooters. Which is why tests of the lens really should reflect how it is used - in portrait shooting.
I’ve watched at least a dozen reviews of the samyang/rokinon, and I think yours is my favorite so far. You mentioned a few times that your tests weren’t “scientific”, but that’s what made them great. If you’re not certain which one is focusing faster, or which one has the more accurate colors, that tells me everything I need to know. 👍
The only time I have noticed a lens producing better color is with astrophotography. This was the difference between a Samyang and a Sigma Art, the Art brought out more color in the milky way. With that said the Samyang was just as sharp as the Sigma Art, Samyang/Rokinon are amazing for the price. Also some lenses produce more contrast and more contrast means more saturation.
the problem on 17-28 is the range. you bought wide lens to have widest as possible. and 28mm being the longest focal length is quite no good compared to 35mm. you bought 16-35 probably to have just 1 lens with you. you got 16wide and 35 tighter shot. that's nice range. if you do not need longer focal length, then maybe a prime lens would be better like 14mm samyang 2.8, or laowa 15mm f2.. :)
Every. Single. Comparison. Comes out to have the same result. “The (third party) lens is 90% the same lens as the Sony but lacks (buttons/build quality/image quality issue at some end). Still, it costs 33%-50% of the Sony. If you absolutely need the best of the best because photography makes you $60,000/yr or more, buy the Sony. Otherwise, buy the (third party) and save the money for another lens or a photography trip/courses.” Every. Single. Comparison. .. Most differences are fixed in post in 10 seconds (WB/Lens Profile). if you’re here and you don’t make $60,000+ from photography, buy the third party zoom, the third party prime, or a cheaper Sony prime in your desired range.
The 85 F1.8 is just as sharp but the bokeh is quite busy in places. The Samyang bokeh is much smoother and less distracting in portraits. Whether that is an issue for you is down to personal preference. I had the Samyang and the Sony 1.8 at the same time to compare them and returned the Sony.
@@joshblank1 both on a par with each other really especially given the shallower DOF at 1.4 vs 1.8. The Samyang snaps onto the eye and tracks it no problem. For posed portraits it's 9 times out of 10 hitting the pupil focus and not the eyelashes even. I have a 2 year old son and it'll track his eye when he's moving towards me in a pretty erratic way! If I'd noticed AF being better on the Sony I probably would have chosen it even given the worse bokeh but the Samyang AF for photography is excellent. Can't comment on video AF as I don't do much video.
HoopDogg80 I have a 3 year old and eye AF and tracking is everything. I own the Sony but may sell it for the Samyang. 1.4 is tempting. What about color rendition? Someone said Sony was saturated and had more pop, while Samyang was muted
I think it's worth noting the 'Autofocus Lock' button on the Sony lens is programmable. I have mine set to eye autofocus. Can't understate how useful this is once you've tried it.
What about bokeh? One of the main reasons to buy an f1.4 is bokeh. This Left me comparing using the AF test. While the Sony 85 1.8 is a good deal sharper of the two sony lenses the Bokeh of the Sony 1.4 is noticeably nicer. Something that this video totally skipped past. So we need a compareo for sharpness and bokeh for portraits.
maird1 No. People today think portraits are all about background blur. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most working photographers shoot at f/5.6-8. Some use f/11. Almost all get their background separation with lighting and not with lenses. Having nice out of focus effects (which is subjective anyway) is nice but not essential. Portraiture is about the subject, not the lens. But since this is a lens test, there are a couple of places where you can easily judge the quality of the out of focus effects. Because of the subjective nature, anything more is a bit pointless.
@@thethirdman225 No, maybe you think people think that but this is a lens test and bokeh is an important part of a lenses character. Being this is a test on an exceptionally fast lens, one primary consideration is bokeh 'quality' and the ability to control it.
The hard part about the Samyang is the Sony 85 1.8 is so gosh darn good Abd cheap. For me ... on a budget, your portrait choice is Sony 85 1.8. If you can afford a premium lens the sigma 105 1.4 blows away the 85 g master and is cheaper
The 85 F1.8 is just as sharp but the bokeh is quite busy in places. The Samyang bokeh is much smoother and less distracting in portraits. Whether that is an issue for you is down to personal preference. I had the Samyang and the Sony 1.8 at the same time to compare them and returned the Sony.
The contrast thing with backlit situations actually makes a pretty big difference even when not shooting directly into the sun, any backlit subject will suffer a loss of contrast that is next to impossible to correct in post. Try it with sunset backlit portraits. Thats imho the biggest reason to go for the more expensive lenses and it can really ruin shots. The focusing might change if you shot at lower than f8 XD
oh wow, I never thought the color different lenses could produce would be that much different in camera. an interesting followup experiment would be to use a color-checker (the ones you take a photo of to do the whitebalance) and compare them after calibrating the color corrected shots.
Sony was definitely better in video focus racking, it was smoothly pulling it off. Whereas in Samyang it pulled focus in stacks (look at the bokeh to get a clear idea).
Your test around 11:00 with the Sony lens wasn't correctly done: The aperture was visibly closed. I don't know if the A7 can open up the aperture for focusing even if set on the aperture ring (it did not move in the video). This way the camera gets less light, and the Sony lens would be at a disadvantage compared to the Samyang. But maybe we just can't see the aperture opening up …
Very minor detail but I love the red ring on Samyang lenses, it really matches with the red ring of Sony full frame lenses, very elegant little touch. I have the Samyang 24mm 1.8 and it's been one of the best lenses I've ever owned, especially for video.
2:06 ... not a feature the reviewer's not personnally using, but makes that lens a Cinema-lens worthy. For that price, it's cheap for such a feature not many lenses have.
Thanks for the review. I own the Samyang 85mm (since release day) and used the GM several times. I am extremely happy with the Samyang. It is very sharp for normal portrait conditions (studio and outdoors). I don't care much about the lens flare resistant, on that focal length I am never shooting sunrises or sunsets (I care more on my 16-35 for landscapes). AF works very well on firmware version 4 and has improved significantly since its release on low light conditions. Samyang updates their firmware frequently so investing in their Lens Station is a good idea. I really like the way the lens renders, especially wide open. If you step it down to f/2.0 it is very sharp across the entire frame. I have no doubt I made the right choice with this lens. My other favorite 85mm is the Batis (it has Optical Image Stabilization) which is also quite expensive but a better value than the GM, imho.
At 1.4 on a 85 mm having the sharper edges isn’t such a big deal because you are most likely looking to put that area out of focus anyway. So a tiny difference won’t even be noticed.
All of these features you said we'll probably never need (AF switch, shooting against the sun, shooting fast moving subjects, changing the aperture while shooting a video) I actually needed during the last couple of months. Keep in mind that not everyone's a youtuber who's mostly shooting with a tripod or simple handheld stuff.
I haven't tried out the 85/1.4 from Samyang but I did try the 35/1.4 on the a7III on several occasions (a friend has it) and the lens is built well, focuses amazingly and at all distances and f stops, and it's sharp at any f stop you choose. Can't really beat it for the price.
Just started using Sony, with Rokinon lenses. Coming from 10 years with my old Canon DSLR. I do notice that better glass produces better colour separation, less muddy bleeds, etc... But again, I'm doing video, which isn't raw colour. Great video, thanks so much for doing this :)
In the AF speed test, the aperture of the Sony lens was quite small, this blocks light to the AF-points. Don't know how much this makes a difference with daylight, but it could make a difference.
UCreations can you explain? Most lenses open up to their widest aperture when autofocusing. I’ll have to watch it again but I thought Lee did the test wide open. -P
Not just videography but more cinematography is what that smooth ring is for. Creative and controlled filmmaking where you plan your aperture rack for effect.
I have that lens (manual version) for my Pentax and it diffidently has color correction issues. Other then that, the Samyang has good sharpness and contrast. I used it for B&W shots.
