Mitakon Speedmaster 135mm F1.4, world&#39;s fastest 135mm lens, is up for pre-order

LukeDuciel MY GOD! you know how to travel in time!!! Maybe this lens not only sucks as you state but also is the harbinger of the end of the world!!!

OH PLEASE dear time traveler do tell us!!!

Oct 22, 2015permalink

LukeDuciel

There has been sample photos over the net. Search them by yourself.

IQ is not the problem, the dimension is. With the size and weight, this thing is horrible to use. With all these weight and bulk, it is still manual focus and a 135mm. I could do more stuff with a 200 F2.

Engineering is all about dance within the lines.

Oct 23, 2015permalink

Banh Mi

Luke, look at the Sigma 500mm and you will see you have to go to Gym 3 years to get 6 packs and you still need 3 tripods to handle that lens. Hahahhaa. HOwever, some people like L Red Ring, some like small Olympus, and some like Big and Long lens like my gf.

Oct 23, 2015permalink

Ran Plett

Happy to see more attention given to the 135mm FL. Now if only one of the lens manufacturers can create a Canon mount 135 f2 IS, I'd grab one in a heartbeat.

I think a MF 135 f1.4 would be far too difficult to work with unless you have a dedicated focus puller. So that, the high cost, and limited production run suggests it's been developed for the cine crowd.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Canon's 135f2 is nearly 20 years old now. I haven't heard any rumors about a replacement, but I would expect to see an IS Mark II version coming out soon anyway.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Although... I could also be completely wrong because it's a pretty awesome lens how it is, and adding weather sealing and IS would make it more experience, which would make it less attractive next to the 70-200 2.8 IS, which might lead to lower sales. Canon often delays products to avoid cannibalization of it's main lines. (See 5D 3 and 4)

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Ran Plett

Yeah I hear what you are saying, but I htink it's more of a matter of the 135 / 2 prime being a 'specialty' lens and there's not so much of a market for it, especially given how good the 70-200's are. Most people are pretty happy with the image quality, and it would be even better with IS :)

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Yea. It's really fun though. Some of my most enjoyable shooting days are walking around with the 135/f2. It's an experience that a lot of more "useful" lenses just can't offer.

Oct 23, 2015permalink

Ran Plett

I absolutely agree with you on that. I guess you kind of get a similar effect at 200 / 2.8, but with a lot less bulk (referring specifically to the 70-200 / 2.8's), and that is so much better for travel.

The Nikon 135 version hasn't been updated in ages either. That has a pretty interesting feature too, if you haven't seen it before.

Oct 24, 2015permalink

ilza

OK, the price of a glass element goes between 4th and 5th power of the diameter.

Now take their 85mm f1.2 — which is about $800.
800*(135/85/1.4*1.2)**4.5 ≈ 3206
Enough said. The price is absolutely justified (as far as the optical part goes). — Even if ALL they needed to do was to geometrically scale the lens design (which would NOT improve the angular resolution!).

And: this also shows that the price going to the mechanical part increases too. So they had a chance to improve the mechanical part A LOT.

Ilya

Oct 22, 2015*permalink

Edgar_in_Indy

Anyone know if Sigma is still working on a fast 135mm Art lens? I heard rumors to that effect a year or so ago, but nothing recently.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

adengappasami

Bold i would say. ZY optics are actually good. Their construction exceptionally NOT SO. Both the 85 and 50mm are actually fantastic lens.

But they were affordable. Not the 135. Its fast agreed, but too costly coming from ZY

I have had their poor construction experience and will be super upset if the 135 starts breaking down because of loose screws :)

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Did anyone 20 years ago imagine Hyundai would be producing cars like they do now? Things change.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

adengappasami

Hyundai quality may have improved. But no one is paying BMW price to get a hyundai. They pay hyundai price only

Oct 21, 2015permalink

If that lens were Nikon, or Leica, or anyone else except maybe Samyang, you would be paying a lot more. My comment had to do with the changing (improving) quality of some aftermarket lens producers formerly known likely for cheap lenses of middlin' quality.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Suntan

It's a TRAP!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

nandbytes

Just wondering if 135mm/1.4 is a big enough difference compared to the 135mm/1.8?? Is the difference large enough to pay a lot more, put up with a lot more weight and lose AF?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Rick_Hunter

So... Let me see...
- Chinese optics, check.
- Manual focus, check.
- 3000$ price tag, check.
- Homungous size & weight, check.
- FL/aperture combo nearly impossible to accurately manually focus, check.
- 500$ non refundable deposit to reserve one, check.
Hey guys, can you introduce me your drug dealer? He must have some really good (or really bad) stuff!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

lcf80

- 100 units, check.

Some folks might get it just to have pretty unique lens in their collection :).

