Previous news story    Next news story

SLR Magic launches HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 for Micro Four Thirds

By dpreview staff on Nov 10, 2011 at 17:06 GMT

Hong Kong-based SLR Magic has formally announced its HyperPrime 12mm F1.6, a manual focus lens for Micro Four Thirds cameras. This fast wideangle prime, which has been doing the rounds of testers and reviewers for the past few months, features a traditional aperture control ring and metal-bodied construction. Its optics include three Tantalum glass elements for 'superior cinematic performance'. It will be on sale from the end of November.

Jump to:

Press Release:

NEW: THE SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6

SLR Magic expands its micro four thirds lineup with new ultra wide angle lens

Hong Kong, China (November 11, 2011)  - SLR Magic expands the micro four thirds lens lineup with the new SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 ultra wide angle lens. With this latest addition, the portfolio of lenses for the micro four thirds system is now comprised of five focal lengths. The world's fastest lens in this focal length, the SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 will be available in November 2011.

The field of view of this new HyperPrime Lens corresponds to a 24mm lens in 35mm format and this ultra fast wide angle of view opens up many new creative composition opportunities, particularly in the fields of interior, architectural and landscape cinematography and photography. Additionally, an ultra fast max aperture of F1.6 makes the SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 ideal for available-light photography. 

We place our highest priority in the development of all HyperPrime lenses to fulfill the demands of professional cinematographers and photographers. The design and build of the SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 is solid and reliable.

The SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 will be available from authorized SLR Magic dealers end November 2011.

SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 specifications

Focal length 12mm
Focal length (35mm equiv) 24mm
Maximum aperture F1.6
Minimum aperture F11
Lens construction • 12 elements / 10 groups
• 3 Tantalum glass elements
Aperture type • 12 blades
• Circular aperture
• Manually controlled diaphragm
Minimum focus 0.15m / 0.5 ft
Focus type Manual
Image stabilization Via camera body when available
Filter thread • 58mm
• Does not rotate on focusing
Weight 330g (11.6 oz)
Dimensions 73mm x 60mm (2.9" x 2.4")
Lens Mount Micro Four Thirds
Optional accessories SLR Magic 58/77 RING hood

Image courtesy of 3D-Kraft.com

Comments

Total comments: 126
Andy16666
By Andy16666 (4 months ago)

I couldn't find a scientific review of this lens before I bought it. Steve Huff and the Phoblographer gave it a glowing reviews but never really addressed sharpness, although if you look at their samples....

It's really soft! It's the sharpest at exactly T/8 but it's still not really sharp enough for prints. It's so soft that even for screen use, the pictures don't usually look sharp. At T/1.6 it's very soft at the edges and only a little less soft in the center. It stays soft at the edges all the way up to T/8, and by T/11 diffraction makes it soft all over.

I really gave this lens the benefit of the doubt. I shot with it for weeks, indoors, outdoors. Flare is terrible, but even when you can't see it sometimes you get this weird brown discoloration. Contrast is weak and varies a lot with lighting. It's also very hard to white balance it properly...the glass seems to be discolored in an odd way.

If you want a manual lens, the Fujian 35mm f/1.7 CCTV lens is sharper and better!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
deadlock2001
By deadlock2001 (4 weeks ago)

I'm with you on that one. I've owned it for more than 1 year since I needed something for night sky photography as well as for occasional architectural or landscape shots. For video where the resolution is not of utmost importance this lens is very good and offers some fun and creative possibilities. But for photography it's a little soft (and I don't mean shallow-depth-of-field like soft) and glares too much and is only usable from f2.0 on anyway. What I positively hated were small halos around point light sources such as stars. The lens is marketed as a videographer lens so I can't really complain. But I think the new Samyang 12mm f2.0 will replace it very soon.

0 upvotes
yeemeister
By yeemeister (7 months ago)

Wait, so apparently there's two versions of this lens? An F1.6 (same construction) was originally released, but it was immediately replaced by the T1.6 cine version? I think I may have the F1.6, because it says "F1.6" on the front of the lens. However, I've seen other versions that display "T1.6" on the front.

0 upvotes
Forrest4Trees
By Forrest4Trees (Apr 29, 2012)

just ordered one from Adorama $549.

0 upvotes
Val030456
By Val030456 (May 27, 2012)

Well, have you received it? If so, what's your impression?

