Venus Optics has announced the Laowa ‘Argus’ 33mm F0.95 CF APO, a manual lens for APS-C camera systems.
The lens is constructed of 14 elements in 9 groups, including one extra-low dispersion element, one aspherical element and three ultra-high-refraction elements. Venus Optics says these elements help ‘to suppress both lateral and longitudinal chromatic aberration (CA) to the minimal at all apertures in its class.’
Below is a sample gallery of images captured with the Laowa ‘Argus’ 33mm F0.95 CF APO lens on various cameras:
Other features include an aperture range of F0.95 through F11 (with a step less aperture ring), a nine-blade aperture diaphragm, a minimum focusing distance of 35cm (14") and a 62mm front filter thread. Venus Optics says the lens also features minimal focus breathing and a long focus throw (300-degrees), making it ideal for cinematography. The lens measures in at 83mm (3.26") long, 71.5mm (2.81") in diameter and weighs 590g (1.31lbs).
Below is an overview of the lens attached to a Sony A6600:
The Laowa ‘Argus’ 33mm F0.95 CF APO are available to purchase on Venus Optics' website for Canon RF, Fuji X, Nikon Z and Sony E mount camera systems for $499. Fuji X and Sony E mount models are expected to ship in early May while the Canon RF and Nikon Z mount models are expected to ship in mid May.
It varies not just with the aperture but also with the rest of the optical design, some designs are harder to focus (the transition is hard to grasp) despite having standard aperture sizes.
Definition: - achromatic: corrected for two wavelengths (usually, but not mandatory red and green) - apochromatic: corrected for three or more wavelengths.
Now, I want to know how you know that it is not corrected for three (or more) wavelengths...
We're talking about colors here (wavelengths) and it's clear from the sample images, that show LoCA-infected magenta/cyan-colored bokeh, that the lens is NOT apochromatic.
Let's do this again, shall we? Achromats are corrected to bring two colours into focus (usually red and blue - not red and green as I wrote above), Apochromats will bring three - or more - colours into focus in the same plane (usually red, green and blue.)
This means that the secondary spectrum will be much better corrected than that with achromats, but it is not absent. Apochromats will still have residual CA (although much less than Achromats.)
To say that a lens is apochromatic or not purely based on the notice of having CA is pure nonsense...
From an artistic perspective, I am very interested to see if this APS-C lens covers full frame. There is no guarantee that the 35mm lens will be "as good" as this APS-C lens (which exhibits extremely cool lens flare, and is much smaller in size, and has perhaps a better MTF chart)...
It’s pretty cool that someone is making a lens that gets the apsc sensor that extra light and background crushing aperture. Why be so negative and separative . Call “yourself “ a photographer and not put yourself into a box and way up on a shelf somewhere. Come join the photographers and don’t worry about your sensor size .
The lens is not "just" equivalent to a 50/1.4 on FF, it just "is" equivalent to a 50/1.4 on FF. How you people conceive an unbiased cross format comparison as a personal attack is beyond me.
Why are you even commenting on this article about 35mm cameras Richard? This is an article about an APS-C specific lens, there is no mention about 35mm format in the article. So the only reason we can fathom why you would even mention your Equivalence waffle is to stir up trouble. Aperture is aperture and focal length is focal length full stop, Percieved differences in depth of field is not a valid measurement of a lens aperture, because it’s too reliant on many other factors of the scene you are shooting to even matter.
It’s not a personal attack, it’s just someone commenting here with the sole purpose of stirring up the most tiresome, boring discussion in photography.
I use APSC and FF formats, and I was also a big Nikon 1 user not too long ago. Whenever I see a lens, on any format, I tend to evaluate it based a global view if you will, since it was no big deal to me to switch cameras to get an equivalent optic if it was advantageous to do so.
That’s your comment, you weren’t on here evaluating anything, you came here solely to reignite the boring discussion with these hugely debatable ‘facts’, that’s the only fact in this, what your true intentions were when you decided to comment.
And to cap this whole discussion off, a 0.9 aperture lens will allow for faster shutter speeds than an F1.4 lens, regardless of which camera you attach it to.
