A Cheap (but powerful) Night Street Photography Lens
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 ноя 2024
- LINKS TO SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
-
How to Monetize your Creativity (50% Off)- www.moderncrea...
The Gear I Use- www.amazon.com...
Edit Like Me- www.evanranft....
Prints and Merch- www.evanranft....
Where I Get My Music (Unlimited License for Clients and Social Media)- artlist.io/art...
My Clothes- Save 15% on CUTS- cuts.team/evan...
-
FOLLOW ME
/ evanranft
/ evanranft
-
AFFILIATE DISCLOSURE:
Some of the links used in the description will direct you to Amazon and Artlist. As an Amazon Associate and Artlist Associate I earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Who would’ve thought noct stands for noct
Its almost like anyone can realise "noct" - nocturnal
I would guess that people whose first language isn't English or just people that don't know Latin roots
@@spudman1734 dumbass he's talking about how the guy in the video said "n-o-c-t which stands for noct" not the translation part
@@cod4Rlp so the lens is active at night? Because that's what nocturnal means
Lolol
Should have started it with “see in the dark with this lens”
the ideas behind shorts are toxic
It use to be see by the light of a candle.
But it doesn't?
@@dcgeeked8917 ya the goal is basically draw the view’s attention with bullshit for as long as possible and maybe even add a part 2 so they have to go through your account, fuck that
It's the pointless and poorly executed loop for me
Okay but all the scene in the examples are pretty well lit
With low iso, 60/s shuttet speed and a normal lens it wouldn't be that well lit in the photo tho
Yeah if you took a polaroid or something you wouldn’t see shit
They are not. There is light, true, but that's night light and it's still low light. They feel lit because of the lens and high ISO. On f/1.3 I use between 3200 and 12800 ISO during the night for example.
It's hard to explain but if you have experience, you'll know that most camera gear will struggle to take a well exposed photo in the same scenarios.
@@MyChiliIceCreamHis little shoulder cam was even able to capture video for the same scene.
The "dark" ... takes photos of a lit gas station.
IKR, honestly would've liked to see some really dark scenes to really show it off
That’s not a gas station
If you know anything about photography, you would know that nothing would show up except the lights with a "standard" lens.
this isn't meant for people who don't know anything about photography. 😕
@@TiBiAstro uhhhh that's bullshit
@foobarturkey You're right, it's the Varsity in my city (Atlanta, GA) it's lit slightly better than a gas station which makes it worst to show off for night shots IMO
I still remember the legend that was of Nikkor 58mm Noct. One of my absolute dream lens with one of the best and dreamiest photos ever seen.
There are a couple things said here a tad off...
-"Noct" isn't a phrase in the "camera world", it's branding from Leica. True that Voigtlander and Nikon have used similar branding since, but I wouldn't say it's a phrase, and certainly not an acronym.
-having tested both, the TTA 50/0.95 has damn near identical to the Leica 0.95. Any lens manufacturer struggles to get perfect sharpness in lenses this fast..
Cool shots
lenses this bright*. Though it allows for a faster shutter speed, it's not a function of speed in itself.
@@Crashentyre yes of course, but colloquially large-aperture lenses are refered to as "fast" since they allow for faster shutter speeds. It may be regional/language based, but it's very rare to hear anyone use "bright/dark" as opposed to "fast/slow" in reference to a lens's max aperture.
Weird obsession with semantics
@@artsyaidan in the astro world we do long exposure. With my cheap f2.8 lens ill do 50 3min exposures we call that lens faster because at f0.8 i could do 20 1min exposure and get the same amount of detail.
@@michaelklages4367 but the lens is not faster 😂 you do the job faster with a slower lens 😊
I got a 0.95 lens for $150. It's manual focus, but I'm not soft
what is it called?
what is it called 🤔?
I think he’s referring to 7Artisans or even the one in the video, because the 700$ is bulls*it. The lens is like 200€
Depends on the sensor size. I haven’t seen .95 under 300$ for full frame or m mount. For APSC yeah but even then it’s close to 400$ for many
@@chidorirasenganz Probably a vintage lens, for 35mm so full frame. If you find one from a seller who doesn't know it's value you can get them for cheap.
