Chinese MF lenses

Tom Caldwell · Feb 20, 2018

These are strictly not “adapted lenses” as they are specifically made for modern mount systems.

However they seem to be increasngly invading the realm of legacy manual focus lenses and the efforts seem to have come far beyond cheap cnverted CCTV lenses.

There are a few brands really trying to make good product at prices that might be challenging the margins of the standard name brands.

Maybe we should start making lists of lens brands that are making acceptable quality lenses that seem to be not a lot different than re-worked classic legacy MF lenses that were revered but now usually don’t need an adapter to use.

I tried a Yongnuo 35/2 AF lens in EF mount some time ago and was not particularly impressed - Yongnuo is now off my “intersting” list. I have tried a no-name “plastic build” wide angle that was not too bad a performer. But its build was a bit basic - nevertheless good value for knockabout.

But recently I have tried Meike - the 6.5mm f2.0 is no longer a full circular fisheye on the M4/3 mount but, strangely (yes you can do it), when adapted to a NEX6 and its designed aps-c image circle it makes a more interesting and quite capable full circle image. It is a pity that Sony did not think to put 1:1 crop mode in the NEX6 but it can be done easily enough in post.

So if we are desperate - then the M4/3 mount manual focus lenses made for aps-c can be adapted to Sony-E (!).

My latest is the very reasonably priced Meike 35mm f1.7 in M4/3 mount - seems to be a very well built lens with acceptably good performance and a pleasure to use.

Reminds me “sort of” as a modern Takumar-like lens now made in M4/3 guise. Well built metal body, smooth precise focus, de-clicked aperture, all with just the right feel. Images are not bad and I don’t really want to get into image perfection tests. But when I get the chance to capture images worth showing then I might upload some.

Meanwhile the object of my post was just to stimulate so responses on the subjects of Chinese MF lenses that are acceptably good enough to consider buying instead of legacy MF lenses.

I have tried Meike, but there are others such as 7artisans and Mitakon. Some of these lenses are not cheap either - many other brand names I have never heard of before are now being sold.

I will seek out and try and list some of the brand names I have now noted.

Is it possible that we can construct a quality “pecking order” of these new names on the block?

The concern of this forum must be that these lenses now seem to be becoming direct-mount (no adapter needed) for some of the stalwarts we have always thought as well gone but still wanted. For example the 7artisans 50/1.1 in LM mount (Sonnar) seems like a very nice super-fast revisit of the Jupiter-3 50/1.5 rather than the Canon RF 50/1.2.

Maybe we could see this a form of what is old is new again comparison as to what was once a Legacy MF classic that has been re-run through the computers and now is re-appearing as maybe arguably a better built and coated improved version?

This might also touch on the actual remakes being offered by Zenit, the new Meyer company and others which are at moe extortionate collectors pricing.

I am nevertheless more concerned here with the more humble versions that can have good build and decent performance at prices that are seriously alternative to buying legacy MF lenses. My pretty little Meike 35/1.7 cost all of AUD$100 delivered to my door. Quality/price value is it very good indeed.

SLN001 · Feb 20, 2018

I have done some playing with these new, Chinese, E mount lenses and in the main am pleased with them, at least when you consider value for cost. They aren't Zeiss but they don't carry Zeiss price tags either.

Meike makes a number of lenses in both Micro 4/3 AND Sony E Mount. This is a recent image I took with the Meike E mount 35mm f/1.7 and an old NEX-3N.

Trooper

The Meike lenses are also sold under the Neewer label. They are the same lenses, like Samyang and Rokinon.

I am even more impressed with the lenses being made by 7Artisans. They are making both APS-C and Full frame lenses.

There is also the Kamlan 1.1/50 for APS-C, the Wesley 2.8/24 and the Discover 1.8/25mm (which may bethe same lens as the 7Artisans 25mm).

Every one of these that I have bought has been of good build quality, aluminum shells over copper core, all machined by computer, smooth and precise.

While these won't compete with my Rokkor, Zeiss or even Sony lenses in terms of overall image quality you can buy a Sony APS-C body and a full spread of these lenses for less than many of Sony's fine but not cheap lenses alone. Certainly worth looking into if on a budget or just wanting to try manual focusing without the worry of legacy lens condition and adapters.

--
Steve
Just an Armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway.