I'm having to trade accuracy for brevity here, but the crux of it is that a larger sensor has better performance than a smaller one. All else equal, FF sensor at ISO 200 gives the same image quality (in terms of noise & DR) as an ASPC sensor at ISO 100. So if the conditions are such that this 33 mm lens at F0.95 exposes correctly at a shutter speed of 1/30s at ISO 400, this is matched on FF by a 50mm lens at F1.4 at a shutter speed of 1/30s at ISO 800. Same shutter speed, same FOV, same DOF, same IQ. That's why we use the term "equivalent".
You have completely moved the goalposts with the assumption that you can just double the ISO on the full frame sensor.
This in itself is completely flawed, which full frame sensor are you talking about? which APS-C sensor? what generation processor? how does that processor handle noise? is the sensor BSI? does it have a certain colour filter that improves noise control? how many pixels?
In order for your 'Equivalence' to work, you need to provide 2 very specific cameras that give you the difference in noise control to suit your argument, and by that point we are in complete nonsense territory again, bending the rules of the experiement to suit your point.
Just claiming '35mm is one stop better noise control than APS-C' is a frankly ridiculous argument.
But that is the issue. 'All else being equal' means we have to pick 2 specific cameras that ensure we can say the noise performance is better by one stop in order to equalise the shutter speed.
My shooting buddy uses a 24mp 35mm camera and i use a 24mp APS-C camera, and as far as we can tell there is little to no difference in image quality between the 2, both look pretty grainy at ISO 6400, but both still offer very usable images at the same ISO. at base ISO they are both extremely clean.
We haven't even covered the mess that is ISO mapping between different brands and how they calculate it, yet another variable to consider.
The clouds behind me were loads better but you take what you can don’t you, side of the road on my way home from work. I keep an XT20 and 27mm in the centre console just to snap anything that looks decent, best decision I made.
There are sunflowers in our area but need to find em.
I work about 300m from where I live, so not much chance of a photo on the way home. At least you're not far from the Lake District (my fave place in Wales) and a 250 mile drive for me. Visiting in September, can't wait.
That's a novel spin, I admit. Okay, a 33/0.95 lens is going to have a tough job hitting any kind of performance targets, APSC crop or no APSC crop, but at $499 I think you just have to call it quits and let it be what it is: a fast lens for APSC users to get them some instagram-ready bokeh / low light fun. It's an effects lens, lets face it, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
Perhaps Brian Caldwell could kindly design a new Speed Booster enabling operation at f/0.7 ? It was good enough for NASA and Stanley Kubrick (in 1975) and should provide a 'bit' of a challenge, particularly if it has to outperform the Speed Booster ULTRA 😀
Why not? I replaced my Sony 20 1.8 with a Voigtlander 21 F1.4 and have anoher voigtlander coming, i selected the 35 F2 APO instead of the 35GM, i guess if you have to ask this question then MF lens is obviously just not for you. yeah, I spent thousands and thousands of dollars so I can get a lot of OOF pictures, LOL.
Focus peaking and magnification makes MF a lot easier. There's obviously a different and slower pace, but it can also be enjoyable and you end up with fewer images (always a plus!), all in focus. https://www.instagram.com/p/BYyF0Ydl7BL/
"why would anyone buy MF lens ? there will be so many out of focus shots ."
Well I actually use manual focus on most of my AF lens to ensure that I don't have as many out of focus shots and or what I didn't actually want in focus. Good MF lens are thought do that even better.
If you don't know when to use AF and when to use MF, you should sell your camera, even the best AF could get confused and you'd have to resort to MF in some situations.
Because at one time even amateur photographers knew how to focus. Now that everyone is a professional, many people think it's a "skill" and therefore not something just anyone can do. I would also point out that at 0.95, the chance of AF being just a little off in a non-OEM lens seems pretty high.
I love shooting manual focus lenses. It's actually faster than autofocus, if you don't need critical focus.
When photographing a group of people with a shallow depth of field...
a) I can compose and focus at the same time - no focus + recompose b) It's faster than dragging the AF point to the part I want in focus
I find it a joy to manual focus when doing event photography.