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 14, 2012)

Heck, this here now is mid-January 2012, and this here lens is still not shipping.

We need some more lens ANNOUNCEMENTS from SLR Magic, surely. Definitely.

1 upvote
panman55
By panman55 (Dec 10, 2011)

the only reviews seem to be from people who have been sent these lenses without paying for them... so where and when can we buy them please?

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Jun2
By Jun2 (Dec 1, 2011)

where can I buy this?

1 upvote
jonnymedia
By jonnymedia (Nov 14, 2011)

Hi everyone. I've hard this lens for a couple weeks now and I really, really like it. Here are my thoughts.

http://www.jonnymedia.com/2011/11/12/review-slr-magic-hyperprime-12mm-f1-6/

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 15, 2011)

I would not call Hong Kong "China" and I respect the people very much, but I think you guys have a long way to go to learn how to design a lens.

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Nov 15, 2011)

Well that's it, from now on I am only buying American made cameras and lenses ;) BTW this lens is not a POS like some people say.
http://www.photozone.de/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/685-slrmagic_12_16?start=1

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 16, 2011)

and here is a standard lens for comparison (Nikkor 24/2.8D)
http://photozone.de/Reviews/551?start=1
since D3X has more MPs, you will have to adjust the scores down to match GF1. it's somewhere between 0.744 (= 3000/4032) and 1, but difficult to guess). also you will have to stop Nikkor down to f/3.2 to match f/1.6 on 4/3, using the test results of f/2.8 and f/4.

Comment edited 13 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
wijnands
By wijnands (Nov 13, 2011)

Well Adech, that's simple. It's to distinguish them from american made products

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 13, 2011)

American products? search "counterfeit Chinese parts."

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
adech
By adech (Nov 14, 2011)

Whats wrong with American made products now?

0 upvotes
Joe Braun
By Joe Braun (Nov 14, 2011)

What's wrong with American-made products now? They are all made on the cheap in China. :) (sarcasm)

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Jan 14, 2012)

"Whats wrong with American made products now?"

Nothing, really. We just don't have any of them now. Not unless you are employed in an industry that designs and builds killing machines for war, that is.

0 upvotes
adech
By adech (Nov 13, 2011)

Sergey S, that is interesting cause Avotis pointed out why do Chinese companies always feel the need to remind us that their products are reliable. It seems even the European companies feel the need to remind us their products are reliable too! What an irony

1 upvote
Sergey S
By Sergey S (Nov 13, 2011)

Why is this press-release so similar to this one http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/10/27/leicaS30mmf2p8 ?
Chinese company can't write own press-release?

2 upvotes
cesko61
By cesko61 (Nov 13, 2011)

:-D Unbelievable!

0 upvotes
Mike Davis
By Mike Davis (Nov 13, 2011)

English isn't your native tongue? No problem - just plagiarize a German!

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 13, 2011)

I don't mind Chinese or German nor I will mind the language as long as the product is good. but this lens doesn't seem good.

0 upvotes
adech
By adech (Nov 13, 2011)

The samples show its very capable wide open for indoor us and its hi tech in a sense. Its T1.6 which is more like a f/1.4 for regular photography.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 13, 2011)

the spec here says f/1.6, which is equivalent to f/3.2 and might be called a moderately bright lens 50 years ago.

1 upvote
phototransformations
By phototransformations (Nov 14, 2011)

f/1.6 is f/1.6 regardless of what camera it's mounted on. Its FOV is closesr to a FF 24mm lens and so is its DOF, but its light-gathering is f/1.6, not 3.2.

3 upvotes
Figure it out
By Figure it out (Nov 14, 2011)

@yakokkie: No, that's not right. f/1.6 at ISO 100 on m4/3 means f/1.6 at ISO 100 on 35mm ... that is, exposure time will be same for m4/3 as for film shot at ISO 100 f/1.6 .... That is, phototransformations comment is correct.

2 upvotes
Zuzullo
By Zuzullo (Nov 14, 2011)

@Figure it out: But I have read somewhere that this lens uses a "cinematic aperture" measured in T-stops and not F-stops. Where a T1.6 equals and F1.4
Can someone clarify that for me? Thanks in advance!