Ching-Kuang Shene · Feb 20, 2018

I don't have expensive lenses made in China. I have two cheaper ones: KamLan 50mm f/1.1 (the same as 7 Artisan?) and ZhongYi 85mm f/2. Compared with Jupiter-9 f/2 M42 version, Nikon 85mm f/2, CZJ Pancolar 80mm f/1.8, Nikon 85mm f/1.8 AI, etc., this ZhongYi has a longt way to go. Keep in mind that ZhongYi 85/2 is likely a modern design, and that the Nikon 85mm f/2 is perhaps the worst 85mm of all Nikon 85's.

As for the KamLan 50mm f/1.1, other than its price, its is not as good as some old 50mm, 55mm and 58mm f/1.2 lenses. From f/1.1 to perhaps f/2.8, the center is just OK and not sharp. Well, performance near edge and corner is so bad. It has been praised for its bokeh, but I don't think its bokeh is great although f/1.1 can indeed blur background and foregroud for sure.

Here are some test shots for your reference.

f/1.1, ISO 100

f/8, ISO 100

f/1.1 focused at the nearest subject

This a 600x600 crop of the upper left corner of the last subject

This a 600x600 crop of the upper left corner of the last subject

I even suspect my lens has problems. When I focused the lens at center, the left and right corners are poor maybe due to coma, field curvature, a combination of both, or something else.

FOCUS AT CENTER. TOP: center, LOWER LEFT: lower left corner, LOWER RIGHT: Lower right corner

If I focused the lens at the lower right corner, I got this:

FOCUS AT LOWER RIGHT CORNER. TOP: center, LOWER LEFT: lower left corner, LOWER RIGHT: Lower right corner

Focusing at the lower left corner, the result is a bit too much fdramatic:

FOCUS AT LOWER LEFT CORNER. TOP: center, LOWER LEFT: lower left corner, LOWER RIGHT: Lower right corner

Note that ZhongYi 85/2, Nikon 85/2 and Jupiter-9 80/2 are sold around the same price used, and Nikon's not-so-good pre-AI 55/1.2 is perhaps as twice of the KamLan 50/1.1. However, Nikon's not-so-good 55/1.2 can be used on FF but KamLan 50/1.1 is designed only for APS-C.

So, I really do not like these cheaper Chinese lenses. I don't know how those upper end versions perform though.

Just my $0.02

CK

vyoufinder · Feb 21, 2018

China is making leaps and bounds with regard to quality of electronics. It's nice to see quality improving too because in the past it was a shame when Chinese made products were almost up to par but just not quite. DJI is a fine example. Mitakon has been making some good lenses for a while. I had an old 28 2.8 multicoated that was really a good lens, especially for its time.

Proplus888 · Feb 21, 2018

Probably the best out of the whole lot of Chinese lenses might be the Laowa 12mm f2.8. I don't do landscape of skyscape photography, but my colleagues who have this lens swear by it having nearly zero distortion.

If you go to there website, it is really impressive when you consider that the company was founded only in 2013!

Heritage Cameras · Feb 21, 2018

Tom Caldwell said:
My latest is the very reasonably priced Meike 35mm f1.7 in M4/3 mount - seems to be a very well built lens with acceptably good performance and a pleasure to use.

Reminds me “sort of” as a modern Takumar-like lens now made in M4/3 guise. Well built metal body, smooth precise focus, de-clicked aperture, all with just the right feel. Images are not bad and I don’t really want to get into image perfection tests. But when I get the chance to capture images worth showing then I might upload some.

I too find these new lenses interesting, but do any of them have click-stopped aperture rings?

Rod McD · Feb 21, 2018

Hi,

I haven't been game to try them. Being a detail enthusiast, and already owning the Fuji lenses I need in similar FLs, I haven't ventured to buy the bottom end.

Nor have I ventured to buy the top end either (eg Irix, Handevision, etc). I could be interested in the Handevision Iberits - potentially the 75 or the 90mm - because Fuji don't make a small telephoto prime. However, it's impossible to find any published tests or reviews. It seems that Handevision (made by Shanghai TV who also make Kipon adapters and the Baveyes focal reducers) either don't actively make them available to test/review sites or, if they do, the sites aren't interested. The net result is that it leaves you in the position of having to be a guinea pig with an expensive lens.