I do architecture photography and sometimes landscape and it quite often happens that you need to shoot against the direction of the sun with wide-angle lenses. Flares and sun stars do play a role in these cases. You can not simply turn around the building to get the building with the light source from a different direction, neighboring buildings or a narrow street limit your possible shooting angles, and it is not always possible to lure around for hours just to wait till the sun has moved on. However 85mm is not a wide-angle lens, but you might need to shoot against light sources in event photography. As for the colors: I have the feeling that some cheaper lenses filter out some blue light, while for example, Zeiss lenses tend to almost exaggerate blue colors. Almost all the Samyang lenses ad little orange/yellow/red to the picture, that is the contrast color of blue. They might do it unintentionally or to reduce chromatic aberration, or because the can not do better coating, don´t know. But when you switch between these brands all the time you see immediately even in the thumbnails which lens took which foto. The difference between different brands and lenses of similar focal length and f stops is in most standard cases not very obvious, but you´ll get more difference the more you go to the extremes: very low light, very bright light, stray light, backlight, high contrasts, extreme colors, fluorescent lights, monochromatic light, then you might see the differences popping out more. And to be honest, sometimes it is the extremes that make a picture either a case for the trashcan or for popping out photos.
Good video with good insights. I would suggest that when testing for sharpness, you photograph something with sharp edges to begin with, such as lettering. Brick wall comparisons with irregular edges and erose texture leave me cold.
You can clearly see by the depth of field it's 1.4, a 5.6 or 8 wouldn't land even close to that level of dof (yes I know this comment is over a year old)
Lenses do affect colour. Compare a kit lens to a “pro” lens and colour replication is different. Although it is probably more of a contrast issue rather than a strict colour issue.
Look at the yellows in the flower side by sides. Also, samyang is making colours when supposed not to. Like for instance when i shot a grey fog over a water, the fog got tinted in the corners of the picture, i am not talking about small contrasted points, but rather large zones of the fog got «painted» by the samyangs optics or coating.
The aperture ring can be declicked on the Sony primes, however the aperture actuation is electronic and rasterized/quantized (just look at the movement of the blades while adjusting the declicked ring). So if you declick it to rack expose you will still get a noticeable stutter. You can't set the aperture to for example 4.7, you can only set it to 1/3 increments, just like you would from the camera.
I'm shocked Lee is for Samyang. Clearly Sony was better in the continious AF test (all other YT channels got the same result). But I like Samyang colors better (athough it could be fixed with 1 slider in LR or DT). If I got FF SonyE camera I would buy Samyang for sure.
Yes, Sony was better in video continuous AF, but the test was a stress test which means most people will find the Samyang good enough in 95% of situations. Plus it's 1/3 the price and I found myself liking some of the Samyang images more also.
Advice from a Samyang Owner: I bought this lens 20 days ago after watching tons of reviews and getting recommendations. Let me tell you my experience with this lens: - Eye AF is Garbage at F/1.4. I first thought its my lens only but its basically the lens and only gets better at F/1.8! - It's super sharp when you are shooting a headshot portrait. If you shoot a body portrait, especially when a bit dark, the photos are absolute trash. I took about 50 portraits the other day and almost 45 of them were soft af! It was an absolutely horrendous experience. On the same day I had my Tamron 17-28 with me and it produced amazing photos with point on eye AF. - If you have already watched other reviews, you know that this lens has very very bad video functionality too - Very hard to sell lens. If you buy this lens the chances are that you will either not find a buyer, or if you do they will buy it very very cheap. But if you get a Sigma or Zeiss the lenses don't lose much of their value even after years of using. Final point: I loved this lens before I bought it. Now after 20 days, I hate it. Bought it for 900 and will be selling it tomorrow to someone for $600 if he doesn't change his mind. Please don't buy this lens. Get a Zeiss or sony even 1.8 as you can at least sell them easier and you know you are not owning a trash. Don't don't don't buy this lens if you are a professional portrait photographer, the quality and user experience will make you regret in just a few days.
@@felixmorsdorf1391 A7III firmware 3 and 3 for the lens. Overall the sharpness is not that great in full body shots. I was really really disappointed with the lens. I'd rather pay extra thousands but never ever think of budget lenses (except for Tamron and Sigma)
coming back into photography and recovering after covid bankrupting my business im switching from canon to sony and getting a a7 ii and the rokinon 85 1.4 excited to start watching your content again
I would think that a better comparison (price wise anyway) might be between the Samyang f/1.4 and the Sony 85mm f/1.8... I like the focus lock on the Sony lens which I reprogram to Eye-AF...
Richard Crowe There are already a few detailed comparisons between the Samyang 1.4 and the Sony 1.8. This comparison was more interesting because when you set aside price, the Samyang 1.4 and the Sony GM are more similar based on application than the Sony 1.8. You buy a 1.4 lens because you want 1.4 1st and everything else second.
Look at the walking test and look at the greenery area to the right. The Sony's focus motors seems to be way smoother where as the Samyang motors seems to be adjusting in steps.
I got the Samyang 24mm a few months ago for my A7ii, and I was impressed by look of the images, and the quiet focusing was a boon. This 85 looks like a bang for buck winner. The GM would be great, if I had more green to throw around.
Optics can capture different amount of different wavelengths so perceptive color can be different. This was probably more important with film cameras. Sony's advantage is its built in auto corrections (I think Sony only supports its own lenses - raw files might not be corrected) I would go with Samyang if I don't plan on using it for videos (wouldn't zoom lens be better for videos?)
Thank you for doing these real world tests that are easy to understand and matter, I would never have thought to compare lens flare, but that's a huge issue. Amazing video
when you did the autofocus speed comparison, you had the samyang wide open and the sony closed at around f/8... clearly not a scientific test, like you said :D on mirrorless cameras, the aperture when you press the focus button is important for speed. the bigger, the better :)
I came down here to say the same. The Sony was heavily stopped down and it must have made quite some impact. Maybe if he had it in auto, the aperture would have opened up momentarily to focus faster as it does with some lenses.
@@dantruitt216 No. the DOF preview button was on the DSLRs. One of the advantage of the mirrorless is the EVF, and the ability to show you the final image, including DOF, unless you specifically disable that in the menu options. so when you are framing your shot, the lens is closed down. and if the aperture is too small, it either cannot use the PDAF points or there is not enough light to reach full potential speed. and when taking the shot, most mirrorless bodies will open wide first before doing the AF measurement, then close back down, unless you use back button focusing. :)
I think you should buy neither of those two lenses. If you have enough money for the Gm you should buy the Zeiss Batis (~900€ on Amazon). Even though the Zeiss Batis 85mm has "just" an f1.8 aperture, it has the beautiful Zeiss look, outstanding image quality, weather sealing, image stabilization, and great ergonomics. I would only recommend the Samyang if you're really on a budget, but for every other case,I would tend to buy the Zeiss Batis. But in the end it's up to your personal reference.
Great comparison fellas, I'd love to see how the Sigma Art 85mm compares in this line up, its a little more than the Samyang, but much less than the Sony. My experience with Sigma on Sony so far has been pretty incredible, so I'd love to see it compare to these two 85s.
I’m not a professional and really value budget lens comparisons. With that said, eye af is one of the best Sony mirrorless features. How does it work? It was never mentioned.
I have the Sony 85 1.8 and love it. The color rendition is almost identical to the 1.4. On a lot of shots I do like the cool colors they produce but 85 is primarily a portrait length and I do primarily shoot portraits with it. For that the warmer tones of the Samyang look great to me! It is just one more step in LR I don't have to take that I'm taking now to fix it.
Sry but as a videographer (who can focus pull better than both of these lenses) I have to say that the Sony is a CLEAR winner. Just look at the bokeh while David is walking towards you; you can see how the Sony transitions much smoother than the Samyang. Also the Samyang is out of focus almost all of the time. Apart from that I love how the results are almost similar in all the other areas except flaring. The AF/MF Button is a great addition and so is the aperture ring, but paying 1k only for that - I don't know.. Thanks for this great test, I would absolutely LOVE to see the same test with the new Sony 35 1.8 against the Samyang 35. 1.4 (and maybe even throw in the Sigma :D?)
14:50 If you pay attention, you can see the out of focus areas when filming with the Sammy are breathing and jumping. not very cinematic. The Sony it's very smooth. However I own the Sammy 35 1.4 and It's smooth. Maybe it's a Firmware-fixable issue.
Talking about white balance the samyang is a bit warmer , the Sony isn’t cooler. I have used both of them But the cromatic aberration is a real issue there. The Sony definitely gives a significant better quality and for price but if you’re on budget and not doing serious stuffs Samyang would feel perfect for you.