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 14, 2011)

if you cut 1 square mm out of any sensor from 5D2 or D3 to compacts, you get the same "image quality" on that 1 squre mm. that's what "Figure it out" said (my translation).

but at same ISO, the the same F-number and shutter, a compact simply cannot do the job of 35mm FF. so what's the meaning?

@ Zuzullo, "cinematic aperture" was needed because the roll has to be developed in the same chemistry formula/temperature. it's not needed for digital. when a lens advertised as "cine lens", they effectively say that it has poor image quality.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 15, 2011)

@ phototransformations, 12mm is 12mm regardless what camera it's mounted on. it will project exactly the same size of image (in mm, as opposed to PH) on the sensor of whatever format. so what? same thing to the aperture.

0 upvotes
IvanBerg
By IvanBerg (Jan 12, 2012)

T-stops are a measure of actual light transmission, after taking account any losses in the lens. (I don't think a glass with 100.00000% light transmission would do its job of bending light to focus it.) Two "f/2" lenses (e.g., with effective aperture equal to half the focal length) might have different light transmission. No problem for still photography, especially with through-the-lens metering. But when you're intercutting wide-angle and tele shots, you don't want the exposure level to differ even slightly between shots lest it distract the viewer.

0 upvotes
RDMPhotos
By RDMPhotos (May 4, 2012)

but @yabokkie, even tho "at same ISO, the the same F-number and shutter, a compact simply cannot do the job of 35mm FF. " For video that's a great thing. Not just good but great, and maybe even for Still photography depending on the photographer. I get to use super fast compact lenses that don't weigh much and I get a greater DOF then I would with a lens that has the same angle of view and max aperture on a double frame camera (24x36)mm . So more is in focus with the same low light gathering lens.

0 upvotes
cesko61
By cesko61 (Nov 12, 2011)

Why so many useless ironic comments about chinese approach, and about the use of grammar in the press release, so much ignorance about aperture performance, and so many out-of-topic "I would like it wider" or "I would like it less chinese-cheap"? Why don't you just buy yourself an M9 and change topic?

6 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 12, 2011)

Chinese or not it's a low value low tech product.

0 upvotes
cesko61
By cesko61 (Nov 12, 2011)

Yabokkie: Ok. But 12mm/1.6 is equivalent of 24mm/1.6 on full frame, as you say. The TS-E 24mm/3.5 may be high quality but not that spec. It is 48mm equivalent and much darker. I have a 12mm/5.6 (!) Voigtlander on my GF1. Pretty good quality, no comparable aperture, but I am happy that way. Anyway it costs twice or three times the SLR Magic. Chinese o not it's a low value not so high tech product. Why expect more? And, as someone says over here, the pudding makes the taste... the taste makes the pudding... if you first eat the pudding... no... first taste the pudding, and then... Oh, I don't remember. :-)

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 13, 2011)

> 12mm/1.6 is equivalent of 24mm/1.6 on full frame, as you say.

shame on you.

0 upvotes
rockmanexe45
By rockmanexe45 (Nov 13, 2011)

Yabokkie, what's the problem of '12mm/1.6 is equivalent of 24mm/1.6 on full frame, as you say.' by cesko61?
even on M4/3, the luminous flux won't change, f/1.6 is f/1.6, won't become a f/3.2. I would say it's a fast wide angle lens.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 13, 2011)

@ rockmanexe45, let's do a simple calculation, 24/1.6 = 15mm and 12/1.6 = 7.5mm. so this lens has half the aperture (caliber diameter) and 1/4 (two stops darker image) as an f/1.6 lens on on 35mm body.

it is f/1.6 on 4/3, but simply cannot do the job of a f/1.6 lens on 35mm FF.

also it is not a fast lens because image quality of ISO 100 on 4/3 is equivalent of ISO400 on 35mm body so it has to be compared against shutter speeds at ISO+2 stops on 35 format (do the same job). or you can get whatever fast speeds with poorer qualityh eliminating any base of comparison.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
phototransformations
By phototransformations (Nov 14, 2011)

This comment makes no sense to me. It's a 12mm, f/1.6 lens that, on m4/3, has a FOV roughly equivalent to a 24mm lens, a minimum DOF equivalent to a 24mm f/3.2 lens, and an f-stop equivalent to... an f/1.6 lens.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 14, 2011)