The fear is that some of these lenses will turn out to be re-makes of film-era lenses, and not a lot better on digital. In the case of short teles, that can mean pretty ordinary performance wide open and a healthy dose of CAs. The hope of course, is that they turn out a cracker for an affordable price. One of these days they will - every company started somewhere, including the famous names. And you have to take your hat off to some of these small Chinese companies for trying adventurous designs - high speed, high magnification, shift, and other features. It's tough trying to break into a saturated market.

Regards, Rod

Tom Caldwell · Feb 21, 2018

Proplus888 said:
Probably the best out of the whole lot of Chinese lenses might be the Laowa 12mm f2.8. I don't do landscape of skyscape photography, but my colleagues who have this lens swear by it having nearly zero distortion.

If you go to there website, it is really impressive when you consider that the company was founded only in 2013!

Well there is a brand that has impressed from the get go and no doubt when enough early adopters have thrown their hard earned at buying them and reporting back to the fringe nervous nellies with their hands in their pockets the brand will get a reputation and they will no longer have to sell on price alone.

I am starting to feel more comfortable with Meike on the quality of their product. If packaging alone were to sell goods then Meike packaging alone seem to be worth the price of the lens inside.

But I am not into CK’s rigour of checking.

Metabones are price leaders in their chosen filed and sell a quality product but there seems never a sneer heard that they make their product in China (or so I believe).

In fact I might ask if any electronic EF adapter is made outside China.

Unfortunately Chinese manufacture has been confued by western market demand for “cheap product”. That market perversely does not really want “cheap low-standard” but rather impossibly low prices for the highest quality product. It doesn’t work with Zeiss or Leica branding but maybe just maybe Chinese manufacturers can be fooled

For a while at least.

In the west branding is an indication to the customer that the manufacturer incorporates a high quality into their product and that the brand name effectively guarantees the product inside. China is just waking up to this fact. The Japanese figured it out years ago and in the process aced-out quite a few western manufacturers who thought that branding and packaging simply allowed them to charge more.

Tom Caldwell · Feb 21, 2018

Heritage Cameras said:
Tom Caldwell said:

My latest is the very reasonably priced Meike 35mm f1.7 in M4/3 mount - seems to be a very well built lens with acceptably good performance and a pleasure to use.

Reminds me “sort of” as a modern Takumar-like lens now made in M4/3 guise. Well built metal body, smooth precise focus, de-clicked aperture, all with just the right feel. Images are not bad and I don’t really want to get into image perfection tests. But when I get the chance to capture images worth showing then I might upload some.

Click to expand...

I too find these new lenses interesting, but do any of them have click-stopped aperture rings?

Tom Caldwell · Feb 21, 2018

Rod McD said:
Hi,

I haven't been game to try them. Being a detail enthusiast, and already owning the Fuji lenses I need in similar FLs, I haven't ventured to buy the bottom end.

Nor have I ventured to buy the top end either (eg Irix, Handevision, etc). I could be interested in the Handevision Iberits - potentially the 75 or the 90mm - because Fuji don't make a small telephoto prime. However, it's impossible to find any published tests or reviews. It seems that Handevision (made by Shanghai TV who also make Kipon adapters and the Baveyes focal reducers) either don't actively make them available to test/review sites or, if they do, the sites aren't interested. The net result is that it leaves you in the position of having to be a guinea pig with an expensive lens.

The fear is that some of these lenses will turn out to be re-makes of film-era lenses, and not a lot better on digital. In the case of short teles, that can mean pretty ordinary performance wide open and a healthy dose of CAs. The hope of course, is that they turn out a cracker for an affordable price. One of these days they will - every company started somewhere, including the famous names. And you have to take your hat off to some of these small Chinese companies for trying adventurous designs - high speed, high magnification, shift, and other features. It's tough trying to break into a saturated market.

Regards, Rod

I imagine that there still might be more lens builders than optical glass manufacturers.

However the Chinese industry must be off to an easier start than lens manufacturers pre-CAD/CAM. I have read that it once took as long as 10 years to take a theorectical design to a saleable product. More than one lens was simply a re-jig of a known working type.

Now I presume that there are many trained optical engineers in China armed with the latest design software and privy to the best glass and build techniques are being worked out.

