Thank you, Christopher. You are so consistent with your tests, as you use the same cameras, the chart, the clock, etc, that one can easily compare different lenses only by watching your reviews. Cheers from Chile.
Thank you, Christopher. I just bought a secondhand copy (1-month-old) for 500 euros. What a great deal. I almost went for sigma DG DN, but I thought of saving 550 euros then Samyang mark II convinced me. The IQ is good enough for me.
Samyang are really produces some great value lenses nowadays. I have just bought the 135mm for £670 with a free docking station. It is very impressive. This could be my next lens.
@@TigaWould you might be right, but I still don't trust adapted lenses on nikon cameras, except for the z9, but that's the only nikon camera on which the AF is mostly dependable, the flagship and the only one right now with the expeed 7 processor and superior software. I have nikon z7 ii, and I fight with the af every time, no mater the subject, and I use adapted F lenses and native z lenses. I heard the best lenses for z cameras, especially the z6 and z7, one and two, are the z lenses. I bet they are not going to improve the af on the z6 ii and z7 ii in any way, which is a shame, as everything else is just impeccable. Not to mention that the canon eos R, the original, with 1 aging processor, has better AF functionality, subject detection and subject aquizition and AF compatibility with adapted lenses than the second generation of nikon z, with two processors and better sensors, with native lenses. But that's not the point. The best option would be for them to make a z mount version of any lens, as it should work better with the aging and mostly inferior AF technology, algorithms and software implementation found in most of nikon's mirrorless cameras.
@@TigaWould i never use auto area af, only using the usual dslr like modes like single point, dynamic area, and sometimes I try the 3d tracking and eye af. I set the camera to only take a photo when the focus is achieved. Sadly, none of these are enough. I feel like the af on my old D750 did better than this one. And most of the photos are blurry, especially when using the eye af setting. I am not comparing nikon to canon. I am comparing the z7 ii and r6 mk ii, or even r6, or maybe r7 or r10. The comparison here is, the canon cameras are priced around that same price as the z7 ii, or even lower, and perform better in almost every aspect. As for the lenses, think about it like this. Canon is now one of the most popular camera manufacturer, right there with Sony( Sony sales are actually decreasing, while canon are growing). You basically own almost half the market. Why would you let other companies make profit from selling lenses made for your camera system, if most of the actual profit comes from selling lenses. It's cheaper for them to make a lens, than a camera. The camera has to be priced competitively with the other brands, but the lenses you cand price as much as you want, or almost as much as you want. The profit they make from selling a body is way smaller than the profit they make from selling a lens, so they have no reason to ,,open" their mounts. Nikon opened the mount for tamron just so they can attract people to buy their cameras, whereas the canon sell cameras like fresh bread, counting on getting their profit back by selling lenses. This situation won't change any time soon. And nikon should get those expeed 7 cameras faster, if they want to survive on this market. I must confess, nikon's lenses on z mount are some of the best there are, big and expensive, but almost better value than canon's or Sony's offerings on their systems. For example, the 800mm is absolutely a bargain, thinking its less than half the canon one, even though it has a darker aperture. The cameras (nikon z9) should compensate for that. I feel somehow cheated by nikon with this second generation of z6 and z7, but there is nothing I can do other than get as much money by working with it, sell it for as much as possible before they announce other new bodies and hope for the best. What differentiate canon from nikon is that they put state of the art technologies and software in actually decent priced bodies. For the price I get the z7 ii, I add a couple of hundreds of dollars and get the best in class af, processing and shooting experience. Yes, z7 ii is not for action, not for slow moving subjects. It's made for landscape and studio photography, but what about z6 ii? The lower price is the only thing going for it. So yeah, I made a bad decision. I should have waited for the r6ii and get it brand new.
@@TigaWould also, its not the adapters, its the system itself. The adapter just links some contacts. The software is the problem, the technology is the problem. Canon were way ahead nikon in live view mode af, their lenses were full electronic right from the beginning. The af was implemented in such way they allowed improvements. Nikon went on full electronic lenses ( electronic diafragm, in lens af motor) with their latest most expensive f lenses, and those are still way fewer than canon has. That diafragm lever is one of nikon's problems, but also poor software. Its just so laggy, and slow, and bad( except z9). All canons cameras work seamlessly, so intuitively, just right. I'm not talking about Sony becouse they are already matured on their mirrorless system, and I have nothing bad to say about them other than good job on setting a standard in the industry.
Thank you Christoper, question seeing how the 135mm and 85mm prices are close, which lens would you recommend? I know that one is Z mount and other F mount. Thanks!
I love my mark 1 version of this lens. I'm no pro, but it's almost too easy to get great pictures of friends and family with a bright 85mm. Thanks for the video, Christopher, always a pleasure.
I have the original 85mm 1.4 for E mount and I've noticed my images tend to have a greener tint compared to my other lenses. Has anyone else noticed this or could this be a defect with my specific unit?