For portraits where whether the eyeball or eyelashes are in focus is important - I rely on autofocus because my ability to get critical focus isn't as good.
I understand that sometimes it is better to shoot MF but sometimes you want to shoot AF . All AF lenses i know are also capable of MF . Why not buy a lens that gives both worlds . I shoot MF sometimes too. many responders here tried to show how professional they are by using MF only . well sometimes AF is good and fast . I think the better way to go is dual lens - AF with MF . and stop patronizing me all "I shoot MF lens thus I am professional"
Watch what Jordan says about video focusing with AF/MF lenses. A lot of them have MF as an afterthought and are not good for manual focus.
You develop a muscle memory - turn the lens quickly this far and then slowly this far to achieve focus. On Leica M Mount lenses - there's a specific out-dent on the lens so you can know by feel approximately where your focus is.
I get the "best of both worlds" argument - but in practice it's often not done well.
[insert analogy here: film vs digital, automatic vs manual transmission cars, in person dating vs zoom dating, book vs movie adaptation]
For some people either is fine - for some people being bodily a greater part of the process is half the joy.
Before the equivalency fun police arrive: Yes, it's just a 50mm F1.4.
But it *is* a 50mm F1.4, for my Nikon D3500, which I didn't have before. And it's only $499. Options are good, and this is a good option. I don't think I'll be picking this up, though, too many good options already for my FF cameras. ...
Isn't focal length measured by the distance from the sensor/film where the light converges? a physical measurement? With max Aperture then calculated as a ratio of that focal length to measure the iris opening?
@ Woz D Boss - You are 100% correct, those are facts. Just as it is a fact that a smaller sensor collects less light, and the reduction in light recorded has a proportionate impact on image quality. Those who are smart enough to understand equivalence can take this into account. Those who prefer to ignore it will get along well enough without.
If i take the F mount 50mm f1.8 FX prime lens and set up the same aperture and ISO on both a D750 and D5300, the shutter speed will be the same... so what relevance does this light gathering nonsense have? How is one sensor different from the other when all the APS-C sensor is, is a smaller portion of the larger one?
This is why equivalence is pure nonsense for gearheads and not real photographers, and you can tell this, because every single real proper photographer in the world takes absolutely no notice of it.
Btw, nothing about 'understanding equivalence' makes you smart, it makes you quite the opposite in fact. It offers nothing to a person out in the field using a camera to compose an image.
. > It offers nothing to a person out in the field using a camera > to compose an image.
Some imbeciles haven't even grasped the notion of depth of field (DoF), at the core of the equivalence rule and of rules of thumb that are useful to photographers the field, like "f/8 and be there"
"[..] No complicated photographic technique here: just a basic setting (ƒ/8) with enough depth of field for most subjects." — Rich Underwood
Let's leave aside for a moment the fact that f/8 on a MF camera like a Graflex has a much shallower DoF than on the 24x36mm format.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that a photojournalist using a 24x36mm film camera, chasing fleeting photographic opportunities that leave little time for composition, let alone careful focusing, might have come to appreciate the wide angle of view and conveniently deep DoF of a 28mm lens stopped down to f/8.
Using the equivalence rule, that photographer can, today, easily determine that to reproduce the same angle of view and DoF on, say, a Canon APS-C digital camera with a 1.6x crop factor, he can use a 17.5mm lens stopped down to f/5, not f/8.
If he was using a micro 4/3 camera, he could also easily determine, again, using the equivalence rule, that he'd need a 14mm lens, and that a f/4 aperture would give him the DoF he's used to.
Focal length and aperture are fixed values that have been measured with a ruler or similar measuring device.
Everything else is just waffle. Why the hell would someone with a certain camera even be considering replicating the shot of another camera that they dont even use, or have with them when taking a photograph? What kind of tool goes to a location with 2 different cameras with differing sensor sizes to set up and take the same shot?? thats borderline insanity, and furthermore completely irrelevant to any kind of real world photography.
Thus increasing just how much nonsense you are talking.
. > Focal length and aperture are fixed values that have been > measured with a ruler or similar measuring device.
