A good company takes it on the chin from photographers who know what they need in their photography. A bad company silenced them and hand picks people who will only say good things. Either outcome would be good, because one way or another, we either have a company willing to improve their product and receive criticism, or we find out another company that only wants people to kiss up!
I liked your positive spin on the dreamy background bokeh for the telephoto nature photography niche. Maybe this lens could be thought of as the first one to offer in-focus bokeh for that extra-dreamy separation and 3D pop. This lens separates the subject from itself like no other lens in its class.
Hi Matti, looks can be deceiving, what a shame when other budget lenses perform better even with some Flaws. The Optical performance should have been good, that's the least we can expect in a lens. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this lens. 😊
From what I can tell as a fair few reviews have noticed similar issues, the big problem is that the focus field is really curved on this lens, so if you're testing by shooting a flat surface with lots of detail (like a fence) you're never going to get all of it in focus in both the corners and the middle. That said, with stuff like the Viltrox 85 on the market I just doing get why anyone would put up with that, or you could adapt a DSLR 85 for even less money if you've got an adapter already.
Thanks for your thoughts. Believe me, I shot quite a few photos on the lens of both flat and curved subjects and the results were equally bad. It's not the first time I'm testing a lens😀
@@mattisulanto Haha totally fair enough! So bizarre that they'd feel this is good enough when stuff like the Viltrox exists on every mount they're releasing it on, at pretty much the same price. Can't see a reason anyone would pick this.
I’m not wasting money on these Chinese lenses with dubious QC and materials. Who knows if they are using high quality helicoid grease or just rural cow lard. The optical designs on many are clearly immature. Novice lens designs. Kudos they have a go but let me check back in ten years and see how the resale values on eBay stack up. Good no BS video.
My question is, why bother??? Is there no quality testing before releasing these things? Why have a whole company building multiple lenses if you're going to release something that sounds this bad for half the price of an actual proper Nikon 85mm lens? Really helps to give China a bad name in retail products. Sell it for $50 cause that's what it sounds like it is worth in 2024
I just saw the Christopher Frost review of this bad lens. I am very happy with my Zeiss Batis Sonnar 85mm 1.8 T*, which I got used for a good price in very good condition.
I encounter worse situations than Matti. Mine was totally front OR back focused, so badly, and so erratically. I suspect the softness is due to inability of the lens to acquire accurate focus. Assuming they did not send the lens to that many reviewers, and THREE of them (yes we have another friend) are bad, it is worth reporting the problems.
@@robinwong I didn't say this was not worth reporting. I was just sharing my experience with the lens and stating the obvious, the lens has problems. It may be a quality control issue or compatibility with some cameras.
@@AndreiDimaReviews quality control issue with 3 samples? That is unacceptable, don't you think? If they cannot even make sure review samples are problem-free, how about mass manufacturing?
@@robinwong No need to argue with me; I agree with you on this one. Did any of you email them to let them know about the problems? What camera did you use? Maybe it is a problem with the firmware. I see Matti Sulanto used the Z5, did you and your other friend used the same camera?
Seems like you got a lemon. Might be decentered. The other reviewers got sharper results but thank you for the honesty. You'd think they would test the lens before sending it out for review unless it got decentered during delivery.
I talked to two other RUclipsrs who have the lens and they all said it's pretty bad. However, I saw someone got pretty decent photos in his review. Obviously some QC issues.
Oh dear, what a disaster! As you said it's probably a bad example but their QC should sift them out. Did you buy it or did they send you a review lens?
Thanks for the honest review and opinion on the lens. It does not make sense, we are in 2024, how difficult it is to make a good 85mm lens optically?
Thanks Robin! It should not be too hard.
Bingo!
You are very straightforward. AstrHori might not give you another lens to review 😁
A good company takes it on the chin from photographers who know what they need in their photography. A bad company silenced them and hand picks people who will only say good things.
Either outcome would be good, because one way or another, we either have a company willing to improve their product and receive criticism, or we find out another company that only wants people to kiss up!
That can be a good thing, no more Horifying lenses 😉
Thanks. I have to say my honest true opinion, always. I can't lie because I may not receive another lens for a review.
@@mattisulanto Thank you very much for that.
I liked your positive spin on the dreamy background bokeh for the telephoto nature photography niche. Maybe this lens could be thought of as the first one to offer in-focus bokeh for that extra-dreamy separation and 3D pop. This lens separates the subject from itself like no other lens in its class.