@@GaryParris yes. They're little expensive. The sigma art is great too for a less expensive price. But you'll definitely notice a difference when you use the Gmaster. They're like apple. Sony sells their cameras for cheaper price but they suck out money from lenses. But yeah that extra quality is worth buying.
@@Saptajit no its not worth the extra money if you dont have that money! there is a difference of technical quality if you are comparing them as is if both are very slightly difference in price, but when you compare them on price sorry but that extra small amount of quality difference in day to day use is absulutely not worth it. you are just trained to pay more for a small fraction, and those are aimed at high earning photographers, that is a small percentage of people or photographers, even then it would be down to the photographer as to whether they got every last pixel out of their equipment!
I DO ALOT OF MULTICAMERA VIDEO SHOOTING, ONE THING NOTICES LENSES HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE PICTURE QUALITY N COLOUR N SAY TEMPRERATURE, WHEN I SHOOT WITH MY SIGMA LENSES N THEN SHOOT WITH MY CANON LENSES I STRUGGLE TO MATCH THEM ON MULTICAMERA EDITTING, SO I PREFER USING 1 LENSE TYPE N THAT IS SIGMA
G-Master renders to 100MP. How's the Samyang? Without fail, everyone who criticizes the GM lenses fails to mention that point. And yes, the A7Rs render beyond that already in pixel-shift mode. Cheers.
On the subject of shooting directly into the sun, I wish you had created some low light tests where you were shooting into street lights, birthday candles, wedding candles, etc. That is something a videographer might be more likely to do. If you do those tests at some point, you might want to try some wide open (typical in a low light situation) and try some stopped down 1 or 2 f/stops. Thank you. Terry Thomas... the photographer Atlanta, Georgia USA
"how often do you shoot directly into the sun?" that test indicate what will happens shooting a concert, the scene lights gives the same situation, and i think that many photog can use this against the sun test then
Nice video! The inconsistency you mentioned in the sharpness in the corners is probably because your camera was tilted slightly down and it wasn’t parallel to the wall. It shows on the video against the lines of the side wall when you had the camera on the tripod but it’s not really a lens issue since you did the same for both lenses. Where the focus stopped is down to the tolerances and by the output differences are negligible.
Wow, the AF component of this video you're clearly getting the material confused. The Sony is significantly better, everything you said in that section was the complete opposite haha Edit: I'm still in awe..the Sony is significantly better in AF-C.
I've watched videos from astrophotographers who have used a number of camera lenses for wide field AP, and there's a bit of a consensus that the Samyang and Rokinon lenses tend to have a bit of a green color cast
I do architecture fotography and you can´t allways go multiple the times of the day to do it with the best lighting. So it happens a lot that I need to shoot a building against the sunlight in wide angle shots. Flaring is a big problem in cases like this. The same with landscape or wildlife photography. You might take the shot or take a flared shot or no shot, coming back at another time or under different lighting is not an option.
Thanks for the informative comparison. One thing you didn’t mention which doesn’t matter for stills shooters but critical for motion picture capture is focus breathing. Did you happen to notice if the Samyang was breathing and if so, was it subtle or pronounced?
The section regarding lens colour variations. Whether it's down to "expensive" lenses being "better" for rendering colour, I cannot say. However, the differences do exist. The greatest lens for colour that I have EVER used was the Canon 85mm f1.2 mk 1 (which was very expensive at the time I bought it). For beautiful skin colours it was unbeatable, I have never seen anything like it. Unfortunately on my Canon DSLR's it back focused so much even the maximum settings of the focus adjustment within the camera couldn't make a sufficient adjustment. I therefore ended up with missed focus unless I stopped it down a lot. In a studio with strobes I could do that and I loved the results (and so did the models who loved how their skin rendered). I eventually replaced it when I got my Sony cameras. I have the Sony 85mm f1.8, Sigma 105mm f1.4 and the Zeiss 135mm f2 APO manual focus. Each of those lenses will beat the 85mm f1.2 for sharpness hands down (they should do as they are much more modern designs) and I am happy with them but they can't match the colours I used to get out of the Canon 85mm - it was unbeatable. I have tried to recreate the skin colours within Photoshop and I just can't do it. If it wasn't for the terrible issues with its focus I would still have it. I am not a "fan" boy of any system, I have owned Nikon, Canon (mainly) and Sony...I will use what ever camera suits me as an individual and so for me it's the results count the most. I do not know if a camera and lens manufacturer can engineer a lens specifically for colour but if Canon were able to do that, they did a supreme job with the 85mm. If a manufacturer came up with a new lens that could match the colour rendition I would buy it. I understand the reason for the comments in the video regarding the colours and once again I admit I don't know if it's down to expense, it's probably more down to a firm like Canon engineering the lens to do it. Anyway, that's how I see it. Good video by the way
I'm actually looking at the manual focus version of one of these lenses right now to use in video shooting... From what I have been able to find it's for the most part the exact same design and lens set up... Including the aperture contacts and the ability to confirm focus electronically..It just does not have the autofocus motor...just wondering if you realized while you were putting this together what a cool shot at 12:40.. that shallow depth-of-field but such a precise sharp focus on him...One of the reasons why I started looking at this lens seriously. Very nice review and I like how you use tons of illustration and make that effort rather than just sitting and talking at the camera. I think I agree with you a lot,, having shot with Nikon lenses and Sony , Rokinon and especially the Leica lenses on the micro four-thirds about the color issue.... All lens formulas are different based on what the manufacturer wants to create as an end product... And in the end it's always a compromise between performance and cost..I will say though that using the Leica prime lenses on a camera like the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema 4K vs many other micro 4/3 lenses... Or adapted Rokinon or Canon lenses... The Leica lenses do have a "pop".. especially in the area of contrast that other lenses don't display. In the end it's not necessarily better always...it's just a different characteristic of that lens line.
For a lens to have “better” or more natural colors, the lens must capture a wider field of electromagnetic waves over the other. I doubt, just like you, that this is the case here, and it probably wouldn’t be noticeable, so it must have something to do with the individual lenses combined with the camera body.
About the colorcasting: Personally I own a Oshiro Macro 2:1 this lens is a "cheap" lens that have all his focus on the magnification (it look very similar to the laowa 2:1). I never had any issue about colors with any lenses, as you said, changing the color temperature fix usually everything, but this lens... I cannot really use it. I tried it so many times and everytime I import the photos in Camera One colors are not what I would expect, they always look much more boring and plain than any other lenses I own. I use it in my fuji system and I am really disappointed by this lenses, that never give me back what I expect. Maybe the problem is the contrast, I have no idea. This is the only lense that I would not use for anything, because I do not like the outcome, I think that is good just for B&W photos
Could you do a behind-the-scenes of what you're shooting video on? I think you were using the GH5 in the studio, is that still true for field work? Are you mostly just using footage with settings that make it good "in camera", or are you grading, etc? It would be nice to hear what you guys are doing and any tips or tricks you'd recommend for video.
interesting comparison. I would have loved to see an eye-af comparison in a portrait shooting. Also waiting to see a comparison against the Sony 1.8/85 Keep up the good work!
There is something about the colour rendition of more expensive lenses that the manufacturer matches all lenses to the same standard, so that professional photographers get consistence results. That means a lot of time is spent on the choice of materials and technique to use to get there. It does not necessarily mean the overall colour rendition is better. Cheaper lenses will vary more and the standard deviation is broader. That results in less time consumption and less money spent on the end. For us - amateurs - this is totally irrelevant and we must except that for manufacturers like Leitz (Leica), Schneider (Kreuznach), Zeiss (Ikon) and the likes, we are not the target customers... P.S.: I can only speak out of experience about this by using an 8mm film camera in the late 70's which had a Schneider (Nizogon) lens. My buddy had a Sanyo 8mm and we both shot the same wildlife from different angles to mount them in post... but it didn't work that way because the colours just didn't match (even though we both used the same film): the Schneider was way more contrasty and the foliage had far more different shades of green and red. I agree that in digital this is less significant, but we have to keep in mind that what is not there, will never be restored by any software. Also: that was consumer stuff from the seventies. These days even cheap kit lenses preform (mostly) very good.