@ phototransformations
it has a focal lens of 12mm, FOV of 24mm (effect),
it has an aperture of f/1.6, and "all the effects that related to aperture on the image" of f/3.2.

it is a 12mm lens, and it is an f/1.6 lens, correct. and it can do the same job, no better, no worse, as a 24/3.2 lens on 35mm body.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RDMPhotos
By RDMPhotos (May 4, 2012)

Yabokkie, you are doing it wrong .. The light gathering ability of any lens at f/1.6 is the same as any other lens on any other format at f/1.6. The only thing that can change is angle of view, dynamic range and depth of field, depending on image capture medium size.
The light gather ability will always be the same...
My God, people that don't believe this .. use your dam heads !! Pick up a darn light meter and learn to use one. They do not have a setting for lens focal length or film size does it? Nooooo! That is because """The light gathering ability of any lens at f/1.6 is the same as any other lens on any other format at f/1.6. "" !!!!

/end discussion

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Greg Primmer
By Greg Primmer (Nov 12, 2011)

How about making a real wide angle for the M4/3 format. Like an 8mm... Thank you.....

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 12, 2011)

They should name the brand 4/3 Magic...

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 11, 2011)

yet another cheap lens? 12/1.6 is equivalent of 24/3.2 on a 35mm body. if you want a high quality lens at that spec, TS-E 24/3.5L2 is the way to go.

1 upvote
Ratso on DP
By Ratso on DP (Nov 11, 2011)

For video - aperture f/1.6 very important thing.
How make a fast shutter and low iso on f/3.2 in low light?

properly, without a wide-open aperture in any way

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 11, 2011)

f/1.6 isn't really a bright lens for 4/3. if we call lenses with f/2.8 or larger apertures fast lenses, by same standard we will need f/1.4 or larger apertures for 4/3. f/1.6 has no meaning without mentioning the format (the meaning is rather chemical than optical).

0 upvotes
dutchjaap
By dutchjaap (Nov 11, 2011)

the nice thing about the f-scale is that the value independent of the (sensor)format used regarding the amount of light needed for a certain exposure (my lightmeter never asks if I'm measuring for a 4x5 or aps-c camera). So f/1.6 is very bright , even on m43. DOF does vary for a certain f-stop between (sensor)formats, where at f/1.6 DOF might be too thin on anything bigger then m43 anyway.

5 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Nov 12, 2011)

f/1.6 is a bright lens.
But on a m43 is certainly not a bokeh master...
A sad fact is that a m43 body with a 50mm f1 lens produces more DOF (less BG blur) than a full frame with a 50mm f1.8 lens...[assuming same picture composition]
With SLR Magic charging outrageous price of it's 50mm f0.95 CCTV lens, and probably also this "Ultra wide" CCTV lens...
For shallow DOF lovers, it is much more rational to buy a used full-frame body, plus a reasonable priced f1.8 lens.

1 upvote
cesko61
By cesko61 (Nov 12, 2011)

You are right. But I mount on my GF1 a Canon FD 50mm/1.8 and a Canon FD 85mm/1.8, and I get very good bokeh. Everything is improvable, of course.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 12, 2011)

@ dutchjaap,
assume what you said are wrong and what I said are right and do some reseach. you may find interesting facts and rules that can straight things out through all the formats beautifully.

again an f/1.6 lens on 4/3 can do no better job, and no worse, than an f/3.2 lens on 35mm format, and DOF and brightness are only different sides of a same thing, no one can separate them.

* by brightness I mean the whole or part of an image, not square inch or mm, which people familiar with films, what I said "chemistry" which does not directly mean image quality if the formats are different.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Figure it out
By Figure it out (Nov 14, 2011)

yabokkie is misleading about f-stop. His point has been refuted elsewhere. f/1.6 lens on 4/3 admits sufficient light on its sensor to allow the sensor to use f/1.6 setting - shutter setting will be comparable for film. It is true that on m4/3 the DOF is like what a 24mm f/3.2 DOF would be like.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 14, 2011)

@ Figure it out, I think you mess up things. when we talk about exposure, we talk on square mm (has nothing to do with camera format), but when we talk about DOF, we talk on the whole image (comared to pic height, etc., if you look at mm, the pokehs are exactly the same).

the spec 12/1.6 is on mm, if we have a 12/1.6 lens on 35mm body, it will produce exactly the same effect on the same mm.

the "equivalent 24/3.2" is on the image frame, like when you look at the images printed to the same size. they will be indistinguishable, image from 12/1.6 on 4/3 and 24/3.2 on 35mm format. they produce the same result, same photo.

so what you want and care?