Yes, but imbeciles like you can't even fathom that some photographers, who were e.g. used to the angle of view and DoF of a 28mm lens on a 24x36mm film camera, might be looking to reproduce, with a digital camera, the optical characteristics / "visual look" they're familiar with.
Imbeciles like you apparently cannot even fathom that a photographer might /not/ want to go on location with 2 different cameras, and that a method that allows him to easily determine the visual equivalence of certain camera / lens / aperture combinations before he even leaves home is therefore quite useful.
Nope, still talking waffle. Not even remotely relevant. You are just making up imaginary scenarios that never happen in order to add some weight to your already nonsensical argument that means nothing outside of gearhead internet forums like this one.
Another anonymous mathematician with no photographs to display, arguing about silly values that offer no use in real world photography.
Thanks for attempting to refer to me as an imbecile by the way, an imbecile that concerns himself with the actual important things in photography like learning what my camera does, and how i can capture images with it, not filling my head with useless information like comparing it to someone elses camera that i dont even use.
Equivalence trolls are all the same, and you personify them perfectly with your imaginary scenarios.
Imaginary scenario? I love the 28mm fl, and the first thing I did before buying a Fuji was to check which lens would give me the same angle of view and how exposures would work. And to do that I used the basic equivalence formula.
No point doing a tutorial for the "less light" crowd. They seem to be taking pictures in a magic, parallel universe where exposures aren't calculated via aperture/shutter speed/ISO
And manual focus when the FF 50's are AF and only $100 or so more in price. Square hood on a Sony a6xxx with a wooden grip extension looks sexy though, I guess.
It's not expensive though, for a nicely made MF lens. As I wrote above, not everyone has the full frame options available to them, and on crop format it's a unique lens.
I agree though in that what I really want on APSC are compact prime lenses that translate to 28 mm or 35 mm FOV. So 20-24 mm. There are only one or two currently, the Canon 24mm STM, Pentax 21mm, plus Fuji. Nikon conspicuously has nothing to offer.
It fascinates me that of all things in photography, comments about equivalence are more likely to generate replies like yours (and the Likes it has received) than any kind of fanboyism. Canon vs Nikon, or even Sony? A matter of opinion and personal preference with no clear right and wrong. But equivalence is a simple fact of physics and not even difficult to understand, yet it always brings a certain type of naysayer out of the woodwork. I won't bother attempting a constructive or informative reply, because years of experience have taught me that it is a waste of time.
Its not a simple fact of physics as you so incorrectly put it... the 'simple facts of physics' are focal length is a physical measurement of where the light converges in front of the sensor or film, and aperture is a physical measurement of the iris opening, calculated as a ratio of the focal length... full stop.
So tootle off and try to argue against my point above where i attach the same lens to 2 different cameras using the same mount and achieve the same shutter speed. Because that alone disproves any of your 'equivalence' rubbish.
I may have misread, but I think the article was stealth edited. I could have sworn F mount was listed originally. Anyhow, "SLR" EF, F and K mounts left out in the cold. Not that I care, nor am I surprised, but it is still saddening.
@Woz. You're a funny guy, but your argument is, yeah, as clueless as it is dogmatic. A 33mm F0.95 is, as you insist, a focal length of 33mm and an aperture of 0.95. We agree on the numbers written on the lens! Congrats. When this lens is used on APSC sensor, it is - and this is as equally true as anything you said - equivalent to (has the same FOV and light gathering capability as) 50mm F1.4 lens used with a full frame sensor.
It's not magic, it's not rocket science. It's just a convenient means for comparing lenses across different formats.
Canon RF mount is certainly a mistake on their website. It will be EF-M mount. There will not be Canon RF cameras with APS-C sensor. No matter what a few people believe.
well, maybe they really launch it as a video lens only. I still am more inclined to think it is some typo/mistake. It would be the first Laowa lens for RF mount but only APS-C image circle. Whereas there already are at least 3 other Laowa APS-C lenses for EF-M mount (4mm fisheye / 9 mm Zero-D / 65mm Macro) .