Why was your aperture closed when doing the autofocus test on the Sony lens? Wouldnt that make a difference considering your lens was wide open during the samyang test?
I definitely don't believe more expensive lenses capture colors "better" but when you think about workflow, I think you have to consider how much time you're going to save when you buy lenses of a set vs. mixing and matching between different manufacturers. Unless you shoot everything with 1 lens of course.
My zeiss classics don’t need any saturation most of the time. My Sony kit lenses let in less detail a saturation. My file sizes actually went up by MB with the zeiss too. I know it’s kind of a bad comparison but a lot of older lenses suffered from poor detail and saturation. I don’t really think that’s the case these days though. Pretty much all optics are insanely good in the current generation of lenses. It’s hard to get a bad lens optically. However build quality, ergonomics, AF, weight and customer support are all things to consider. Now do I think Sony gm lenses are worth it? Probably but I can save money on the FE 85 1.8 or the sigma for faster and better performance. I’d even take the zeiss baits over the gm 85mm. The price of the gm lineup doesn’t add up.. I mean the 85 FE 1.8 seems like the best bang for your buck. You should do samyang vs viltrox vs Sony 1.8 and Sony gm 1.4 (all 85mm). That would be cool. The viltrox is only $399.
You taught me a lot specially as a rookie like myself. I'm thinking of getting a Sony a6600 or the Fuji xt4 or the Sony a7iii. Peace and love from East Harlem NYC...
About the noise with the Sony focusing, my Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm makes the exact same sound. I always thought it was weird, but at least mine isn't not the only one doing it😂
The Sony definitely killed the Samyang in the AF video mode while David was walking towards the camera. No doubt about that. However, I love my Samyang 24mm. Will probably pick up the 85mm too. Thanks for the review.
Sony lens autofocus is very loud, but after a firmware update to the lens is so much quieter. Check the Sony official site for the new firmware for this lens. Cheers!
You stated that the samyang suffers more from diffraction but, correct me if Im wrong, its not dependent on the lens at all, its the pixel size of the sensor that determines when diffraction kicks in(?)
Alfred Johansson diffraction can def be better or worse from the lens itself. With your reasoning, every lens would have the same diffraction on the same camera body. That’s not the case -P
Autofocus sound may vary from copy to copy. For example my Canon 24-70 II is a bit noisy compared to some other copies... But autofocus performance is great for stills so...
Amazing video with opinions clearly presented from different user's perspective. I am just watching lens reviews for fun, but this is by far the most comprehensive comparison video.
i just picked up the 135mm 1.8 (IDENTICAL in sharpness to the native 135, which happens to be Sony's sharpest lens in their lineup). great review. the cool thing about samyang/rokinon is that they spent years perfecting their optics before throwing af into the mix. no one can argue their image reproduction/sharpness. I'm so thankful that they have finally been pushing out these af options. at the price, it's a no brainer. take that extra money and fly somewhere cool for a week-shoot landscapes you'd have to wait until next year to see if you bought the sony option ;) (btw, as of today, you can get a used version of this samyang 85 for about 375!! just bananas, man.)
I'm just starting out in Photography but these issues exist in every other industry from computing to audio to whatever you're interested in. If you're making money with your Photography then the question is "Does the Sony lens save me time fixing certain aberrations?" If you're a hobbyist then time != money thus you're likely better off with the Samyang.
![POV STREET PHOTOGRAPHY LONDON - DAY TO NIGHT [ 85MM 1 4 SAMYANG ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rBNlxPmUWmY/mqdefault.jpg)
About the auto focus, are you just watching it on the back LCD? On a bigger screen it's clear that SONY keeps up better, but as you said, not scientific.
Exactly my thought. So if the focus pull scenario is really relevant, I guess the Sony is much better from what could be seen in the video.
I thought the same thing, the sony out performed the samyang but a long shot in the autofocus test. But I was still very impressed by the lens
yep, totally faster.
Basically, I agree very much with this test! I do, however, agree with some of the other commenters that the Sony lens DID focus a bit more accurately and smoothly than the Samyang. Is that worth the additional price of the Sony?... Well, NOT for MOST photographers and videographers. BUT IF SOMEONE KNOWS THEY NEED THAT SMOOTH FOCUS, YES GET THE SONY. The shot into the sun (something I wouldn't ever do normally) again the Sony had better contrast. Again, not worth the cost for me. I'm IMPRESSED with the Samyang!
You're correct. It was much better full screen than I could see on location.
You can get this lens and the Samyang AF 35mm f/1.4 for the cost of the 85 GM and still have over $500 left.
And THAT is amazing.
I have the 24-70GM, 70-200GM, Sigma 135 1.8 and Sony 85 1.8
The Samyang 35 1.4 is by far my most used lens.
@@DrBluntPK I was considering Sony's 70-200 f/4 because I also have the 85, but Tamron is due to launch a telephoto zoom soon and who knows. Maybe it'll be one of those.
@@RealRaynedance You'll get the Tamron. Easy sell. Bokeh will hardly be different but the ability to be at 2.8 is a big difference in light
@@DrBluntPK True enough, but it's very rare that I ever need something that bright anymore. _Usually_ if I do, the 85 is long enough.
I found barely used (looked as just unpacked) Samyang 35 - 1.4 and 14 - 2.8 with update adapter, all together for 950€ (around 1050$), and just ordered today Samyang 85 - 1.4 for 510€ - 555$ (vat excluded), I'm sure that 85 GM ISN'T worth alone as these 3 Samyang lenses for almost the same price...
These lenses are primarily aimed at portrait photography, but you didn't take any portraits. It's important to understand how the lenses resolve facial features, how they render bokeh, how well they establish separation between a foreground subject and the background at different apertures, etc. The color cast is a significant issue if you do portrait photography, because you don't want someone's skin to have a yellow cast to it (as with the Samyang lens), nor do you want to have to color correct every photo you take. Based on this review, I can not tell how these portrait lenses compare for portrait photography.
Totally agree with you, it's more about rendition, in portraits we don't need super sharp or have "no vignette" ... it's all about rendition!!
It's pretty easy to set up a color correction profile which you just apply to all shots taken with the lens. In any case, if you're shooting professional portraits it's highly unlikely that you won't be doing any color correction on images from a shoot, and you'd only need to correct one of these and then copy that across to the rest of the images (like one would do for pretty much any portrait shooting session). I agree on the other points, though I don't expect that the lenses would be wildly different here (based on the flower photo).
Just set a custom white balance for it when shooting if you want it right in camera straight away. Colour should fine.
Emanuele Farnesi how so? He doesn’t shy away from detailing the negatives of the samyang, but makes the fair point that sometimes you get diminishing returns by shelling out for high end lenses. For the price of that Sony lens you could get two or three cheaper but still high quality lenses. Sure those lenses may not be the ultimate best lenses in their focal length, but if they’re good enough for what you need to do then clearly it makes more sense to buy them over one very expensive lens. If you are one of the few photographers/cinematographers who will actually benefit from the more expensive lens, then it might be worth shelling out the extra cash. For the rest of us, probably not worth it.
@@TheWhyteBear It's always the case that you pay more for a premium product. But that's not the issue here. There are lots of cheaper alternatives to Sony's lenses, with various trade-offs. The question is how do those trade-offs affect the people who use the lenses for the things they've been optimized for. An 85 1.4 is optimized for portraits. 85 puts you at the right distance to easily direct a model, while working in just enough background to fill the frame with the model's eye at the 2/3 vertical line. The 1.4 really only makes sense if you want to shoot in low light, or if you want significant subject / background separation. Otherwise, you're just adding size and weight to the lens. So this is a lens aimed at portrait shooters. Which is why tests of the lens really should reflect how it is used - in portrait shooting.
I’ve watched at least a dozen reviews of the samyang/rokinon, and I think yours is my favorite so far. You mentioned a few times that your tests weren’t “scientific”, but that’s what made them great. If you’re not certain which one is focusing faster, or which one has the more accurate colors, that tells me everything I need to know. 👍
The only time I have noticed a lens producing better color is with astrophotography. This was the difference between a Samyang and a Sigma Art, the Art brought out more color in the milky way. With that said the Samyang was just as sharp as the Sigma Art, Samyang/Rokinon are amazing for the price. Also some lenses produce more contrast and more contrast means more saturation.