0 upvotes
boswelox
By boswelox (Nov 11, 2011)

Since when was 24mm "ultra wide angle"? Even a few compacts start at this.

2 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Nov 11, 2011)

Since 24mm focal distance <= 24 mm shortest of the FF sensor dimensions.

0 upvotes
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Nov 12, 2011)

Guess they will soon announce a 50mm SUPER telephoto.

1 upvote
cesko61
By cesko61 (Nov 12, 2011)

I think they want to remind the "UltraWide" definition of the 12mm/5.6 Voigtlander lens - that I have and mount on my GF1 with excellent results. Of course the max aperture is very different, and maybe this comparison is what they want to put our eye on. :-)

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 12, 2011)

24mm used to be "ultra-wide" before, and people used to call f/4 "fast lens." those people should be over 100 years old now.

0 upvotes
Tj Jelen
By Tj Jelen (Nov 11, 2011)

The proof is in the pudding
Show me the images produced with the lens

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 11, 2011)

Scroll down here to the list of all reviews and videos:

http://www.43rumors.com/slrmagic-hyperprime-12mm-f1-6-lens-officially-announced-bye-bye-noktor/

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 11, 2011)

"We place our highest priority in the development of all HyperPrime lenses to fulfill the demands of professional cinematographers and photographers."

Why did it suddenly become first person?

1 upvote
phutyle
By phutyle (Nov 11, 2011)

The text between the product image and the spec table is a press release from the company.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
beeldlab
By beeldlab (Nov 11, 2011)

Created this video in which I used the 12mm a lot. It was the pre-production model of the 12mm with the green ring, luckily SLR magic decided to remove it from future models! It was a pain when using filters. Great wide lens, although I would have liked the focus ring in front.
http://vimeo.com/31256823

3 upvotes
Julian_K
By Julian_K (Nov 12, 2011)

Wow, that's ridiculously good!

0 upvotes
ntsan
By ntsan (Nov 14, 2011)

that that really nice video! too bad people would rather stick on their potato head then to see how good this lens really are

0 upvotes
avotius
By avotius (Nov 11, 2011)

"The design and build of the SLR Magic HyperPrime 12mm F1.6 is solid and reliable."

Why do Chinese companies always feel the need to remind us that their products are reliable? Hm..........

2 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Nov 11, 2011)

My Chinese made i7 MacBook Air is more solid and reliable than American made laptops.

6 upvotes
Klarno
By Klarno (Nov 11, 2011)

Interesting. Thank goodness they went away from the chartreuse ring on the front.

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
1 upvote
BJN
By BJN (Nov 11, 2011)

The corner quality of this lens is really miserable. If you're into MFT for low light video work, maybe this lens makes some sense. But for wide angle still photography, the Olympus prime is the lens to get.

1 upvote
duartix
By duartix (Nov 11, 2011)

I don't see any problem with corner sharness...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hhackbarth/6315274442/sizes/o/
Where did you get that idea from?

The way I see it, CA is a much bigger issue.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Zuzullo
By Zuzullo (Nov 14, 2011)

Hei duartix, can you shoot some a pattern like a builing fasade so we can really compare the sharpness between the center and corner?

Thanks in advance

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Nov 10, 2011)

is "SLR Magic" a bad translation? its just as bad a name as lens baby, no one is going to take it seriously.

1 upvote
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Nov 11, 2011)

If it does the job better than any lens in it's class who cares if they name it dog poop.

5 upvotes
Biowizard
By Biowizard (Nov 11, 2011)

Yeah, if this all-metal bodied large-aperture prime wideangle optic delivers perfect Bokeh, fine resolution, contrast and colour neutrality, you could call it "osama bin laden" for all I care ... it is what it DOES that matters!

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
peterb999
By peterb999 (Nov 11, 2011)

I must admit I have never heard of "perfect" bokeh. I guess everything else is downhill after that.

0 upvotes
ianz28
By ianz28 (Nov 11, 2011)

Lens Baby was developed by an American and is an American company.