Long product experience might not give as much protection as it once did but there is still a huge maze of patents to wend through when the best design thrown up by a computer replicates precisely what someone else’s patent clearly covers. Push the design a little further and a patent might no longer apply.

As China comes to terms with the law and ethics of international trade patents and respect for quality product they have to adhere to proper trade requirements.

But it is still easy to denigrate product ex-China a cheap copy or rip off. I suggest that this might still happen at the lower end of the market but serious manufacturers wishing to indulge in a high level of world trade would surely be following the rules.

I can (just) remember “made in Japan” having to go through a similar eye of the needle - but now their product quality has become revered. So much so that the product of western countries has had to lift their game or die. Much of it died. But as it has died low standard western made has only aquired an aura through age. Someone locally immaculately restored an Austin A35 (!) Heck, that was never a particularly good car even when new

itsDing · Feb 21, 2018

TOM. An old school friend "David Turner" who lives in Barnet near London restores A35 cars. I keep telling him to find better old cars to restore, but......

Tom Caldwell · Feb 22, 2018

itsDing said:
TOM. An old school friend "David Turner" who lives in Barnet near London restores A35 cars. I keep telling him to find better old cars to restore, but......

Austin 7 with a sexy body? And that didn’t mean “7-seater”. I did have an A30 for my first car - I should have kept it as a great restoration project

--
Tom Caldwell

Sjak · Feb 22, 2018

Tom, interesting thread!

So far, I've refrained from commenting on these lenses here, as they are not "adapted", but still I do feel they belong in this part of the forum.

I have 2 lenses from 7artisans, the 25mm 1.8 ($70 incl. shipping!) and the 35mm 1.2 ($140 incl shipping) Tiny and lightweight lenses, and ridiculously cheap for what they offer.

I bought these specifically for their small size, so it makes a lightweight package and is also pretty unobtrusive.

The 25 is a versatile walkaround lens, also during evenings, and has a minimum focus distance of just 18cm. It has nice warm colours.

The 35 1.2 is great for indoors and/or evenings, and of course for subject separation and the bokeh is very sweet. Although outdoors I find it difficult as the throw on the focus ring between 3m and infinity is really small which makes it difficult to pin focus on objects not quite at infinity. Also pretty prone to flaring but probably a hood will solve that. But it has earned its place in my bag for evening use and in bars. Another sweet detail about the 35 1.2 is the dented focus ring, a bit similar to the Industar 61, so it can be used almost like a focusing tab. And let's face it, $140 for a 1.2 lens, isn't that great?

Another lens I have in my visor is the 7artisans 50mm 1.1 in LM mount. An advantage is that it is not limited to my Fuji. I consider it sort of a disadvantage for a lens > $350, if it can be mounted on 1 system only.

Too bad I already purchased Samyang's 8mm and 12mm lenses before I was aware of most of the chinese wide-angle options. But the Samyangs are nice, and actually pretty compact, since the versions I bought are designed for APSC.

rensar · Feb 23, 2018

For my Panasonic cameras, I own the 7artisans 25/1.8 and the Meike 35/1.7, and love them both. (I have tried the Mitakon 25/0.95, whose price I wish wouldn't make me think thrice about owning.) I got tired of adapting lenses to the MFT mount, and prefer the smaller and lighter-weight "form factor" of native-mount manual-focus lenses.

The 7artisans lens is really well-made, and not just "for its price." I use it and the Meike mainly for video (thanks to their clickless apertures), and often in low light. The 7a 25mm's image quality is really good, but the Meike 35mm's is surprisingly good. Its construction is also solid, and my only complaint is that the throw of the focus ring is too long, though well-dampened and consistent. In fact, its sharpness is almost too good for a 16MP MFT-sized sensor; I'd like to try one on a 24MP APS-C camera, to see how that holds-up.

pluton · Feb 23, 2018

I recently tried the Fuji X 35mm/1.4 lens. Optically it is really good, but it has a really awful unresponsive motorized focus system that I couldn't face living with.

I am deciding between the Meike/Opteka 35/1.7 and the 7Artisans 35/1.2. I'll probably try the 7Artisans when B&H gets it back in stock. The Samyang 35/1.2 (for APS-C) looks like it might be fantastic optically, but their (Samyang's) mechanical construction has not impressed me in the past. Also, I agree that these days, buying a lens that is doomed to only ever work on one camera system (as all Fuji X mount lenses are likely to be) seems like a poor decision.
-KB-

Sjak · Feb 23, 2018

pluton said:
The Samyang 35/1.2 (for APS-C) looks like it might be fantastic optically, but their (Samyang's) mechanical construction has not impressed me in the past.