Oct 21, 2015permalink

tinzi1

Hello, $300,000 is 2 million RMB. Pretty looking fund for any company selling 100 unit of glasses. Don't worry about the function or quality of this lens; because 100 units will be far gone by the time you wonder.

Oct 21, 2015*permalink

People comparing (and deriding) this lens to slower units or units with different focal lengths are missing the point.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

So what would you compare it to then?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

There is nothing really. Nikon's 200mm f/2.0 is a pure sports lens of the highest calibre and costs $5000.00 new. But it's slower and longer.
I guess Zeiss's 135mm f/1.8 for Sony is closest, but it's still slower.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

And canon makes a 135f2 with an incredibly fast autofocus, and it's 1/3 the price. This lens is clearly just a collectors item (limited release), or for those with really specific 135f1.4 tasks in mind. Not even the flash can manually focus sports at 1.4. They are probably selling it under cost, because research and tooling to get this kinda of product up and running costs a lot more than 300,000. Maybe they're just trying to generate buzz and offset some infrastructure while they work on the 10000 dollar autofocus version.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

OpenandShutterCase

Rokinon T2.2 at $600? In terms of affordable and speedy.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

I don't get this. The lens is collector's item and not for real shooting? After being lectured by an endless line of FF shooters of the vital importance of blurring-out the background in every shot? Surely you can't be suggesting an f/2.0 lens is any substitute for an f/1.4?

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Why not? At 3 meters away you'd be photographing an area around twice the size of someones head. At F1.4 your DOF will be 4cm (meaning if you focused right between the eyes, you'd be able to get the pupils in focus, but not the end of the nose), at f2 you increase your DOF to 6cm (IE, maybe enough for the eyes and nose, but definitely not the ears). They'd better be pretty unwaveringly still to get that shot too. There is less than 1 inch difference in DOF.

You could increase the DOF by moving farther away from your subject. At 12 meters your field of view would be large enough to take any non- NBA player standing up. Then your DOF would be would be 64cm and 94cm respectively. So, unless they are leaning against a wall, the background is still not going to be in focus. If there was nothing in the foreground (blocking your shot) then you could fix that by focusing slightly in front of them anyway.

Oct 22, 2015*permalink

Part II
Sure, the bokeh may have slightly different levels of blurriness, but that happens across lenses as well. So when choosing a between an f2 and an f1.4, unless you have a really specific shot that you want to take at f1.4, you're better off considering other distinctions between the lenses, like IQ, colors, distortion, bokeh, sunstars, AF, price, ergonomics, weight, etc, instead of just going with the larger aperture.

I have a 135 f2. And while I love that it goes to f2, and would think it would be even cooler if it went to 1.4, I am almost always using it at 2.8, 3.5, or greater. I wouldn't trade it up for a faster lens unless there was a good need for it, especially one that was heavier, manual, and more expensive.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

BigShooter

I'll stick with my Sony/CZ 135mm f1.8, it's fast enough for me and has AF to boot! (and was roughly half the price of this POS)

Oct 21, 2015*permalink

I wonder if they will even sell 100.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

///M

if you can find one, there is always the Nikkor 200 f/2 Ais MF lens, its about the same size, or larger, and runs about 1/3 what this does and has nice bokeh and compression... or a Nikkor 135 f/2 Ais, which will have better image quality, nice bokeh at portrait distance, and run $400 used, and fit in a normal camera bag.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Those aren't f1.4!!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Clyde Thomas

At this price, and limited run, they should make available for any camera mount.

Not like there's any electronics or linkage to reverse engineer.

I'd consider buying if available for AMount, the only large body EVF suitable for this giant. Can I pay an extra $50 to have Mitakon slap on a $10 AMount? They ignore my email requests for the 85/1.2 AMount version. Just typing in the wind.

Oct 21, 2015*permalink

The Name is Bond

Unless they put some fairly special glass in to it, it'll be soft at full aperture and one may as well buy the 135mm f2's on the market.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Zeiss 135mm Master Prime is T1.3.

Not sure of the f-stop, but faster than f1.4.

So this lens isn't the fastest 135mm available.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Lapkonium

i Guess the lens in question is going to cover full frame, whereas the Zeiss 135 T1.4 is super-35 format.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

PCalado

The Zeiss is a cinematography lens. For a different frame size.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Michael Ma

because this lens is not available to pretty much 99.999% of the population. Probably worse than that.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

135mm Master Prime does cover full frame.

Only the wide Master Primes like the 25mm don't cover full frame well.

Most people in film / TV would have used Master Primes.
I don't agree that they are rare or exotic.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

TN Args

With only 100 Mikatons, even less of the population will have access to them than Zeiss.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

These day fashion dictates that a lens is a lens.
Now there is no such thing as a cine lens or a stills lens.
Everything is fair game to be used with an adaptor or an accessory for any purpose.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

falconeyes

Theoretically, a cine lens has no focus breathing while a stills lens has.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

... and no iris clicks, is parfocal, marked in T-Stops, long and smooth focus throw, sturdy front barrel that doesn't extend for clamp-on matte boxes etc. etc.