Do tamron 17-28 2.8 vs Sony 16-35mm 2.8
Just a Globe 😂
tamaron
@Al Castill I have both, and your right they are great lenses for the price and sharpness.
the problem on 17-28 is the range. you bought wide lens to have widest as possible. and 28mm being the longest focal length is quite no good compared to 35mm.
you bought 16-35 probably to have just 1 lens with you. you got 16wide and 35 tighter shot. that's nice range. if you do not need longer focal length, then maybe a prime lens would be better like 14mm samyang 2.8, or laowa 15mm f2..
:)
Every. Single. Comparison. Comes out to have the same result. “The (third party) lens is 90% the same lens as the Sony but lacks (buttons/build quality/image quality issue at some end). Still, it costs 33%-50% of the Sony. If you absolutely need the best of the best because photography makes you $60,000/yr or more, buy the Sony. Otherwise, buy the (third party) and save the money for another lens or a photography trip/courses.”
Every. Single. Comparison. .. Most differences are fixed in post in 10 seconds (WB/Lens Profile). if you’re here and you don’t make $60,000+ from photography, buy the third party zoom, the third party prime, or a cheaper Sony prime in your desired range.
I would love to see the Samyang compared to the Sony 1.8, since their closer to the same budget!
The 85 F1.8 is just as sharp but the bokeh is quite busy in places. The Samyang bokeh is much smoother and less distracting in portraits. Whether that is an issue for you is down to personal preference. I had the Samyang and the Sony 1.8 at the same time to compare them and returned the Sony.
HoopDogg80 what about AF acquisition & tracking, and eye AF? Sony 1.8 or Samyang 1.4?
@@joshblank1 both on a par with each other really especially given the shallower DOF at 1.4 vs 1.8. The Samyang snaps onto the eye and tracks it no problem. For posed portraits it's 9 times out of 10 hitting the pupil focus and not the eyelashes even. I have a 2 year old son and it'll track his eye when he's moving towards me in a pretty erratic way! If I'd noticed AF being better on the Sony I probably would have chosen it even given the worse bokeh but the Samyang AF for photography is excellent. Can't comment on video AF as I don't do much video.
HoopDogg80 I have a 3 year old and eye AF and tracking is everything. I own the Sony but may sell it for the Samyang. 1.4 is tempting. What about color rendition? Someone said Sony was saturated and had more pop, while Samyang was muted
@@BenLovell80 I think the same but for video af sony works better but for photo samyang it's better choice
Love that Lee does not give a shit about micro-macro things. Stop buying expensive gear as an excuse not to create.
I think it's worth noting the 'Autofocus Lock' button on the Sony lens is programmable. I have mine set to eye autofocus. Can't understate how useful this is once you've tried it.
I had come to say the same thing so thanks for that. also nice work on the sad-face as a username.
That is what makes it great for users that don’t have the 3rd series of cameras.
What body do you use ?
@@ahmadreza6818 A7R3
0011101001011011 have you upgrade to latest firmware ?
What about bokeh? One of the main reasons to buy an f1.4 is bokeh. This Left me comparing using the AF test.
While the Sony 85 1.8 is a good deal sharper of the two sony lenses the Bokeh of the Sony 1.4 is noticeably nicer. Something that this video totally skipped past. So we need a compareo for sharpness and bokeh for portraits.
maird1 did some bokeh tests here heyengel.com/samyang-85mm-f14-af-vs-sony-85mm-f18-lens-comparison
*_"One of the main reasons to buy an f1.4 is bokeh."_*
Maybe for _you..._
@@thethirdman225 ...And most others shooting portraits...with a "portrait lens". Otherwise just use an f2.8
maird1 No. People today think portraits are all about background blur. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most working photographers shoot at f/5.6-8. Some use f/11. Almost all get their background separation with lighting and not with lenses. Having nice out of focus effects (which is subjective anyway) is nice but not essential. Portraiture is about the subject, not the lens.
But since this is a lens test, there are a couple of places where you can easily judge the quality of the out of focus effects. Because of the subjective nature, anything more is a bit pointless.
@@thethirdman225 No, maybe you think people think that but this is a lens test and bokeh is an important part of a lenses character. Being this is a test on an exceptionally fast lens, one primary consideration is bokeh 'quality' and the ability to control it.
The hard part about the Samyang is the Sony 85 1.8 is so gosh darn good Abd cheap. For me ... on a budget, your portrait choice is Sony 85 1.8. If you can afford a premium lens the sigma 105 1.4 blows away the 85 g master and is cheaper
The 85 F1.8 is just as sharp but the bokeh is quite busy in places. The Samyang bokeh is much smoother and less distracting in portraits. Whether that is an issue for you is down to personal preference. I had the Samyang and the Sony 1.8 at the same time to compare them and returned the Sony.
I am too smart to carry needlessly heavy lens
@@IncognitoOnezz You carry your own gear? With your big brain I'm sure you can afford an assistant or two. :-)
joseluisphoto He probably doesn’t even own a camera.
The Sony 851.8 is better than the Samyang 1.4 just because of the reliabiility of the autofocus. Also, I feel the color rendition is a bit smoother
The contrast thing with backlit situations actually makes a pretty big difference even when not shooting directly into the sun, any backlit subject will suffer a loss of contrast that is next to impossible to correct in post. Try it with sunset backlit portraits. Thats imho the biggest reason to go for the more expensive lenses and it can really ruin shots.
The focusing might change if you shot at lower than f8 XD
Every video I see about the Samyang makes me glad I bought it.
How is the image quality
Raz Vlogs it’s good. It’s my go-to lens for outdoor portraits.
oh wow, I never thought the color different lenses could produce would be that much different in camera.
an interesting followup experiment would be to use a color-checker (the ones you take a photo of to do the whitebalance) and compare them after calibrating the color corrected shots.
For video the Sony looks like it's the better lens. For now I'll just stick with the Tamron 28-75mm
Sony was definitely better in video focus racking, it was smoothly pulling it off. Whereas in Samyang it pulled focus in stacks (look at the bokeh to get a clear idea).
no! samyang is better at all
Your test around 11:00 with the Sony lens wasn't correctly done: The aperture was visibly closed. I don't know if the A7 can open up the aperture for focusing even if set on the aperture ring (it did not move in the video). This way the camera gets less light, and the Sony lens would be at a disadvantage compared to the Samyang. But maybe we just can't see the aperture opening up …
@@paulstickley4819 Really unusual.
Very minor detail but I love the red ring on Samyang lenses, it really matches with the red ring of Sony full frame lenses, very elegant little touch. I have the Samyang 24mm 1.8 and it's been one of the best lenses I've ever owned, especially for video.
Red ring is ❤️❤️🔥🔥
Samyang came out with an autofocus lens??? New World we living in
2:06 ... not a feature the reviewer's not personnally using, but makes that lens a Cinema-lens worthy. For that price, it's cheap for such a feature not many lenses have.
Thanks for the review. I own the Samyang 85mm (since release day) and used the GM several times. I am extremely happy with the Samyang. It is very sharp for normal portrait conditions (studio and outdoors). I don't care much about the lens flare resistant, on that focal length I am never shooting sunrises or sunsets (I care more on my 16-35 for landscapes). AF works very well on firmware version 4 and has improved significantly since its release on low light conditions. Samyang updates their firmware frequently so investing in their Lens Station is a good idea. I really like the way the lens renders, especially wide open. If you step it down to f/2.0 it is very sharp across the entire frame. I have no doubt I made the right choice with this lens. My other favorite 85mm is the Batis (it has Optical Image Stabilization) which is also quite expensive but a better value than the GM, imho.
What he said ^^
At 1.4 on a 85 mm having the sharper edges isn’t such a big deal because you are most likely looking to put that area out of focus anyway. So a tiny difference won’t even be noticed.
All of these features you said we'll probably never need (AF switch, shooting against the sun, shooting fast moving subjects, changing the aperture while shooting a video) I actually needed during the last couple of months. Keep in mind that not everyone's a youtuber who's mostly shooting with a tripod or simple handheld stuff.
we can reduce flaring with help of a UV filter right??
If you're gonna do an autofocus test, why not record through the Atamos Ninja to show what you're seeing for focus?