The fact that you know the name implies that you also know what their "specialty" products are.

That being said, is the name actually "good" or "bad"?

0 upvotes
Zebooka
By Zebooka (Nov 11, 2011)

Jooger, that's your opinion. No everyons.

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 11, 2011)

IMO Jogger is right, took me a while to realize they actually make good useful stuff rather than just cheap toys not worth considering as the name would suggest. And with a while i mean a few thus not considered product announcements ago.

0 upvotes
TaxiDinner
By TaxiDinner (Nov 10, 2011)

I think it's just a CCTV lens with a wide angle converter stuck to the top of it. Genius though I must say (in the fact that the less-informed will buy it, and SLR Magic will make $$$). Shouldn't cost more than $299 though, but most likely will.

-Craig
www.taxidinner.com

0 upvotes
random78
By random78 (Nov 10, 2011)

Price is determined by the quality that the lens offeres and not by how it is made. If it is good quality then people will pay the price, if its not good people will not. Hardly matters how they made it. Considering that the lenses that Canon, Nikon, Panasonic etc sell are mass produced unlike this lens, it is very likely that the manufacturing cost per lens to those companies would not be very high either.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Nov 10, 2011)

Yeah, what world are you living in. Not all the time. You do not always get what you pay for. Buyers, are not all informed, but best be. Personal preferences differ too.

0 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 11, 2011)

No, factory claim it's an original design. Even if they had reused elements from other lenses, the body design doesn't really support the "cobbled from bits" notion.

3 upvotes
Tom Bird
By Tom Bird (Nov 11, 2011)

random78 says:
Price is determined by the quality that the lens offeres and not by how it is made. If it is good quality then people will pay the price, if its not good people will not. Hardly matters how they made it.

<<<Not true. Some buy things just because they are handcrafted wonderfully. you just can say: if the buy it, they buy it :-)

ps: Is it really "SLR" magic?

0 upvotes
Slobodan Blagojevic
By Slobodan Blagojevic (Nov 10, 2011)

Would someone really walk around with something inscribed with as cheesy name as "SLR Magic"? Seriously!?

2 upvotes
QuarterToDoom
By QuarterToDoom (Nov 10, 2011)

So cameras are nto for photography but a fashing statement? Sucks to be you...

15 upvotes
ianz28
By ianz28 (Nov 11, 2011)

Too bad there isn't a dislike button.

I've been using SLR's for years and I could care less what is inscribed on the lens. I still use a 30 year old lens from a 3rd party manufacturer on modern bodies.

The results are far more important than whatever name is inscribed on a lens.

4 upvotes
balios
By balios (Nov 11, 2011)

If you're that worried, cover it with a red Leica sticker, put a Canon lens cap on the front, put a Nikon strap on the camera, and wear a shirt that says "My other camera is a Pentax 645D". Then you'll be able to hang out with the cool photographers again.

7 upvotes
Slobodan Blagojevic
By Slobodan Blagojevic (Nov 12, 2011)

Oh, you guys are so much fun!

To "QuarterToDoom": it actually must suck to be you, the "serious" photographer, and realize how I, the "fashionista" get published more, including magazine covers, and get more awards than you. If names do not matter, why don't you change your handle, under which you hide and hurl personal insults, into something more appropriate, say "iSuck"?

To "balios": no, I am not worried for myself... but for the people I might (God forbid) shoot with that lens, as they might die laughing, once they read the inscription on the lens, with the pompous and cheesy name more appropriate for, say, p3nis-enlargement pills.

What's in a name? It is Marketing 101. Companies spend millions on inventing and protecting brand names. There are companies specializing in creating brand names, like Namelab Inc. and Landor Associates.

1 upvote
Dan Ortego
By Dan Ortego (Nov 10, 2011)

It would have been nice to see it mounted on something as its hard to visualize the scale.

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Nov 10, 2011)

See here:
http://www.eoshd.com/content/4435/slr-magic-noktor-12mm-f1-6-gh2

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Nov 10, 2011)

Seb Farges has three great video tests with this lens with one comparing it with the Oly 12mm F2.0 !
http://vimeo.com/30233622
http://vimeo.com/30165718
http://vimeo.com/30097165

1 upvote
rrr_hhh
By rrr_hhh (Nov 12, 2011)

I'd say : advantage to the Olympus !
It is visibly sharper and has a better micro contrast.