There are RF-mount cinema cameras with super 35-sensors (well, two of them at least), so it's aimed for that. Venus Optics do mention videography quite a bit on their website about this lens.
simple logic suffices for this one. an APS-C sensored EOS R does not make any sense. All future Canon FF sensors in stills/hybrid portfolio will be 40+ MP = sufficient rez for built-in crop mode.
Just like in the film [FF : APS] and DSLR days before, Canon will continue to keep their FF and APS-C lineups separate. They will continue to offer * a full lens lineup, including exotic glass for FF in RF mount and * a limited lineup of compact/light/more affordable glass and cameras for ASP-C (EOS M / EF-M) - for as long as it sells. That way they have a lineup for all sorts of users and many users will take both systems - FF and APS-C.
All those Canon rumors re. APS-C sensored EOS R model/s ("R 7") are delusional, pipe dreams.
Super 35 Canon video cams with RF mount are a different story - and yes, maybe Laowa is trying to only serve that market niche with this lens.
Again, pure conjecture without a single fact. Your thinking is certainly simple but logical - no. You say "sufficient rez for built-in crop mode". You are not qualified to judge what others want. The M6II is 32MP, so a full frame would have to be over 80MP to match that in crop mode today. If RF lenses fitted the M series there is more of case for your argument but unlike their biggest competitors, Nikon & Sony who share lens across FF & APS-C cameras, that is not the case.
Nah 7D mark II is due for an update and it's popular line from canon 7D traditionally share same spec with 1D line, from pixel count to fps, the only difference is crop factor
There's a couple of Super-35 video cameras with RF-mount (RED Komodo and Canon C70). Plus all (or most?) Canon FF R cameras can also shot in APS-C crop-mode. But still, one wonder if there's more to it than that? :-)
I wonder if there's a Fuji X sample gallery for this lens? These pics look fine, it would just be nice to see how it looks on my brand of camera as well. Sony's white balance seems to look a little different than Fuji's.
There's a bit of cat's eye, but the bokeh don't seem to have a bright edge on them no matter what. Really quite nice. For cinema use, the key question is does it suffer focus breathing?
I have their 65mm APO and it really is APO (more so than my voigtlander apo 50mm) and many of their other lenses show very good longitudal CA performance so they do take it seriously. The 65mm is a scaled down version of their full frame 105mm macro so there is no reason they can't do the same and release a 50mm full frame version later.
That's great to hear. (And to be clear I wasn't being sarcastic. The Minolta 200/2,8 APO might not have ever been very APO but these J Rask sample shots have either been clinically CA-trimmed or the lens does combat CA rather well and you provide an indication it's the latter).
In the prior article here (from Januari 2021) the two closely-specced FF lenses were going to arrive in Q2 as well as this APS-C one..so within a couple of months hopefully.
Looks like a nice lens. It seems to have a romantic rendering over a clinical one. Lacks some 3D pop, maybe that's a contrast issue, but it's hard to tell from the processed images. The bokeh looks smooth and I like the subject separation in the samples.
I think the lack of 3d pop is because most of these images have ridiculously shallow depth of field. It often looks like an unnatural composite of 2 images, one blurry, one sharp.
H&Y has announced a new system of magnetic filters and accessories called Swift, designed to make switching filters in the field faster and easier than traditional filter systems. We tested two magnetic kits aimed at still photographers and filmmakers
Chris and Jordan took a trip to sweltering Florida to test out Canon's new RF-Mount APS-C cameras. Give it a watch to find out our initial impressions.
It says Olympus on the front, but the OM System OM-1 is about the future, not the past. It may still produce 20MP files, but a quad-pixel AF Stacked CMOS sensor, 50 fps shooting with full AF and genuine, IP rated, weather sealing show OM Digital Solutions' ambition. See what we thought.
Is the GH6 the best hybrid camera there is? Jordan has been shooting DPReview TV with the Panasonic GH6 for months, so he has plenty of experience to back up his strong opinions.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Most modern cameras will shoot video to one degree or another, but these are the ones we’d look at if you plan to shoot some video alongside your photos. We’ve chosen cameras that can take great photos and make it easy to get great looking video, rather than being the ones you’d choose as a committed videographer.
Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
Artificial intelligence is improving fast. Less than a month after OpenAI released its impressive DALL-E 2 text-to-image generator, Google has bested it with Imagen.