I haven't tried out the 85/1.4 from Samyang but I did try the 35/1.4 on the a7III on several occasions (a friend has it) and the lens is built well, focuses amazingly and at all distances and f stops, and it's sharp at any f stop you choose. Can't really beat it for the price.
Just started using Sony, with Rokinon lenses. Coming from 10 years with my old Canon DSLR. I do notice that better glass produces better colour separation, less muddy bleeds, etc... But again, I'm doing video, which isn't raw colour. Great video, thanks so much for doing this :)
In the AF speed test, the aperture of the Sony lens was quite small, this blocks light to the AF-points. Don't know how much this makes a difference with daylight, but it could make a difference.
UCreations can you explain? Most lenses open up to their widest aperture when autofocusing. I’ll have to watch it again but I thought Lee did the test wide open. -P
@@FStoppers The aperture ring wasn't wide open. What also sometimes makes a difference is the "live view display effect" on or off.
Not just videography but more cinematography is what that smooth ring is for. Creative and controlled filmmaking where you plan your aperture rack for effect.
I don't think the Samyang lens is "wider". It's just not being corrected automatically for distortion by the Sony Camera RAW app.
I wonder if the Samyang is using the latest firmware. They are notorious for updating the AF lenses overtime. Thank you for doing this.
I'm wondering about this too.
This video swung me into buying Samyang. Had it 9 months and never missed a shot. It's clinically sharp in the centre. Far sharper than both Sony 85
The garden you're filming in is incredibly beautiful.
TRU
I have that lens (manual version) for my Pentax and it diffidently has color correction issues. Other then that, the Samyang has good sharpness and contrast. I used it for B&W shots.
I do architecture photography and sometimes landscape and it quite often happens that you need to shoot against the direction of the sun with wide-angle lenses. Flares and sun stars do play a role in these cases. You can not simply turn around the building to get the building with the light source from a different direction, neighboring buildings or a narrow street limit your possible shooting angles, and it is not always possible to lure around for hours just to wait till the sun has moved on. However 85mm is not a wide-angle lens, but you might need to shoot against light sources in event photography. As for the colors: I have the feeling that some cheaper lenses filter out some blue light, while for example, Zeiss lenses tend to almost exaggerate blue colors. Almost all the Samyang lenses ad little orange/yellow/red to the picture, that is the contrast color of blue. They might do it unintentionally or to reduce chromatic aberration, or because the can not do better coating, don´t know. But when you switch between these brands all the time you see immediately even in the thumbnails which lens took which foto. The difference between different brands and lenses of similar focal length and f stops is in most standard cases not very obvious, but you´ll get more difference the more you go to the extremes: very low light, very bright light, stray light, backlight, high contrasts, extreme colors, fluorescent lights, monochromatic light, then you might see the differences popping out more. And to be honest, sometimes it is the extremes that make a picture either a case for the trashcan or for popping out photos.
Good video with good insights. I would suggest that when testing for sharpness, you photograph something with sharp edges to begin with, such as lettering. Brick wall comparisons with irregular edges and erose texture leave me cold.
You did the auto focus test with a closed aperture on the Sony didn't you?
You can clearly see by the depth of field it's 1.4, a 5.6 or 8 wouldn't land even close to that level of dof (yes I know this comment is over a year old)
@@mragrayson oh hallo 2020! How have you been. Dont continue :D
Lenses do affect colour. Compare a kit lens to a “pro” lens and colour replication is different. Although it is probably more of a contrast issue rather than a strict colour issue.
"Kit lenses" and "pro lenses" from the same manufacturer will have almost no difference in colour rendition.
Look at the yellows in the flower side by sides.
Also, samyang is making colours when supposed not to. Like for instance when i shot a grey fog over a water, the fog got tinted in the corners of the picture, i am not talking about small contrasted points, but rather large zones of the fog got «painted» by the samyangs optics or coating.
The aperture ring can be declicked on the Sony primes, however the aperture actuation is electronic and rasterized/quantized (just look at the movement of the blades while adjusting the declicked ring). So if you declick it to rack expose you will still get a noticeable stutter. You can't set the aperture to for example 4.7, you can only set it to 1/3 increments, just like you would from the camera.
I'm shocked Lee is for Samyang. Clearly Sony was better in the continious AF test (all other YT channels got the same result). But I like Samyang colors better (athough it could be fixed with 1 slider in LR or DT). If I got FF SonyE camera I would buy Samyang for sure.
Yes, Sony was better in video continuous AF, but the test was a stress test which means most people will find the Samyang good enough in 95% of situations. Plus it's 1/3 the price and I found myself liking some of the Samyang images more also.
Advice from a Samyang Owner: I bought this lens 20 days ago after watching tons of reviews and getting recommendations. Let me tell you my experience with this lens:
- Eye AF is Garbage at F/1.4. I first thought its my lens only but its basically the lens and only gets better at F/1.8!
- It's super sharp when you are shooting a headshot portrait. If you shoot a body portrait, especially when a bit dark, the photos are absolute trash. I took about 50 portraits the other day and almost 45 of them were soft af! It was an absolutely horrendous experience. On the same day I had my Tamron 17-28 with me and it produced amazing photos with point on eye AF.
- If you have already watched other reviews, you know that this lens has very very bad video functionality too
- Very hard to sell lens. If you buy this lens the chances are that you will either not find a buyer, or if you do they will buy it very very cheap. But if you get a Sigma or Zeiss the lenses don't lose much of their value even after years of using.
Final point: I loved this lens before I bought it. Now after 20 days, I hate it. Bought it for 900 and will be selling it tomorrow to someone for $600 if he doesn't change his mind. Please don't buy this lens. Get a Zeiss or sony even 1.8 as you can at least sell them easier and you know you are not owning a trash. Don't don't don't buy this lens if you are a professional portrait photographer, the quality and user experience will make you regret in just a few days.
Muji Huz this lens is a used buy. For $900 you could have had the zeiss 1.8.
@@jamesjackson4264 Yeah sorry I forgot to mention its in Australian Dollars :)
which a7 body and lens firmware did you use? on my a7iii and lens fw 0.3 and 0.4 eye-af is spot on at f1.4
@@felixmorsdorf1391 A7III firmware 3 and 3 for the lens. Overall the sharpness is not that great in full body shots. I was really really disappointed with the lens. I'd rather pay extra thousands but never ever think of budget lenses (except for Tamron and Sigma)
Muji Huz maybe you got a bad copy? sample variation can be quite high sometimes , even for top-brands (e.g. the sony/zeiss 35mm f1.4).
coming back into photography and recovering after covid bankrupting my business im switching from canon to sony and getting a a7 ii and the rokinon 85 1.4 excited to start watching your content again
I would think that a better comparison (price wise anyway) might be between the Samyang f/1.4 and the Sony 85mm f/1.8... I like the focus lock on the Sony lens which I reprogram to Eye-AF...
Richard Crowe There are already a few detailed comparisons between the Samyang 1.4 and the Sony 1.8. This comparison was more interesting because when you set aside price, the Samyang 1.4 and the Sony GM are more similar based on application than the Sony 1.8. You buy a 1.4 lens because you want 1.4 1st and everything else second.
Look at the walking test and look at the greenery area to the right. The Sony's focus motors seems to be way smoother where as the Samyang motors seems to be adjusting in steps.
I loved that radio static sound actually my view points it’s like when radio has no frequency reception kind of sound...
Why do you have the beep turned on? I turn that off right after I first hear it.
I have it on. I like it.
I got the Samyang 24mm a few months ago for my A7ii, and I was impressed by look of the images, and the quiet focusing was a boon. This 85 looks like a bang for buck winner. The GM would be great, if I had more green to throw around.
Optics can capture different amount of different wavelengths so perceptive color can be different. This was probably more important with film cameras. Sony's advantage is its built in auto corrections (I think Sony only supports its own lenses - raw files might not be corrected) I would go with Samyang if I don't plan on using it for videos (wouldn't zoom lens be better for videos?)