Great snaps !
the sharpness is good bro it is the flare controll brings down the price
It bugged me that most of the photos where shot stopped down past 1.4 😂 awesome shots Evan!
How come
@@MrShazaamablefrom the shape of the flares. The deep focus. And the overall sharpness.
You can see on the lens dial too
I wonder how well these will do for Astrophotography. Although won’t zoom into any thing crazy, but with that wide aperture. You can get easy Milky Way shots or even Orion Nebula
Gotta love a video with my Alma Mater in the background!
We ain't gonna act like there are other f/.95 lenses out on the market right now that perform similarly for a competitive price?
Which ones are there?
@@heiko4297 Google is your friend, but 7Artisans has 2
I bought this lens for $209... I also have an AF 50mm Fuji lens f1.0 that was $2300... They produce very different images... I wouldn't take the fuji lens to a punk show, it would get trounced, but this lens is perfect.
@@IanBPPK Could 3, don't forget the 25.
"Act" like that is precisely the word for a guy being paid to sell this specific brand.
You could take the same photos with a f4 lens.
Or with my Sigma 1.4 16mm lens.
@@UHDGamers-re2xj 0.95 Fstop lets in more than twice as much light as a 1.4.
Not on film.
I love this lens. I have the red version, I call it the knockofftilux.
I do agree with the 0,95 aperture. I do own the mitakon speedmaster 35mm f/0,95 and it is tack sharp wide open. Sharper then i.e. my Fujifilm FX 35mm f/2 (that has a good reputation for sharpness). And I’m a pixel peeper… I’m just hopping for them to release a 23mm.
This is Atlanta 😱😍
I own this lens and can tell you the 0.95 pertains to it’s DoF not its light transmission. This lens is no brighter than my Sony 50mm f1.2 GM
I wish there was more reviews of lenses talking about light transmission rather then just Aperture
Yeah, for low light, I think T stop is more meaningful than F stop.
Noct = Noct nice! Got it
I bought this lens as a noob. It's wildly soft and impractical.
For anyone who's more on a budget, TTA also makes an f/1.4 35mm for around $70 bucks
Noctilux actually consigs of 2 latin words
Nox, Noctis, the night
and Lux, lucis, the light
so it basically means the light of the night iirc
Atlantaaaaaa damn everybody is here lol
The lack of sharpness of this lens combined with a black diffusion filter would be a great creative combination for street photography at night.
Seeing in the dark with everything unsharp is still seeing in the dark
perfect loop as always
I learned something new today!
I learned that he doesn't know anything about photography 😂
You're brave to walk around Atlanta at night these days!!!😅😅😅
Yeah I'm sorry, have fun pulling focus at F0.95, I'd bump the ISO every time if it meant I get some actual DOF to keep something in focus.
Well said. It’s as if one or two stops is worth the downsides of terrible resolution and zero DOF. What a misleading video.
Thought the same
Most of the shots had no movement so you could also just use a slower shutter speed.
Mitakon speed master lenses are also great with their super fast apertures
Beautiful
Night Sight on my pixel 3 does this too
The nifty 50 works just as good, and you can get a decent brand from 100-200$
F-stop isn’t everything. T-stop is what really indicates light transmission, and this lens is nowhere near T0.95.
You’ll get the same light transmission as a lens with better quality optics and a smaller aperture, such as the Sigma 50mm 1.4. And the sigma gives you auto focus and a tack sharp image at 1.4.
Thank you! Someone else who understands how cameras work, I commented the same thing
I doubt this lens is one f-stop off from what is labled. And u doubt the sigma 1.4 is exacty t1.4 as well.
@@claudianreyn4529 And you doubt that based off of what exactly? Did you test it?
Because I did. And it is.
You realize that the low cost has to come from somewhere, right?
Lenses aren’t expensive because the manufacturers are evil and money hungry, they’re expensive because really high quality optics are stupid hard to engineer and make, thus expensive.