Firmware v1.01 for the Sony a7 IV promised an improvement in Eye AF performance but we're still finding that wide-aperture shots are fractionally front-focused.
H&Y has announced a new system of magnetic filters and accessories called Swift, designed to make switching filters in the field faster and easier than traditional filter systems. We tested two magnetic kits aimed at still photographers and filmmakers
The specification sheet, leaked by Photo Rumors, suggests we'll see Sony's next-generation a7R camera feature a 61MP sensor powered by its BIONZ XR image processor.
Canon's EOS R10 and R7 share a lot of their spec, including an impressive AF system, but the closer you look, the more differences emerge. We look at how the two models compare.
The SmartSoft Box allows the degree of its diffusion to be controlled electronically and varied in 100 increments from clear to heavily frosted via the main control panel of the Rotolight AEOS 2 light. Changes in electrical charge alter the diffusion and the angle of coverage of the light
Camera accessory company Nine Volt now offers a camera body cap that includes a secret compartment designed to hold an Apple AirTag tracking device, giving victims of camera theft hope for recovering a lost camera.
The R7's 32.5 megapixel APS-C sensor is an interesting prospect for sports and wildlife shooters. Check out our shots from sunny (and scorching) Florida to see how it performs.
Canon just launched an entry level camera using the RF Mount! You should probably take a look at some photos it (and Chris Niccolls) captured in Florida.
Canon's EOS R7 is a 33MP APS-C enthusiast mirrorless camera built around the RF mount. It brings advanced autofocus and in-body stabilization to the part of the market currently served by the EOS 90D.
The Canon EOS R10 is a 24MP APS-C mirrorless camera built around Canon's RF mount. It's released alongside a collapsible 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM zoom to give a usefully compact, remarkably 'Rebel'-like camera.
Chris and Jordan took a trip to sweltering Florida to test out Canon's new RF-Mount APS-C cameras. Give it a watch to find out our initial impressions.
The Canon EOS R7 brings a 32.5MP APS-C CMOS sensor to the RF mount. In addition to stills at up to 15 fps (30 fps with e-shutter), the camera offers IBIS and 4K/60p video.
While its lineage is clearly inspired by Canon's line of Rebel DSLRs, this 24MP APS-C mirrorless camera takes plenty of inspiration from Canon's more capable full-frame mirrorless cameras.
These two RF-mount lenses are designed to be paired with Canon's new APS-C mirrorless cameras, the EOS R7 and EOS R10. Both lenses offer seven stops of image stabilization and use Canon's stepping motor technology to drive their internal AF systems.
Late last week, DJI quietly released a firmware update for the Mini 3 Pro drone that adds, amongst other improvements, 10-bit video recording in the D-Cinelike video profile.
The patent explains how the auto-zoom feature could use a combination of digital and optical zoom to better frame subjects within a composition with little to no input from the camera operator.
360-degree action cam manufacturer Insta360 has shared a teaser video for a new product set to be announced tomorrow. And based on the visuals provided, it appears as though it might involve some kind of drone.
The Ricoh GR IIIx is a popular camera among photo enthusiasts thanks to its small size and 40mm (equivalent) F2.8 lens. Ricoh's GT-2 tele conversion lens is a 1.5X converter that extends this focal length, though it comes with some compromises. Learn more about it and check out our sample gallery shot with the GT-2 on the camera.
This 'Mark III' lens offers a few improvements over its predecessors to get even better image quality out of its ultra-fast design. The lens is available for Canon EOS R, Fujifilm X, Leica L, Micro Four Thirds, Nikon Z and Sony E-mount APS-C camera systems.
Chris and Jordan are out of the office this week, so we're taking a trip in the wayback machine to feature a classic episode of DPRTV: a review of the EOS R, Canon's first full-frame mirrorless camera.
Last week, we featured Markus Hofstätter's scanner rebuild, which saw him spend three months bringing back to life a massive scanner to better digitize his collection of large format photographs. This week, we're taking a look at the results, kicked off by a beautifully detailed 30cm x 40cm collodion wet plate portrait.
Comments