Thank you for doing these real world tests that are easy to understand and matter, I would never have thought to compare lens flare, but that's a huge issue. Amazing video
when you did the autofocus speed comparison, you had the samyang wide open and the sony closed at around f/8... clearly not a scientific test, like you said :D
on mirrorless cameras, the aperture when you press the focus button is important for speed. the bigger, the better :)
I came down here to say the same. The Sony was heavily stopped down and it must have made quite some impact. Maybe if he had it in auto, the aperture would have opened up momentarily to focus faster as it does with some lenses.
Usually the lens stays wide open for AF until you actually shoot, no? Hence the DOF preview button on most mirrorless bodies to this day...
@@dantruitt216 No. the DOF preview button was on the DSLRs. One of the advantage of the mirrorless is the EVF, and the ability to show you the final image, including DOF, unless you specifically disable that in the menu options.
so when you are framing your shot, the lens is closed down. and if the aperture is too small, it either cannot use the PDAF points or there is not enough light to reach full potential speed.
and when taking the shot, most mirrorless bodies will open wide first before doing the AF measurement, then close back down, unless you use back button focusing. :)
I think you should buy neither of those two lenses.
If you have enough money for the Gm you should buy the Zeiss Batis (~900€ on Amazon).
Even though the Zeiss Batis 85mm has "just" an f1.8 aperture, it has the beautiful Zeiss look, outstanding image quality, weather sealing, image stabilization, and great ergonomics.
I would only recommend the Samyang if you're really on a budget, but for every other case,I would tend to buy the Zeiss Batis.
But in the end it's up to your personal reference.
Great comparison fellas, I'd love to see how the Sigma Art 85mm compares in this line up, its a little more than the Samyang, but much less than the Sony. My experience with Sigma on Sony so far has been pretty incredible, so I'd love to see it compare to these two 85s.
I’m not a professional and really value budget lens comparisons. With that said, eye af is one of the best Sony mirrorless features. How does it work? It was never mentioned.
I have the Sony 85 1.8 and love it. The color rendition is almost identical to the 1.4. On a lot of shots I do like the cool colors they produce but 85 is primarily a portrait length and I do primarily shoot portraits with it. For that the warmer tones of the Samyang look great to me! It is just one more step in LR I don't have to take that I'm taking now to fix it.
The 85 1.8 sony has faster AF than the 1.4 that's why I got it
@@toddysurcharge771yeah thats funny as well
Sry but as a videographer (who can focus pull better than both of these lenses) I have to say that the Sony is a CLEAR winner. Just look at the bokeh while David is walking towards you; you can see how the Sony transitions much smoother than the Samyang. Also the Samyang is out of focus almost all of the time. Apart from that I love how the results are almost similar in all the other areas except flaring. The AF/MF Button is a great addition and so is the aperture ring, but paying 1k only for that - I don't know.. Thanks for this great test, I would absolutely LOVE to see the same test with the new Sony 35 1.8 against the Samyang 35. 1.4 (and maybe even throw in the Sigma :D?)
14:50 If you pay attention, you can see the out of focus areas when filming with the Sammy are breathing and jumping. not very cinematic. The Sony it's very smooth. However I own the Sammy 35 1.4 and It's smooth. Maybe it's a Firmware-fixable issue.
I disagree. I thought there was nothing in it overall.
Talking about white balance the samyang is a bit warmer , the Sony isn’t cooler. I have used both of them But the cromatic aberration is a real issue there. The Sony definitely gives a significant better quality and for price but if you’re on budget and not doing serious stuffs Samyang would feel perfect for you.
not when you consider the price alone, the sony as always is overpriced.
@@GaryParris yes. They're little expensive. The sigma art is great too for a less expensive price. But you'll definitely notice a difference when you use the Gmaster. They're like apple. Sony sells their cameras for cheaper price but they suck out money from lenses. But yeah that extra quality is worth buying.
@@Saptajit no its not worth the extra money if you dont have that money! there is a difference of technical quality if you are comparing them as is if both are very slightly difference in price, but when you compare them on price sorry but that extra small amount of quality difference in day to day use is absulutely not worth it. you are just trained to pay more for a small fraction, and those are aimed at high earning photographers, that is a small percentage of people or photographers, even then it would be down to the photographer as to whether they got every last pixel out of their equipment!
I DO ALOT OF MULTICAMERA VIDEO SHOOTING, ONE THING NOTICES LENSES HAVE AN EFFECT ON THE PICTURE QUALITY N COLOUR N SAY TEMPRERATURE, WHEN I SHOOT WITH MY SIGMA LENSES N THEN SHOOT WITH MY CANON LENSES I STRUGGLE TO MATCH THEM ON MULTICAMERA EDITTING, SO I PREFER USING 1 LENSE TYPE N THAT IS SIGMA
G-Master renders to 100MP. How's the Samyang?
Without fail, everyone who criticizes the GM lenses fails to mention that point.
And yes, the A7Rs render beyond that already in pixel-shift mode.
Cheers.
I alway change the autofocus lock button to super 35 mode, but you can change it to whatever you want.
focus beep should be default to off and hidden so well inside some obscure menu that no one could ever find it.
On the subject of shooting directly into the sun, I wish you had created some low light tests where you were shooting into street lights, birthday candles, wedding candles, etc. That is something a videographer might be more likely to do.
If you do those tests at some point, you might want to try some wide open (typical in a low light situation) and try some stopped down 1 or 2 f/stops.
Thank you.
Terry Thomas...
the photographer
Atlanta, Georgia USA
"how often do you shoot directly into the sun?" that test indicate what will happens shooting a concert, the scene lights gives the same situation, and i think that many photog can use this against the sun test then
Here goes a tip for next test of noise AF. Change for AFC and the beep will be gone
The Sony does WAY better focusing on video... but I can’t afford it so my battle is between the samyang and the Sony 1.8
i think i that would make for a better video
Nice video! The inconsistency you mentioned in the sharpness in the corners is probably because your camera was tilted slightly down and it wasn’t parallel to the wall. It shows on the video against the lines of the side wall when you had the camera on the tripod but it’s not really a lens issue since you did the same for both lenses. Where the focus stopped is down to the tolerances and by the output differences are negligible.
Did you shut of de lenscorrections in de camera ???? for the native lens sony camera corrects these
Wow, the AF component of this video you're clearly getting the material confused. The Sony is significantly better, everything you said in that section was the complete opposite haha
Edit: I'm still in awe..the Sony is significantly better in AF-C.
I've watched videos from astrophotographers who have used a number of camera lenses for wide field AP, and there's a bit of a consensus that the Samyang and Rokinon lenses tend to have a bit of a green color cast
Good but why do u have 2 mics . Please explain
I do architecture fotography and you can´t allways go multiple the times of the day to do it with the best lighting. So it happens a lot that I need to shoot a building against the sunlight in wide angle shots. Flaring is a big problem in cases like this. The same with landscape or wildlife photography. You might take the shot or take a flared shot or no shot, coming back at another time or under different lighting is not an option.
I believe that a little vignetting is good, especially for portraits. It's good that the Samyang produces some vignetting. Less postprocessing time.
Thanks for the informative comparison. One thing you didn’t mention which doesn’t matter for stills shooters but critical for motion picture capture is focus breathing. Did you happen to notice if the Samyang was breathing and if so, was it subtle or pronounced?
The section regarding lens colour variations. Whether it's down to "expensive" lenses being "better" for rendering colour, I cannot say. However, the differences do exist.
The greatest lens for colour that I have EVER used was the Canon 85mm f1.2 mk 1 (which was very expensive at the time I bought it). For beautiful skin colours it was unbeatable, I have never seen anything like it. Unfortunately on my Canon DSLR's it back focused so much even the maximum settings of the focus adjustment within the camera couldn't make a sufficient adjustment. I therefore ended up with missed focus unless I stopped it down a lot. In a studio with strobes I could do that and I loved the results (and so did the models who loved how their skin rendered). I eventually replaced it when I got my Sony cameras. I have the Sony 85mm f1.8, Sigma 105mm f1.4 and the Zeiss 135mm f2 APO manual focus. Each of those lenses will beat the 85mm f1.2 for sharpness hands down (they should do as they are much more modern designs) and I am happy with them but they can't match the colours I used to get out of the Canon 85mm - it was unbeatable.
I have tried to recreate the skin colours within Photoshop and I just can't do it. If it wasn't for the terrible issues with its focus I would still have it.