I don't see the advantage of fast apertures in wa lenses : you have to go so near of the subject that it defeats the purpose of a wa lens. Bokey is not that important in wa lenses, because it is not for that reason that you'll use it most of the time.

In terms of light, the difference between f2 and f1.6 is not even a full stop.

0 upvotes
Almeida
By Almeida (Nov 12, 2011)

It has a price advantage and for video 2/3 of a stop might make all the difference, if there's not enought light to use 1/50 shutter with a reasonable ISO.

2 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 10, 2011)

I tried out a pre-production version of this lens. I really like it. Not something you can compare to the typical ultra-light auto-focus m4/3 lenses. While it has its limits, it does produce great photos, which is what counts for me.

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Nov 10, 2011)

well if it can't be compared to the ultralight, ultraslow, ultraboring m4/3 zooms, that's a great start.

Now for the fast zooms. Still waiting, waiting, waiting.

1 upvote
obeythebeagle
By obeythebeagle (Nov 10, 2011)

Looks suspiciously like the classic Leitz 50mm M-series Summicron.

3 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Nov 10, 2011)

I was thinking it looked like a Vivitar 28/2.8 from the 1970s. Appears to be reasonably sharp, too. But 11 ounces is substantial on m4/3. For low light, I think I'd rather just take a D700 and not have to worry about noise or quality.

2 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 10, 2011)

Good luck finding a lens for your D700 of comparable focal length that is that fast and will focus six inches from your sensor! At any price. Not to mention being able to use it confidently at 1/8" on a Pen body. Photography is full of compromise and this lens pushes one boundary.

5 upvotes
JensR
By JensR (Nov 10, 2011)

A 24/2.8 on the D700 is easily available and lets in more photons per second for the same angle of view. This equates to more shallow DOF, too. Minimum focus distance of Nikon's 24/2.8 is worse, at 12".
However, the Sigma 24/1.8 comes to mind - but that will be a bit larger. Given the ease of operation of the AF/AE lens on the D700 compared to the all manual "SLR Magic" lens, this might be the better compromise.

3 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Nov 10, 2011)

re: JensR
Your still using FF camera? MF is where its at. Lets in more light and even more blur....Lets ignore price and size because people don't care about those things right? Leica M2 plus 70mm f2.5. (in small text: 30+ grand and 5+lbs)

Junk D700 and FF cameras ;P

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 11, 2011)

@deep7 What's wrong with the excellent Nikon 24 1.4G? A superb lens. Don't forget on m43 camera the above lens is not a 12mm lens, but a 24mm.

@Mssimo Have no idea what your talking about. Nikon D700 is one of the best, most popular Nikons ever made, with gorgeous IQ. My 5D Mk II is FF, and I am "still" using it. In fact I just bought it, and it's great. The Leica your thinking of is the S2 and it's excellent. Why? Do you have one or are you just mentioning random cameras?

How would anyone take you seriously with idiotic statements like "junk D700"? Have you ever used one?

1 upvote
JensR
By JensR (Nov 11, 2011)

No, the "standard" cropped 645 format does not let in more light and DOF is not more shallow than "FF". Uncropped 645 comes close to FF, but is much more expensive, much more bulky and much slower. If shallow DOF and capturing as many photons as possible per time is what you are interested in, then nothing beats FF in bang for the buck.
This is not due to physics, but due to the available lenses for 645 - that's why FF wins out.

I'm lucky in that I have several cameras with different sensor formats, so I can pick the most suited system to whatever I do.

1 upvote
Almeida
By Almeida (Nov 12, 2011)

@Mssimo

You completely missed what JensR was talking about. What he said was that if you ignore price and size like you did, then there's always a better out there. Then he joked about junk full frame cameras.

* zing *

1 upvote
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Nov 13, 2011)

its called sarcasm

0 upvotes
Almeida
By Almeida (Nov 14, 2011)

Sorry, wrong reply, was meant for JenR.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Nov 16, 2011)

the format size is not the point.
a collectoin of large aperture, high image quality lenses is.
neither M2 nor 4/3 have it, yet.

12/1.6 is equivalent to 24/2.8 stopped down to f/3.2.