However the industry is different now.
Even on huge budget films and TV shows it isn't uncommon to use Canon stills lenses or GoPros etc. etc.

Oct 22, 2015*permalink

falconeyes

Mike_V, you're right although you find some of the other attributes (parfocal, clickfree aperture) in still lenses too.

Nevertheless, even if still lenses are frequently used in film production, there still is such a thing as cine vs. still lens.

Oct 23, 2015permalink

Martin.au

Ahhh, just the thing for my E-M5.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Juzam

Shame they don't offer native m43 mount yet :)

Oct 21, 2015permalink

rhurani

Why such a lens? the answer could be: they received order for a special-purpose lens and thought while we are at it, let's stir the still and also make few bucks to relieve the design budget....

Oct 21, 2015*permalink

trungthu

The price is too high with a new unknown brand...

Oct 21, 2015permalink

BarnET

mitakon ain't exactly new. In fact they made lenses before i could walk. The company zy optics was founded in 1984

Oct 21, 2015permalink

trungthu

I's so sorry, I've known this brand for the first time. Even I've taking photos in professional field from 1983.
Maybe I have a narrow eye. Thanks...

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Can someone explain the practical use of this lens which isn't already well covered?

-With 5-axis IBIS stabiliser and already amazing high ISO available (hello Sony A7sII), surely the extra stop of light vs. a good F2.0 doesn't make sense for the weight, size, cost trade-off? (image quality still unknown)
- Or if is it just for obscenely narrow DoF that this is marketed? Couldn't you just go lighter, smaller, and cheaper F2.0/200mm? (and perhaps also gain AF which is more or less required for Nikon/Canon users)

...honestly curious to know your thoughts.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

M Jesper

They're only making a 100, so obviously it's just because they can, and quite simply to put their name in the spotlights. Nothing wrong with either imho. And nothing wrong with wanting something special, even if it doesn't completely make sense.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

I'm gonna answer that seriously, since it has been bugging me too...

One possible use I could imagine is concert or event photography, where it is really dark, you are a little further away than you want to be, and there is no way to use a tripod (and IBIS is useless since the subject is moving).

But generally speaking with modern full frame ISO performance what it is now, and factoring in the stupid-shallow DOF obtained at such large apertures, no ... there is really no good reason that I could see to pay $3000 for this lens over any f/2 or even f/2.8 optic of the same or similar FL.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

@M Jesper
- Yup, I suspect that's true... certainly it made front page of dpreview and host of other sites!

@Ricard Murdey
Good thoughts, although I think you rightly identified that the extreme shallow DOF might be a problem in that case... also I feel the size and weight may render the set-up unworkable for handheld use!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

profilor

@M Jesper, you got it. If people only ever bought stuff that made sense, the photo industry (and many others for that matter) would go bankrupt overnight!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

tr573

Where are you getting a cheaper 200 f/2 from Nikon or Canon?

Oct 22, 2015permalink

A 3kg 135mm lens, without AF?

Mind you, on the new Leica SL, this will probably count as compact prime.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Juzam

Made my day :)

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Alan Brown

that's sooo funny. I like your ironical humour.:)

perhaps you'll be branded a Leica 'hater' for that comment.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

An inexpensive compact prime.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Timmbits

I was going to say, send $500 to China... one of those countries notorious for not enforcing international patent and trade laws against their own...

but then I though, wait a minute, with this being announced on the web, they obviously already have a 100 pre-orders... so who wants to send a startup $500... and then sit back and wait, for it to never arrive?

Oct 21, 2015*permalink

jnd

Which startup? They are selling their Speedmaster series for soem time already.

About patents, much better for innovation than system with armies of lawyers defending trivial and never-to-be-used patents which eats up companies' profits.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

It's not 2002 anymore.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

For starters I hardly think this is the case of some evil plot to copy the lens design from another manufacturer, simply because there's no 135mm f/1.4 lens in existance.

Second of all the company is well established with a rather big costumer base around the globe (heck even B&H sell their stuff)

But the biggest problem is how blatant your ignorance is..

Oct 22, 2015permalink

Timmbits

That is not what I said. I was giving as an example, how it is nearly impossible to sue anyone in China from abroad! I run some interest groups for inventors and patenting, so I know a little about how the legal system in China works (or doesn't work if you prefer).
If you send them your money, you have no guarantees.
I much prefer to wait until something is available in the channel.

Oct 23, 2015permalink

alextardif

Fantastic product shot, btw! The only thing that's missing is a half eaten cup of noodle soup, used condom wrapper, and a pair of dirty socks laid out on the table - bravo!