I like your idea that this lens can separate the subject from itself😅
Hi Matti, looks can be deceiving, what a shame when other budget lenses perform better even with some Flaws. The Optical performance should have been good, that's the least we can expect in a lens. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this lens. 😊
Thanks. It's a shame really but fortunately there are other options.
The Viltrox 85MM F/1.8 is a good choice and others. Thanks Matti 😊
That level of softness is what you might expect from a damaged lens.
Yeah, that is beyond normal tolerances.
From what I can tell as a fair few reviews have noticed similar issues, the big problem is that the focus field is really curved on this lens, so if you're testing by shooting a flat surface with lots of detail (like a fence) you're never going to get all of it in focus in both the corners and the middle.
That said, with stuff like the Viltrox 85 on the market I just doing get why anyone would put up with that, or you could adapt a DSLR 85 for even less money if you've got an adapter already.
Thanks for your thoughts. Believe me, I shot quite a few photos on the lens of both flat and curved subjects and the results were equally bad. It's not the first time I'm testing a lens😀
@@mattisulanto Haha totally fair enough! So bizarre that they'd feel this is good enough when stuff like the Viltrox exists on every mount they're releasing it on, at pretty much the same price. Can't see a reason anyone would pick this.
I’m not wasting money on these Chinese lenses with dubious QC and materials. Who knows if they are using high quality helicoid grease or just rural cow lard. The optical designs on many are clearly immature. Novice lens designs. Kudos they have a go but let me check back in ten years and see how the resale values on eBay stack up. Good no BS video.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
My question is, why bother??? Is there no quality testing before releasing these things? Why have a whole company building multiple lenses if you're going to release something that sounds this bad for half the price of an actual proper Nikon 85mm lens? Really helps to give China a bad name in retail products. Sell it for $50 cause that's what it sounds like it is worth in 2024
A LUMIX 85 F1.8 can be found in very good condition used for a little less than $400. Amazing value even at the new retail price. Amazingly sharp.
Thanks for your tip. The Lumix is a great value but of course does not fit on a Nikon Z😀
@@mattisulanto having an L-mount camera has saved me from many lens purchases. ;)
@@jamescaldwell5 I'm sure we all can say the same regardless of the camera we use😀
@@mattisulanto seems like everything comes in E-mount.
Good honest opinions
Thanks.
Matti turns into Marques mode.
Thank you for the warning. Don't hold back; what do you really think Matti?
Thanks. What I really think is in the video😀
I just saw the Christopher Frost review of this bad lens. I am very happy with my Zeiss Batis Sonnar 85mm 1.8 T*, which I got used for a good price in very good condition.
The Zeiss is on another level😀
@@mattisulanto I love it 😇
Yes I saw that video as well. Very soft except right in the middle
I think you have a bad copy. I tested the lens, and while the corners are soft until f8, the centre is good from f1.8.
I encounter worse situations than Matti. Mine was totally front OR back focused, so badly, and so erratically. I suspect the softness is due to inability of the lens to acquire accurate focus. Assuming they did not send the lens to that many reviewers, and THREE of them (yes we have another friend) are bad, it is worth reporting the problems.
No the factory says it is within specifications.
@@robinwong I didn't say this was not worth reporting. I was just sharing my experience with the lens and stating the obvious, the lens has problems. It may be a quality control issue or compatibility with some cameras.
@@AndreiDimaReviews quality control issue with 3 samples? That is unacceptable, don't you think? If they cannot even make sure review samples are problem-free, how about mass manufacturing?
@@robinwong No need to argue with me; I agree with you on this one. Did any of you email them to let them know about the problems? What camera did you use? Maybe it is a problem with the firmware. I see Matti Sulanto used the Z5, did you and your other friend used the same camera?
So they have a problem with quality control. It will make all their products suspect.
They seem to have that exactly.
Seems like you got a lemon. Might be decentered. The other reviewers got sharper results but thank you for the honesty. You'd think they would test the lens before sending it out for review unless it got decentered during delivery.
No the factory says it is within specifications.
I talked to two other RUclipsrs who have the lens and they all said it's pretty bad. However, I saw someone got pretty decent photos in his review. Obviously some QC issues.
Oh dear, what a disaster! As you said it's probably a bad example but their QC should sift them out. Did you buy it or did they send you a review lens?
No the factory says it is within specifications.
It's a review sample.
Great alternative for portrait photographers 😊
Indeed!
Lensbaby alternative :-)
😅