I am not a "fan" boy of any system, I have owned Nikon, Canon (mainly) and Sony...I will use what ever camera suits me as an individual and so for me it's the results count the most.
I do not know if a camera and lens manufacturer can engineer a lens specifically for colour but if Canon were able to do that, they did a supreme job with the 85mm. If a manufacturer came up with a new lens that could match the colour rendition I would buy it.
I understand the reason for the comments in the video regarding the colours and once again I admit I don't know if it's down to expense, it's probably more down to a firm like Canon engineering the lens to do it.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
Good video by the way
You can use an external monitor/recorder to test autofocus speed.
I'm actually looking at the manual focus version of one of these lenses right now to use in video shooting... From what I have been able to find it's for the most part the exact same design and lens set up... Including the aperture contacts and the ability to confirm focus electronically..It just does not have the autofocus motor...just wondering if you realized while you were putting this together what a cool shot at 12:40.. that shallow depth-of-field but such a precise sharp focus on him...One of the reasons why I started looking at this lens seriously. Very nice review and I like how you use tons of illustration and make that effort rather than just sitting and talking at the camera. I think I agree with you a lot,, having shot with Nikon lenses and Sony , Rokinon and especially the Leica lenses on the micro four-thirds about the color issue.... All lens formulas are different based on what the manufacturer wants to create as an end product... And in the end it's always a compromise between performance and cost..I will say though that using the Leica prime lenses on a camera like the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema 4K vs many other micro 4/3 lenses... Or adapted Rokinon or Canon lenses... The Leica lenses do have a "pop".. especially in the area of contrast that other lenses don't display. In the end it's not necessarily better always...it's just a different characteristic of that lens line.
For a lens to have “better” or more natural colors, the lens must capture a wider field of electromagnetic waves over the other. I doubt, just like you, that this is the case here, and it probably wouldn’t be noticeable, so it must have something to do with the individual lenses combined with the camera body.
pity you didn't do a panning auto focus in video mode. that would have been an interesting test
My Sony 24-105 makes the same noise in AF-S mode, but the sound is only noticeable in a very quiet room.
That seems like too much of a difference in focal length on the color test. Is the software cropping out the edges for lens correction?
About the colorcasting: Personally I own a Oshiro Macro 2:1 this lens is a "cheap" lens that have all his focus on the magnification (it look very similar to the laowa 2:1). I never had any issue about colors with any lenses, as you said, changing the color temperature fix usually everything, but this lens... I cannot really use it. I tried it so many times and everytime I import the photos in Camera One colors are not what I would expect, they always look much more boring and plain than any other lenses I own. I use it in my fuji system and I am really disappointed by this lenses, that never give me back what I expect. Maybe the problem is the contrast, I have no idea. This is the only lense that I would not use for anything, because I do not like the outcome, I think that is good just for B&W photos
Re : the sun flares , yes the samyang has green reflections and blue in the pic , the Sony did also have blue , so neither was perfect it seems.
Considering Profoto vs Godox with 4:1 ratio and doing similar test result. Sony vs Samyang with 2.5:1 ratio, I found it a lot easier to accept.
Could you do a behind-the-scenes of what you're shooting video on? I think you were using the GH5 in the studio, is that still true for field work? Are you mostly just using footage with settings that make it good "in camera", or are you grading, etc? It would be nice to hear what you guys are doing and any tips or tricks you'd recommend for video.
Great video! Ive been looking for a new portrait lens. Think i figured out what i want to try!
interesting comparison. I would have loved to see an eye-af comparison in a portrait shooting. Also waiting to see a comparison against the Sony 1.8/85 Keep up the good work!
I have purshed the Samyang for on my Nikon D750 and am very happy with it. Thanks for your review!
There is something about the colour rendition of more expensive lenses that the manufacturer matches all lenses to the same standard, so that professional photographers get consistence results. That means a lot of time is spent on the choice of materials and technique to use to get there. It does not necessarily mean the overall colour rendition is better. Cheaper lenses will vary more and the standard deviation is broader. That results in less time consumption and less money spent on the end. For us - amateurs - this is totally irrelevant and we must except that for manufacturers like Leitz (Leica), Schneider (Kreuznach), Zeiss (Ikon) and the likes, we are not the target customers...
P.S.: I can only speak out of experience about this by using an 8mm film camera in the late 70's which had a Schneider (Nizogon) lens. My buddy had a Sanyo 8mm and we both shot the same wildlife from different angles to mount them in post... but it didn't work that way because the colours just didn't match (even though we both used the same film): the Schneider was way more contrasty and the foliage had far more different shades of green and red. I agree that in digital this is less significant, but we have to keep in mind that what is not there, will never be restored by any software. Also: that was consumer stuff from the seventies. These days even cheap kit lenses preform (mostly) very good.
Why was your aperture closed when doing the autofocus test on the Sony lens? Wouldnt that make a difference considering your lens was wide open during the samyang test?
I definitely don't believe more expensive lenses capture colors "better" but when you think about workflow, I think you have to consider how much time you're going to save when you buy lenses of a set vs. mixing and matching between different manufacturers. Unless you shoot everything with 1 lens of course.
My zeiss classics don’t need any saturation most of the time. My Sony kit lenses let in less detail a saturation. My file sizes actually went up by MB with the zeiss too. I know it’s kind of a bad comparison but a lot of older lenses suffered from poor detail and saturation. I don’t really think that’s the case these days though. Pretty much all optics are insanely good in the current generation of lenses. It’s hard to get a bad lens optically. However build quality, ergonomics, AF, weight and customer support are all things to consider. Now do I think Sony gm lenses are worth it? Probably but I can save money on the FE 85 1.8 or the sigma for faster and better performance. I’d even take the zeiss baits over the gm 85mm. The price of the gm lineup doesn’t add up.. I mean the 85 FE 1.8 seems like the best bang for your buck. You should do samyang vs viltrox vs Sony 1.8 and Sony gm 1.4 (all 85mm). That would be cool. The viltrox is only $399.
You taught me a lot specially as a rookie like myself. I'm thinking of getting a Sony a6600 or the Fuji xt4 or the Sony a7iii. Peace and love from East Harlem NYC...
About the noise with the Sony focusing, my Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm makes the exact same sound. I always thought it was weird, but at least mine isn't not the only one doing it😂
The Sony definitely killed the Samyang in the AF video mode while David was walking towards the camera. No doubt about that. However, I love my Samyang 24mm. Will probably pick up the 85mm too. Thanks for the review.
Sony lens autofocus is very loud, but after a firmware update to the lens is so much quieter. Check the Sony official site for the new firmware for this lens. Cheers!
You stated that the samyang suffers more from diffraction but, correct me if Im wrong, its not dependent on the lens at all, its the pixel size of the sensor that determines when diffraction kicks in(?)
Alfred Johansson diffraction can def be better or worse from the lens itself. With your reasoning, every lens would have the same diffraction on the same camera body. That’s not the case -P
Fstoppers no but the same size of the circle of confusion, which would be same aperture and focal length, no?
Autofocus sound may vary from copy to copy. For example my Canon 24-70 II is a bit noisy compared to some other copies... But autofocus performance is great for stills so...
Amazing video with opinions clearly presented from different user's perspective. I am just watching lens reviews for fun, but this is by far the most comprehensive comparison video.
i just picked up the 135mm 1.8 (IDENTICAL in sharpness to the native 135, which happens to be Sony's sharpest lens in their lineup). great review. the cool thing about samyang/rokinon is that they spent years perfecting their optics before throwing af into the mix. no one can argue their image reproduction/sharpness. I'm so thankful that they have finally been pushing out these af options. at the price, it's a no brainer. take that extra money and fly somewhere cool for a week-shoot landscapes you'd have to wait until next year to see if you bought the sony option ;) (btw, as of today, you can get a used version of this samyang 85 for about 375!! just bananas, man.)
I just managed to get a used one off eBay for $325, it's Like New, barely noticeable usage. Can't wait to test it out.
I'm just starting out in Photography but these issues exist in every other industry from computing to audio to whatever you're interested in. If you're making money with your Photography then the question is "Does the Sony lens save me time fixing certain aberrations?" If you're a hobbyist then time != money thus you're likely better off with the Samyang.