Where do I deposit my $$ at again?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Juzam

It's guerilla marketing for social networks. Has to look authentic ;)

Oct 21, 2015permalink

swedishnerd

LOL!!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Eh... You are very wrong!!!! You see that semi transparent plastic like thing on the desk? well just imagine why the boss at Mitakon is called "Big Boss" ;)

Oct 22, 2015permalink

(unknown member)

I would think most of them will end up used for video.

Does seem a bit strange to limit it to 100.

1.8 or f2 is plenty fast FF at 135mm.......I have an old 135 1.8 and it is big enough thanks.....and I love the Canon f2 L.

There is a Vivitar 135mm f1.5 around though rare and unlikely to be close to this in image quality.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

And I would think most of them will end up as collectors' items.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

(unknown member)

Of course a true collector will want one in each mount!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

jimmy.walsh

Why on earth limit it to 100 units??

Oct 21, 2015permalink

So collectors will buy it.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

jimmy.walsh

But after all the money that went into designing it, surely it would make more sense to drop the price a little and sell more units?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Marketing 101.

1. Offer to sell a "limited edition" lens. This may attract buyers and gain brand exposure.

2. If still more people want the product, release a "new, improved" version six months later. Chances are, the chumps who bought the first version will buy the second version too!

3. Profit!

Oct 22, 2015permalink

They are testing the water to see if it is going to sell well, they may also need to fund a little the production of the lens.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

aramgrg

That's a brave move to pre-order a lens from a very new company at $3000 with a deposit.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

When it doesn't even have AF, and with a lot of DSLRs it would be very difficult to focus it accurately.

Exactly who uses a fast 135mm in MF, on a tripod with magnified live view?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Perhaps someone with a mirrorless camera where manual focus is made child's play? In the picture it shows it mounted on a Sony, so that might be a clue.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Ulric

That very new company has been making lenses for decades.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

"That very new company has been making lenses for decades"
Mitakon is a name that has been around a long time, but I'm not sure what connection it has with this company. From what I can remember 30 years or more ago, is that Mitakon lenses were manufactured in Japan.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

aramgrg

So if Kodak enters now DSLR market, we should tell it's been making DSLRs for decades? Absolutely no.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Peiasdf

Zhongyi Optics means China 1st optics. It is a state owned firm formed in 1984 with assistance from Japan after China opened up and NATO governments are helping China counter the Soviets.

Originally it was to make optics for military use, think infrared lens for missile guidance, and now just started to make civilian stuff.

Oct 22, 2015permalink

You mean the company who is selling lenses in B&H? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1072733-REG/mitakon_mtk50mf095bk_50mm_for_0_95_lens.html Yeah We should not trust them... (sarcasm)

Oct 22, 2015permalink

MAubrey

I never thought there would be a time when I'd think:

"Meh. I'll pass. My Nikon 200mm f/2 AI-S was cheaper and weighs less, too."

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Marksphoto

your nikon is 2.0, how does that compare when 1.4 matters?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

joe_leads

Most people will not buy this for the speed itself, but for a shallow DOF in portraits, and here the 135/1.4 compares with a 200/2 very much.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Marksphoto

everything is relative, most people won't buy the same lenses you would buy. This lens is also for shooting in dimmer light...

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Pandimonium

A 2.8 135 mm will already give you plenty shallow DOF. What would be the T value of this lens?

Oct 21, 2015permalink

MAubrey

To answer Marksphoto, it's comparable in its physical aperture: 135mm f/1.4 = 96.4mm vs. 200mm f/2 = 100mm.

They're also comparable in its function: both are fast medium telephoto lenses. How are they *not* comparable? What would you use a 135mm f/1.4 for that you couldn't use a 200mm f/2 for?

Anyway, my original comment was a joke in any case. Maybe that was less clear on the interwebs...

Oct 21, 2015permalink

200mm is 50% longer than 135mm. If we are going to assume 50% change in focal length is OK, just get an 85mm f1.2 and call it a day.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

@tkbslc: except that focal length changes have no linear effect on FOV or DOF, so you can't assume a 50% change at 135mm will matter as much as at 85mm

Oct 21, 2015permalink

PKDanny

Need AF!!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Learn MF!!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Buy the ZF!!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Nobody gives an F.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

mrschmo

Best F-ing thread ever.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Beware of the F-bombs!

Oct 22, 2015permalink

ProfHankD

Well, that's certainly a lens that makes a statement for ZY Optics!

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Valen305

Pre-ordered! ...my cat, that bokeh, bliss.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

This will enable a whole new era of cat photography, where the clutter in people's homes will be made completely OOF.

Oct 21, 2015permalink

Bokeh, no cat.

Oct 21, 2015permalink