They don’t have very large profit margins either, typically only around 10%, with is considered rather low in product manufacturing.
With lenses, cutting costs virtually always means cutting quality in one way or another.
In this case, it’s sharpness and light transmission.
And as an edit, no, the Sigma 50mm f1.4 isn’t exactly a T-stop of 1.4. It’s slightly higher. But that doesn’t matter, because the TT Artisans lens isn’t a T-stop of 1.4 either. I never said that, you just assumed it. It’s also slightly higher than t1.4. About the same as the Sigma in fact, that being the entire point of my comment.
On and a second edit, the TTA lens only gets reasonably sharp at f2.0. The Sigma is sharp through the entire aperture range. Sharper in fact at f1.4 than the TTA is at f2.0. Which is why the Sigma is simply a better lens in all regards, with the sole exception of you liking the soft image of the TTA, or the way it “feels” to operate.
Oh a third edit, because why not.
Yet despite all this, the Sigma is only 10 or so dollars more expensive, but better quality thanks to the magic of economies of scale and decades of experience.
Sigma has been making lenses and not much else for over 60 years, and has been making basically that exact same lens for an about a decade, which allows it to be cheaper than a lens that is newly designed by a small and young company (TTA was founded in 2019) producing much smaller batches.
There’s a reason Sigma lenses regularly beat premium Canon, Sony, and Nikon glass twice their price.
The f/0.95 lens isnt T/0.95, nor is a f/1.4 lens T/1.4, and the TTArtisan gives me around 1 stop more light in the sensor (less so in the corners) compared to f/1.4 lenses that I own.
Most people buying this lens want that low DOF, I don't think anyone's buying it as T/0.95 lens.
Great
Lmao you were shooting at 2.8 in the vid 😂
💡 Noct
Carl Zeiss Super-Q-Gigantar 40mm f/0.33: The Fastest / Brightest Lens Ever Made?
Look for a Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 for Nikon. You won't regret having it.
Dope 🎉
that would make a great astrophotography lens for milky way shots
Just what I was waiting for, a CHEAP $700 lens to buy to shoot when I should be sleeping!! lol
Nice loop
if youre shooting night scenes with no moving parts, shoot at f8 and take a long exposure. results will always be better and sharper
I have this on my Sony A7iv.
i got the tt artisan F1.05
Meike has 50mm 0.95 for $189, 7artisans has a 35mm 0.95 for $199, TTartisans has another 50mm 0.95 for $218. Lots of good choices out there.
That can basically what? THAT CAN BASICALLY WHAT!
Or you can get a Sony A7S series camera they are kings of low light!
One word. Fujinon 50mm 1.0
You mean the XF? That's a great lens.
TT Teal and orange
The old man had the Leica F0.95 Noctilux 50mm. I'm gutted he sold it.
Will this be better for videography than latest phones during day?
One of my friend had that lens.
Amazing little damn thing, for that price.
But it has it downsides too, no autofocus. Better have a focus peeking camera or most of your shot will be crap.
Yeah but that is an APSC lens, equivalent to an f1.4 on full frame. You could get an f1.2 vintage lens with full frame coverage for less or use a speed booster for an APSC. Also, noct is just leica and nikon branding.
That’s not actually true. The same amount of light enters in an apsc and in a full frame lens at f0.95
@@matteo3591 No, not really. The image circle on a full-frame or 35mm lens is large than that of an aps-c lens. Therefore, when one uses a focal reducer (also referred to as a speedbooster) to adapt a full-frame lens to an aps-c mount, they are directing more light (roughly one stop more) into the image circle than an aps-c lens of the same f-stop rating. This means that when I use my Canon nFD 85mm f/1.8 on my x-pro3 with the Metabones speedbooster, I can shoot wide open and transmit as much light into the aps-c sensor as though I was using an f/1.0 or f/0.95 (haven't done the exact math on it) lens coupled with a full-frame sensor. You could also buy the full-frame version of this lens and then adapt it with a speedbooster to an aps-c body. The advantage there being thay you could stop down by a full stop or so (thereby increasing overall sharpness) and still recieve the same degree of light transmission as though you were shooting wide open. That would be a very expensive means to achieve only one additional stop of light though.