I think it's a Samyang coating thing, I have the original 85, the 35 1.4, and I used the 24-70 F2.8 briefly before returning it. They all had a slightly green tint compared to my Sigma and Sony lenses.
had the mark 1 samyang 85mm and changed to the sigma 85mm 1.4 (Sony a7iii) There is no comparison as the sigma has better autofocus and better picture quality. Then again the samyang is very good for the money!
Samyang lenses look good on chart tests. In the real world, they're not that great with slower auto focus, color tint that's ugly, and their quality control is lacking.
Thank you, Christopher. You are so consistent with your tests, as you use the same cameras, the chart, the clock, etc, that one can easily compare different lenses only by watching your reviews. Cheers from Chile.
agreed with this, this channel is the only source i check to be absolutely sure of the quality of the lens
@@TheEnergizedcinema +1
Absolutely! He's my most trusted reviewer.
not as sharp killed it for me. wait for mark 3
Great job once again, Chris. Congrats on passing 300K!
Thank you, Christopher. I just bought a secondhand copy (1-month-old) for 500 euros. What a great deal. I almost went for sigma DG DN, but I thought of saving 550 euros then Samyang mark II convinced me. The IQ is good enough for me.
Samyang are really produces some great value lenses nowadays. I have just bought the 135mm for £670 with a free docking station. It is very impressive. This could be my next lens.
really? EVEN with the slow AF?
@@pal54321use some old DSLR lens like ef85 and you will feel normal
Hope to see a review of Fuji 30mm f2.8 macro 🙏🙏🙏
Did you notice you say 35mm instedo of 85mm in the intro, when you say the full name of the lens? Got me confused for a moment
Yeah I noticed also. still this is a great channel
FINALLY. I was waiting soooooooooo long for this review, thanks Chris!
I hope they will make this lens for nikon z cameras sometime in the future too. Awesome review, as always!
Pleeeease give us even just half the E mount third party lenses for Z oh my god 🫠🫠🥵
@@TigaWould you might be right, but I still don't trust adapted lenses on nikon cameras, except for the z9, but that's the only nikon camera on which the AF is mostly dependable, the flagship and the only one right now with the expeed 7 processor and superior software. I have nikon z7 ii, and I fight with the af every time, no mater the subject, and I use adapted F lenses and native z lenses. I heard the best lenses for z cameras, especially the z6 and z7, one and two, are the z lenses. I bet they are not going to improve the af on the z6 ii and z7 ii in any way, which is a shame, as everything else is just impeccable. Not to mention that the canon eos R, the original, with 1 aging processor, has better AF functionality, subject detection and subject aquizition and AF compatibility with adapted lenses than the second generation of nikon z, with two processors and better sensors, with native lenses. But that's not the point. The best option would be for them to make a z mount version of any lens, as it should work better with the aging and mostly inferior AF technology, algorithms and software implementation found in most of nikon's mirrorless cameras.
@@TigaWould i never use auto area af, only using the usual dslr like modes like single point, dynamic area, and sometimes I try the 3d tracking and eye af. I set the camera to only take a photo when the focus is achieved. Sadly, none of these are enough. I feel like the af on my old D750 did better than this one. And most of the photos are blurry, especially when using the eye af setting. I am not comparing nikon to canon. I am comparing the z7 ii and r6 mk ii, or even r6, or maybe r7 or r10. The comparison here is, the canon cameras are priced around that same price as the z7 ii, or even lower, and perform better in almost every aspect. As for the lenses, think about it like this. Canon is now one of the most popular camera manufacturer, right there with Sony( Sony sales are actually decreasing, while canon are growing). You basically own almost half the market. Why would you let other companies make profit from selling lenses made for your camera system, if most of the actual profit comes from selling lenses. It's cheaper for them to make a lens, than a camera. The camera has to be priced competitively with the other brands, but the lenses you cand price as much as you want, or almost as much as you want. The profit they make from selling a body is way smaller than the profit they make from selling a lens, so they have no reason to ,,open" their mounts. Nikon opened the mount for tamron just so they can attract people to buy their cameras, whereas the canon sell cameras like fresh bread, counting on getting their profit back by selling lenses. This situation won't change any time soon. And nikon should get those expeed 7 cameras faster, if they want to survive on this market. I must confess, nikon's lenses on z mount are some of the best there are, big and expensive, but almost better value than canon's or Sony's offerings on their systems. For example, the 800mm is absolutely a bargain, thinking its less than half the canon one, even though it has a darker aperture. The cameras (nikon z9) should compensate for that. I feel somehow cheated by nikon with this second generation of z6 and z7, but there is nothing I can do other than get as much money by working with it, sell it for as much as possible before they announce other new bodies and hope for the best.
What differentiate canon from nikon is that they put state of the art technologies and software in actually decent priced bodies. For the price I get the z7 ii, I add a couple of hundreds of dollars and get the best in class af, processing and shooting experience. Yes, z7 ii is not for action, not for slow moving subjects. It's made for landscape and studio photography, but what about z6 ii? The lower price is the only thing going for it. So yeah, I made a bad decision. I should have waited for the r6ii and get it brand new.
@@TigaWould also, its not the adapters, its the system itself. The adapter just links some contacts. The software is the problem, the technology is the problem. Canon were way ahead nikon in live view mode af, their lenses were full electronic right from the beginning. The af was implemented in such way they allowed improvements. Nikon went on full electronic lenses ( electronic diafragm, in lens af motor) with their latest most expensive f lenses, and those are still way fewer than canon has. That diafragm lever is one of nikon's problems, but also poor software. Its just so laggy, and slow, and bad( except z9). All canons cameras work seamlessly, so intuitively, just right. I'm not talking about Sony becouse they are already matured on their mirrorless system, and I have nothing bad to say about them other than good job on setting a standard in the industry.
I wonder if the customization for the focus ring was a feature they intended to use if they were able to make this for RF Mount…
Seeing as they did make the original version of this for the RF mount, it wouldn't surprise me.
@@RealRaynedance yeah, I have that first one for RF and it’s still one of my favorite lenses! It’s a shame Canon’s locking everyone else out.
0:15 Weird that Samyang names it 85mm lens as "35mm" 😋
😂
I love how frequently you’re churning out the videos Christopher! Thank you for giving us content and great reviews :)
Quite a bit of purple fringing on full frame too. Still, not bad for the price!
Overall it is better then sony 85 f1.8 ?
I want to see how this compares with the new Meike 85mm f1.4, any opinions_
Hello Christopher can you tested in APSC the Tamron 35 150 f2-f2.8, please ?
Not sure it's just me & my eyes but it look's sharp just in Centre of frame, the rest just looks blurry , is this the case Chris. Cheers.
The new samyang design looks really good.
Thank you Christoper, question seeing how the 135mm and 85mm prices are close, which lens would you recommend? I know that one is Z mount and other F mount. Thanks!
I have 24 to 200mm focal ranges covered in 2 lens, and this is a serious contender for my next one.
I love my mark 1 version of this lens. I'm no pro, but it's almost too easy to get great pictures of friends and family with a bright 85mm. Thanks for the video, Christopher, always a pleasure.
Hi Chris, many thanks! I have the older Canon EF 1.2/85mm L USM, also a very nice lens with excellent image quality. Best wishes, Ralf
So the only improvement are the build and button? Nothing done to image quality?
I have the original 85mm 1.4 for E mount and I've noticed my images tend to have a greener tint compared to my other lenses. Has anyone else noticed this or could this be a defect with my specific unit?
I think it's a Samyang coating thing, I have the original 85, the 35 1.4, and I used the 24-70 F2.8 briefly before returning it. They all had a slightly green tint compared to my Sigma and Sony lenses.
How does this stack up against the 1.8 85 Sony
Any idea if they are going to upgrade the rest of their AF lenses?
My sharpness findings as well. Was not impressed at 1.4 but 1.8 on was good.
This has much less distorsion compared to new Sigma 85mm
Thank you Christopher, but would you choose this over the Sony 85mm f/1.8?
Yes .but IMO the sigma 85mm 1.4 is better than both .
@@pierrenj79 But that's almost 300€ more than the samyang that is already 200€ more than the sony (sony being at 500€, samyang 700€ and sigma 1.15k
Vs sigma 85 mm 1.4 whice better ?
Just purchased the 135 1.8 on Amazon Cyber Monday for $663!
I did too😅. What an amazing lens at an amazing price. Enjoy it.
i got mine for the same price!
Me too with a free docking station. It is amazing..
@@Chris1LFC wow. With the station as well. What a deal !!!!
Is that for canon eos r also??
Great lens
Can we use the lens button in a73
Would you buy it over Sigma 85 1.4?
had the mark 1 samyang 85mm and changed to the sigma 85mm 1.4 (Sony a7iii) There is no comparison as the sigma has better autofocus and better picture quality. Then again the samyang is very good for the money!
@@savvas.gregoriouI really appreciate your opinion. Thanks!
Seems like the Yongnuo 85mm it's still the better choice if price / quality ratio is important for you
their tiny 1.8 series is much better imho. performance and image quality is alot better
Not super impressed with the purple fringing in the middle at f/2 on full frame with this one! Does not look great.
Hello! I just need to ask cause I'm having difficulties navigating all of this, is this lens compatible with the nikon d3500?
The focus speed is unacceptable for a lens like this....
Oups! 35mm? Slip of the tongue here…😊
85 mm 1.4.....whats not to love.
Doesn't seem worth it at all. At least where I live it's only $100 less than the incredible Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG DN.
Samyang lenses look good on chart tests. In the real world, they're not that great with slower auto focus, color tint that's ugly, and their quality control is lacking.
pretty much the only lenses worth getting are the 1.8 primes by samyang
Bleh. Just another third-party lens review. Please consider going back to reviewing first-party lenses as the main focus of this channel.
Thanks.
I do. Haven't you seen my reviews of Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Fuji lenses? I barely miss any of them.
@@christopherfrost Oh I know, Chris. Been watching your channel for years now. The balance seems a bit skewed recently.
More native Nikon F mount lens review please! Not everyone is going Z.
Maybe it’s because there are so many third party lenses out there.
@@EduardoPortasRuiz That's simply because more third party lenses are being released
With FF sensor theres still a lot of purple fringing