0 upvotes
jovillaverde
By jovillaverde (Nov 10, 2011)

Ohh, might finally be able to replace my 14mm 2.5.

3 upvotes
PeterNMIF
By PeterNMIF (Nov 10, 2011)

This will be a nice match for (1) color (2)size and (3) weight on my G2! The Olympus 12mm in silver looks terrrible on the G2 and is too small for a good ergonomic feel. IMO. And I wouldn't worry about image stabilzation on a 24mm equiv. lens.

The price (about half of the Oly 12mm someone mentioned??) is certainly a nice consideration.

0 upvotes
rrr_hhh
By rrr_hhh (Nov 12, 2011)

Look at Seb Farge video comparing the two lenses : http://vimeo.com/30233622

I'd say : advantage to the Olympus ! I have one and it looks OK on my black G3. Not the least : it is very sharp and has a good micro contrast. I think that those characteristics are more important in wa lenses than bokey.

If you want out of focus areas, you use longer lenses. With shorter focals you have to go way to near of your subject; this is not what they are made for.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Nov 10, 2011)

Interesting brand name when they actually make lenses for the anti-SLR

4 upvotes
poorfatjames
By poorfatjames (Nov 10, 2011)

MSRP, mi nina-Chavezes?

0 upvotes
Aaron MC
By Aaron MC (Nov 10, 2011)

I think that they are very smart in targeting low-budget film makers. Autofocus is basically useless, and mechanical focus is ideal. There's much less competition with this sect than ordinary photography, and I think that it's growing.

3 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 10, 2011)

Not to mention the aperture ring is stepless and both aperture and focus rings are super-smooth. It does work nicely for video

1 upvote
frosti7
By frosti7 (Nov 10, 2011)

simply fantastic video shot by Seb Farge with this lens
http://vimeo.com/30097165

3 upvotes
Roman Korcek
By Roman Korcek (Nov 10, 2011)

Hmm, I noticed some vignetting, though.

0 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (Nov 11, 2011)

I assume it was shot wide open, so vignetting is expected and IMO adds to the IQ for the subject material. I don;t worry about vignetting at all when shooting very fast lenses wide open; I usually add vignetting to the type of images I tend to shoot at these apertures anyway.

0 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 11, 2011)

I think, if I got it right, Seb's vignetting came with an ND filter fitted. I found any filter vignettes - you need a larger filter on a step-up ring. Without a filter, there is vignetting until you stop down but it's more gradual than what shows in that video.

1 upvote
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Nov 10, 2011)

This is essentially a 24mm f/3.2 lens in terms of FOV and depth of field. Goes to show you can have really fast & shallow DOF glass on 4/3 like a 24mm f/1.4 camera for 35mm SLRs.

1 upvote
rescuer
By rescuer (Nov 10, 2011)

the aperture is unnafected by the crop factor.

1 upvote
jovillaverde
By jovillaverde (Nov 10, 2011)

In terms of exposure, crop factor does not affect aperture but it's effective DOF is simply because the image is cropped.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
1 upvote
msusic
By msusic (Nov 10, 2011)

DoF is irrelevant, bokeh is much more important factor.

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Nov 10, 2011)

@rescuer..read again, he stated "in terms of FOV and DOF" and he's right.

2 upvotes
deep7
By deep7 (Nov 10, 2011)

The ability to focus very close has a massive impact on D.O.F. It becomes razor thin and the background completely blurs out. I'd post a link to show you but dpreview won't let me, sorry.

1 upvote
Jogger
By Jogger (Nov 10, 2011)

my nikkor 24/1.4g focuses down to 22cm from the sensor.. for m43, the equiv distance would be 11, which this isnt

1 upvote
Klarno
By Klarno (Nov 11, 2011)

In terms of DOF and FOV, this is basically a 17mm f/2.2 on Super 35. It's really no slouch, especially not for the price...

0 upvotes
Kinematic Digit
By Kinematic Digit (Nov 10, 2011)

More details and a short review here: http://3d-kraft.com/

Looks like a fun lens to add to the collection. I already have the awesome 12mm F/2.0 so not sure if this worth it to me, but at nearly half the price it might be something for others to consider.

0 upvotes
farrukh
By farrukh (Nov 10, 2011)

c. $499

0 upvotes
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Nov 10, 2011)

Cost?

1 upvote
Total comments: 126