I'm just here to see what the next comment says
@@TaxingIsThieving ...is exactly what an INTP would say.
Hope you brought the popcorn.
@@firstnamelastname9955 but the speedbooster loses some quality and also some light transmission during the conversion. And the S/N ratio of a smaller sensor is worse so even tho the relative aperture is faster, the equivalent aperture is the same or worse. Total amount of light depends on relative aperture AND size of image circle.
Those photos look insane!
Some pricing in the world is depicting by manufacturing costs, profit margins & supply/demand.
Camera lenses are determined by board directors spinning a chocolate wheel.
Varsity in Atlanta! Was just there a couple days ago
Cool
My Nikon f 1.4 with speed booster is almost.
Thanks for telling us the exact lens that this is lol is it full frame or aps-c
he lowkey sounds like kermit
You mean he sounds like Jordie Peterson
sharpness is overrated. cool photos
just shoot with Cinestill 800T on any point and shoot with an ISO gauge. like the pentax AF-M. thats cheaper.
Proceeds to take a photo of a super bright gas station.
The Nikon lens 0.95 f is crazy
Yeah, if you want sharpness and big aperture you pay a lot. I think that was an experiment. 8.5k though.
'The Dark Noct'
Tartisan crushed it in 2023, I hope they continue to 2024, their quality kind of sucks but who cares to pay 12k
That vignette is ridiculous.
Could you use a speed booster with this and go even lower?
50mm works fine
I always thought it was just short for nocturnal...
U can.ger them way cheaper than that but dude anything below 1.0 is 50mm n up and that's outside my comfort zone period
Does it just focus on one tiny area at .95?
Yes but only if you're focusing close
Why isn't the depth of field so shallow for this 0.95 aperture?
Because he shot at 1.4 and slower because at 0.95 it is soft and he didn't want to show that because he misleads alot. He also shot far away which means his lens was basically at its Infinity focus
I still prefer to use auto focusing oem 1.2 lenses
f0.95 is nice and all, but what's the T-stop?
And for al other brands it’s 350 euro 😅 same lens double the price with leica mount
I love the 50mm 0.95 that was £210
I want
I've got the 50mm f1.2, is there a huge difference in low light?
A f1.2 (all else being equal) allows ~60% more light in.. But all else probably isn't equal.
What do you get in focus though?
Also it’s APS-C
The only issue with these Chinese 0.95 lenses is they don't have the light transmission of a 0.95. Someone already did the tests and they're proven to only let in the same amount of light as your standard 1.4 lens, but the diaphragm is 0.95.
This is why film maker use T-stops.
Then that’s an f .95. You just explained why filmmakers t stops. An f 1.4 isn’t a t 1.4. F measures the physical size, t measures the light transmission..
@@mrwashur1991 yeah that's great. But he's using this lens because he believes it's going to be amazing in low light conditions, but it really isn't too much better than any cheap nifty 50 you can get that's an f/1.4
You will literally have an easier time using a 50mm 1.4 than this 0.95
which mounts is it available on?
Leica M, Sony E, Fuji X, L Mount, Canon RF, Nikon Z, and MFT
What color profile do you use?
is this atlanta??
That can basically this lens is at close as you get
I have this same lens but I have the ridiculously sexy red version. Look it up the lense is sexy af. Love it for night photos so dreamy
Unfortunately you have to stop it down to f/2 to make it look sharp in the centre of it's image.
Varsity Gang
👇🏻
This video confirms my assumption that he’s based in Atlanta
Now it's $190
Wait until you see how small the focus area is
Hey this was filmed in Atlanta
>Buys an f0.95 lens
>Shots at f2
Dose this lens work for micro 4/3s or is there some kind of adapter?
keep on hitting "do not recommend" but keep on getting your poser videos
is it for full frame
TTA make some great lenses but the Risespray 0.95 35mm/50mmFFE is no worse and costs maybe £180...
Any link ?
I mean what's the point if the picture isn't sharp?
I would put that up against my mitakon 50mm .95