TTArtisan 50mm f/0.95 Review Bokeh Beast + Samples (APS-C + Full Frame)

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 2 ноя 2024
  • Here's my review of the TTArtisan 50mm 0.95 APSC fully manual lens that is also compatible with full-frame cameras!
    Sample photos: www.dropbox.co...
    TTArtisan 50mm f/0.95: amzn.to/3SL91f8
    Sony 50mm f/1.8 (My recommendation): amzn.to/3y5eLIU
    Join this channel to get access to perks:
    / @jackwoodhams
    SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/3j8dBn4
    Follow me on Instagram ► / jswoodhams
    Follow me on twitter ► / jswoodhams
    Music used in this video:
    Artilist: artlist.io/Jac...
    Hooksounds: www.hooksounds...
    Use code JACK10 to get 10% off a Hooksounds membership!
    GEAR I USE:
    ► Sony A7III: geni.us/BuySon...
    ► Sony FE 28mm f/2 lens: geni.us/SonyFE...
    ► Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8 lens: geni.us/SonyFE...
    ► Rode NT1-A: geni.us/RODENT1-A
    ► Atomos Ninja V Recorder: amzn.to/31VzZGu

Комментарии • 31

  • @JackWoodhams
    @JackWoodhams  2 года назад +2

    Hope you enjoyed my latest review! If you have any questions, drop a comment and I'll reply asap.
    Visit the links below:
    TTArtisan 50mm f/0.95: amzn.to/3SL91f8
    Sony 50mm f/1.8 (My recommendation): amzn.to/3y5eLIU

  • @legradihp
    @legradihp 2 года назад +3

    So, it can be useable on fullframe camera without cropping? Im really interested in experimentations with strange lenses, I know the iq wont be good, but this looks interesting and fullframe lenses are really expensive. 0.95 sounds gooood for trying something different. (sorry for my bad english)

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  2 года назад +3

      Yes! There is just some slight vignetting! But other than that, fully usable. And does produce some very interesting results.
      If you do order the lens please consider my affiliate links (I will earn a small commission).

  • @tariqnasheed9951
    @tariqnasheed9951 Год назад +2

    The TTArtisan, Meike and 7Artisan f.95's appear to be mostly for niche hobbyist portrait still-photography. Its essentially just a specialty lens for people who lean more towards macro/medium photography versus professional portrait.

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  Год назад

      This lens wouldn't be for macro, the lens has a minimum focus distance of about 70cm.

  • @TechWithBruno
    @TechWithBruno 2 года назад +2

    Great review and great video 👏👏

  • @H8inLyfe
    @H8inLyfe 2 года назад +3

    Amazing breakdown for typical use. It kept getting worse the more you explored this lens... haha

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  2 года назад +2

      I know 😭 thanks for watching! Should be back to a regular schedule now.

  • @saturnzreturn88
    @saturnzreturn88 Год назад

    7artisans 50 0.95 vs this lens? What's better in your opinion?

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  Год назад +1

      They're pretty much the same. However this one can be used on full frame with virtually no crop

  • @Lalaland.001
    @Lalaland.001 11 месяцев назад

    ​ @JackWoodhams It's a night time lens used for low light photography without having to use a flash, think star, galaxy night time-street and club photography. Yeah might be niche but not really...The more you know,,,

  • @aaronactive
    @aaronactive 2 года назад +1

    This is the closest thing to an 85mm 1.4 on a APS-C camera, probably doesn't make much sense with all the other options you have on FF

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  2 года назад +1

      Yeah exactly. That's why I picked up the Sony 50mm for this video. Just seems weird to spend more for an inferior lens. Unless you like some of those quirks.

  • @robyfadilah8157
    @robyfadilah8157 Год назад

    can i see full image of fullframe version on google drive please..

  • @ivandj707
    @ivandj707 11 месяцев назад

    You leave out comparing these two lenses in low light or at night, too bad. Cameras with apsc sensor are not so good with high iso (over 3200) and at night that can mean a lot. If I'm not mistaken, the 0.95 receives 4x more light than the 1.8.

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  11 месяцев назад

      Yeah also 10x more blur and soft image at 0.95 😂

  • @a2roland
    @a2roland 7 месяцев назад

    Thank you!

  • @ashyxt
    @ashyxt Год назад

    4:15 I think u have accidentally mislabeled the 2 images

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  Год назад

      I didn't.

    • @ashyxt
      @ashyxt Год назад

      @@JackWoodhams oh.. because i wondered why is the bokeh deeper with the 1.8 😅

  • @jedunboxing4127
    @jedunboxing4127 10 месяцев назад

    they have another 50mm f1.2 and its much cheaper, you will not shoot at 0.95 anyways ,also theres kamlan 50mm f1.1 mark2

  • @paceyombex
    @paceyombex Год назад +2

    Well, at least its f/0.95 means it will be better than Sony in low light, with more than 1 stop difference. Other than that, yeah it's pretty underwhelming.

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  Год назад +2

      But Sony's perform quote well with high ISO so is the low image quality worth it over iso difference? 🤔

    • @paceyombex
      @paceyombex Год назад +1

      @@JackWoodhams Most modern cameras are. I'm just pointing the fact, cause numbers don't lie.
      Personally, I don't think it's worth it, unless you want the 0.95-ness. Then my suggestion is to get it second hand so you don't have to spend a lot. But also, think about the amount of massaging you need to do in post to get the most out of it, vs a modern lens.

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  Год назад +1

      @@paceyombex I agree with you! I'd rather just get a 50mm 1.8 or save for the 55mm

  • @WhySteve
    @WhySteve Год назад

    "Not de-clicked, so not the best lens for videographers". Hold up, who adjusts their aperture WHILE filming?

    • @JackWoodhams
      @JackWoodhams  Год назад

      It's a pretty common thing to do when going from dark to light sets for example. Or to go from wide open with one subject to a more narrow dof when other subjects come into the shot.

    • @WhySteve
      @WhySteve Год назад

      Interesting. I've never heard of this before.