I have not used the Samyang 35 1.2, but I own the 12mm 2.0 and 8mm 2.8 (both in Fuji-mount), and have read about real world users on some other lenses (and seen their pics)

Most Samyang fast lenses seem pretty well regarded by those that use them (such as the 135/2, 85/1.4,...)

Also, I think the build quality is more solid than the 7artisans lenses at this point in time. I think 7a is at a point in its development where Samyang was some years ago.

However, these two 35 1.2s are vastly different in size and weight; this alone would make me decide in favor of the 7a 35 1.2.

pluton said:
Also, I agree that these days, buying a lens that is doomed to only ever work on one camera system (as all Fuji X mount lenses are likely to be) seems like a poor decision.

If the lens is cheap, or really good/unique, I can still justify it to myself, otherwise, I'll look for an alternative in a different mount. The Fuji-registration distance is indeed shorter than any other mirrorless system currently for sale, so it will make manual FX-mount-lenses useful only as (semi-)macro-lenses if adapted to another system.

rokphish · Feb 25, 2018

I have two that I like, worth the price I paid for them and then some:

Zonlai Discover 25 f1.8 (which might be rebadged to 7artisans 25 f1.8)

Zonlai Discover 35 f1.8

I might be tempted to get the 7artisans 35 f1.2 the next time I go to China and compare them both (the 35) and get rid one. Might also try 7artisans 55 f1.4 if more reviews/feedbacks confirm its worth.

I also have another which is a fun lens to use. Also worth the price I paid for it albeit not for general use.

Fujian CCTV 35 f1.7

Reading the reviews this might be a hit and miss ordeal so I couldn't heartily recommend this as readily as the other two.

Sjak · Feb 25, 2018

rokphish said:
I have two that I like, worth the price I paid for them and then some:

Zonlai Discover 25 f1.8 (which might be rebadged to 7artisans 25 f1.8)

I think it is the same indeed, and it's a nice lightweight walkaround lens.

rokphish said:
I might be tempted to get the 7artisans 35 f1.2 the next time I go to China and compare them both (the 35) and get rid one.

The 1.2 is all about the max. aperture of 1.2; if it wasn't then I probably would not have considered it.

rokphish said:
Might also try 7artisans 55 f1.4 if more reviews/feedbacks confirm its worth.

From what I've seen, it is not substantially different to classic 1.4 lenses in the 50 to 58mm range. If I was looking for a (new) fast 50, I would rather look at the SainSonic Kamlan, or the 7artisans, both 50 1.1 lenses.

rokphish said:
I also have another which is a fun lens to use. Also worth the price I paid for it albeit not for general use.

Fujian CCTV 35 f1.7

What did you specifically like about this lens?

rokphish · Feb 25, 2018

I don't want to spend a lot of money on manual lens thus the Kamlan and 7artisans 50/1.1 is out. The 7artisans 55/1.4 is cheap, also available in my prefer camera mount thus no need for adapter (compared to other manual lenses). So size and price already on my side. Just wondering about sharpness wide open, color/contrast. So far the little I've seen not to encouraging.

As far as the Fujian, I wrote a little review with photo samples awhile back. I think it's much better to direct you there: https://www.fujix-forum.com/threads/fujian-35mm-f1-7-cctv-lens.70725/

The concise summary: very small, light, cheap, pleasing color and bokeh (for me).

Sjak · Feb 25, 2018

OK, I understand. I thought both the 7a 55 1.4 and Kamlan 50 1.1 were around $150. Since I already have some very similar 1.4s, the 7a 55 1.4 is not that interesting to me, and between the 50 1.1 lenses, I'd pick the one I can use on more camera's (thus the M-mount 7a)

If the 7a 55 1.4 is designed for APSC, and below $100, I might consinder it, and sell off some vintage DSLR-lenses of similar spec.

Chinese MF lenses

Community Leader

Senior Member

New member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Community Leader

Community Leader

Community Leader

Senior Member

Community Leader

Veteran Member

Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts