When I saw the comparison between the 85 GM and the f/1.2 competition I immediately figured out why Sony didn't bother with an f/1.2 lmao those lenses are ginormous and way too expensive for what is ultimately a 1/3 stop advantage. I feel like I could reasonably justify jumping from an 85 f/1.8 to an 85 f/1.4, but looking at those f/1.2 lenses I don't think I could justify going to one of those if I had an f/1.4 lens. It's too big a jump for arguably too small a gain.
When people refer to "vintage look", what they eventually mean unknowingly is lenses that offer great contrast, color, nice quality bokeh, great tonal range... which was a standard up until 2012-2013. Modern lenses are often so over corrected that they're now very sharp, but that's all they are. Unfortunately, people have been wired through youtube influencers to believe that sharpness is everything. I too believed that until I got very sharp lenses only to realize that some "hipster" as Jared kind of bitterly refers was producing images I could never reproduce.l thus challenged myself and bought a modern manual focus voigtlander lens, which completely transformed my vision on photography. The lenses from this video might eventually turn out to be crappy, but if you think that modern lenses are better because they're sharper, you are gravely mistaken. The culture of over editing images is ultimately born from the fact that many new lenses render so dully that the images need to be re-imagined from scratch. A truly great lens will, however, leave you hesitant to make any changes to the photo as it is already so special. And yes, you need to know what you're doing in photography, but you also need the right tools that will expand your creativity.
@ofeykalakar1 Indeed! which, by the way, still manages to have great characteristics for image rendering. That's due to a combination of great optical glass (leaded glass) + great optical formula + low number of glass elements that allows great transmittance of light with minimal data loss. The APO has 10 elements, while most zooms usually have been 16 and 23 elements. The Nokton line, on the other hand, has usually as few as 7 to 9 elements. I am mentioning Voigtlander as they are the most accessible lens manufacturer of the big 3 trio, which also includes zeiss and leica. There is a reason why professional photographers are paying those multi thousand dollars manual focus prime lenses and why their clients are paying even more money to get a gig out of them, it's because these photographers are savy for what makes images stand out, a special sauce of sorts. Sadly, most modern primes to be able to achieve tack sharpness at F1.2 were required to add as many elements as zooms, using glass that is compromised in quality. This means that they could achieve a very sharp image with very shallow depth of field at F1.2 and F1.4, but at the cost of color saturation, general contrast etc... So you end up with a prime lens having the attributes of a zoom and few of the qualities of a good prime. Sharpness isn't everything, it's the quality of the image that counts. Nobody cares how many pores can be seen underneath the eyelids of a supermodel, for instance!
There are people that actually want that vintage crappy lens look. Low contrast, blurry, lots of chromatic aberrations, etc. I do like good modern lenses which in my experience are sharp as well as offering good contrast and color. However I also like the look I get from my Voigtlander 60mm F0.95 lens. Although the Chromatic aberrations wide open can be distracting if shooting in color. I have a few other adapted vintage lenses that I like to play around with, but at the end of the day I can as Jared put it, "dumb down" my image in post. I can't do what my Voigtlander can do in post, so it gets more use.
@ElMundoDuro There are plenty of terrible old lenses of course, and there are some epic modern lenses. I am just referring to the fact that the reason why so many people are falling back to the vintage look is because there is a charm that is now missed from many (not all) modern lenses.
While I somewhat agree with what you wrote, don't forget that you have modern lens that are also better in every aspect of those that you mentioned. Be it contrast, micro contrast , color , 3d pop etc. top of the line modern lenses are not superior purely because of sharpness, they are superior in pretty much everything else as well
In contrast, I like Voigtlander's approach, which creates modern lenses that match the resolution of modern cameras, but the optical designs are based on old lenses. This gives you a vintage look, 3D pop, also: sharpness and contrast.
Just got Nocton Classic 35/1.4. Like soooooo much. My second most beloved lens after 50/1.2 GM. It’s just different in every way and a joy to use with A7C II.
Right? I can already take "bad" photos if I want to with the equipment I already have. Why spend $350 to get gear to help take bad photos when I can put that money towards a good travel tripod or a bag or something else I can actually use?
laugh all you want but I got a disposable lens adapted to my sony and my wedding clients absolutely love it. maybe this doesn't work for commercial work. but theres wedding photographers charging 30-50k for a wedding day using these lenses.
PolarPro and Samyang are playing to the trend, can't blame them. With people editing with dull colours, yellow or blue tints, crushed blacks, under exposure, low highlights, 2.35:1 aspect ratios, grain and black mist filters... having 20% focus, large flare, halos and ghosting totally makes sense!
I'm thinking about rebranding vaseline into something photographic sounding like '"nostalgic lens optical jell" and selling it to the same people that really want their image quality to suck. Smear some on your lens to give it that "slick" dreamy effect. Want the effect only on one side? Just slob some on that side and not on the other. And as a bonus, I will include a Trojanic Photographic Latex shoot through lens protection device you can stretch over your lens for a really diffuse look to your images. These devices also come in various flavors and some even glow in the dark. The package says single use only, but if you use the lens optical gel along with it, you can re-use them over and over. But I will not be responsible if you end up with a lens-baby.
Its not like several recent productions have been made with helios lenses (soviet from the 70s) or anything... I love my a6400, and my a7s, and I have decent sigma glass, and I get good quality images out... I also love my olympus om1 film camera, and especially its relatively tiny 135 f3.5 lens, which is great for street photography, and very lightweight... give me a roll of repurposed cinema stock (candido 200 is my current favourite, and I'm happy as can be). Both have a place in my photography bag, and I entirely understand why people want an "imperfect" look...
There's no harm in those lenses. They tell you what they are and show you the results to expect, so good on them. Noone will buy them for the wrong reasons, and some people might like it.
Okay, I’m old School. Take the cleanest photo possible then mess it up in editing. The biggest thing I’ve been doing lately is creating a pro mist series of presets. To give my photos that soft romantic glow like you would see in. Early 70’s playboy layouts. There have been some of my images that I screwed around with to make them look like old Polaroid photos but I always start with a fine clean image
It's funny how for years people said the Sony GM lenses were just spectacular.. but then when the new versions come out, so does the truth about how bad the older lenses were like the 85GM and 70-200 2.8 GM. The same tends to apply even with cameras as RUclipsrs tend to rave about a new camera, but when the replacement comes out, then we finally hear about what they really thought about problems with the old cameras that were never really mentioned before. I'm not signalling out Jared as I think he's the most honest and open about reviews (unlike many of the paid Sony "Influencers" out there), but when I get FOMO when a new product comes out, I take all the initial hype with a grain of salt. In fact was one of the first to say the original 85 was not great. I think he or Manny also talked about how mediocre and inconsistent the original 70-200 GM was too. Love that shirt so much btw! I can't find it on your website sadly.
I've seen a lot of photos that were taken with vintage lenses adapted to newer cameras. Those photos have the vintage look. These photos shown were just terrible photos. I'm with FRO on this, I like my photos in focus and not washed out looking. Unfortunately, a lot of the people that will buy these lenses, can't take great photos anyway.
I don't get the "vintage look" new lenses. Get an actual vintage lens for $20-$30 and adapt it - you'll get the vintage look. Or just use a modern lens and smack on a filter and you'll get pretty much the same look and the target audience won't even know the difference anyway.
@@paulgood2218 probably, but I guess the target audience would see better image quality as a flaw... It's honestly ridiculous but it's their own money I guess
(Not an AD) For those looking, there is actually a brand here in China these "special effect" lenses, that sell for around 10-20$. I have a few because it is makes a really fun look. nobody should pay 300$ for bad glass. Some cheap ones are 3D printed and actually somewhat sharp in the center, some have pretty good build for their prices and give unique optical effects (swirly bokeh, flare and light-leak included). The most popular product is a 500mm that is literally two pieces of plastic water pipe and two elements.
I think the 1.4 advantage over 1.2 is the size and price, personally even having a 1.4 lens not every time 1.4 or lower is needed. The new 85 GM version is a truly a masterpiece
Those lenses do indeed suck! If people want old style photos, buy an old camera or a very old camera, put some film in it and snap away! Putting a crappy lens like this on my R3 defeats the object of owning an R3.
Also the optical exchange lenses look visually fascinating... not saying I'd buy one new, but definitely would have a place on my camera shelf for fascinating concepts...
Recommendations pleaseeeee!! Newbie your vids helping me learn manual. Got a z50 kit cam. 50-250mm struggling in low light and long shots. Mainly shooting daughter at horse shows which is usually bad lighting or good lighting during day just large arenas. Opinions on wha to get please. 180-600 mm Nikon lenses ?
Love your comments about disposal cameras and why on earth spent $350 deliberately bad lenses. I was lucky not to be blocked from the use a real camera, so some of my first pictures were from an already back in the 70s vintage Leica 2F from 1938 with 50/2. Still have camera!
Those cheap lenses are a solution to a problem we didn't have. The old polaroid/disposable camera look is "cool" I guess...for 5seconds If I wanted that look, I'd simply crank the f-stop until it is defraction party and use a FroPack preset like acid wash, waffle house, wonder years etc
Technology has given us amazing photographic cameras with amazing resolution and image capturing abilities, so let’s put the lens of a broken $20 camera on it!
I am keen on lenses with character but these on offer just suck. For Nikon the 58mm 1.4 was a unique lens and I can't reproduce the look in editing. I guess now overall you make a look in editing?
Well if samyang would go with better image quality ,like lvl nifty fifty, instead of horrible they would make a great set for starters in photography. Say 350 for main body and the lenses with the af feature for people who start with a nikon z30 ,zfc or sony 6400 for example ,that would be a great way to interest more people in making photos who avoided it due to the extreme prices and place for stocking the lenses.
No Fing Way. “Hey it would be SICK you just want bad pictures and direct sunlight on your sensor.” Unfortunately these things will sell. Five years ago when I was going through Gear Acquisition Syndrome I probably would have bought these. Why, because I was new and stupid.
If you really want that old time look I have a complete set of original Nikon F primes as well a mint Nikon Ftn film body that I keep around for nostalgia sake. I used to shoot Rock and Roll professionally in the later 70's and early 80's.
Bro this was just bad. I get it your journalist that takes tact tile sharp photos for events and shit. But damn most people like that vintage look for a creative choice. Feel like you were going in on them on an unnecessary situation. If it ain’t for you just come out it with respect. Not shitting on creative choices photographers make. Still love your videos keep up the great work. But just my 2 cents.
Not that I exactly have the money to spend triple digits on gimmick lenses anyway but they made my decision not to buy much easier by not even giving me the option to buy a Nikon F mount version of their lenses.
its not f/1.2 because the E-Mount is NOT big enough for f/1.2 for 85mm focal length. E mount was made for APS-C cameras which Sony adapted for Full Frame. Now imagine how much Sony is going to loose the market if they change the mount like Nikon Z & Canon RF mount to make exotic lenses like 85/1.2, 58/0.95 or f/2 zooms ..... !!!!!!
L-mount probably laugh in the corner somewhere having the top-of-the-line Sigma Art lens with no need of any other lens. 😅😅 (Not an L-mount shooter but honestly their lens are superb.)
yeah i don't understand this crappy lenses trend. If you want that look u can get it in editing, also there are lots of vintage lenses that are cheaper and much better, and even with the adapter is less expensive, also that's the real old feeling
“That disposable look that was so hot in the 90s…” wtf we couldn’t afford anything but that look, most of us didn’t choose it, it was all that was available. wtf our lenses have gotten soo good that we have to start making them shitty now
NGL. I kinda like that idea of having the ability to introduce light leak into an image in the camera. That's kinda cool. Just a shame they introduce that feature on deliberately horrible lenses that are sold at an obviously too high price point for how shit they are (also... Did I see a fixed f/11 lens? 😶).
Hey Jared, I've got an idea. Why don't people save money and dig out their old iPhone 4 from the back of the bedside drawer (you know the one that has all the toys in it), and use that instead of these crazy lenses that will give a similarly crappy photo. Or they could just stick with what they have and use Lr or Ps to give the same effect...... just sayin' 🤔
These people do be spending hundreds of dollars for the point & shoot look. Meanwhile with my 3D printer, I can just 3D print an point & shoot adapter for my digital camera's mount from Thingiverse, gut an real disposable point & shoot film camera to harvest the lens and assemble it together using hot glue for almost nothing as your local film lab will likely be glad to give you an already processed disposable camera for free.
"Hey, boss! Turns out it's really hard to make good glass."
"No worries, just make shitty glass!"
Yeah but $1800 vs $2800 on the 1.4 vs 1.2, some of us have 1.4 budgets!
i have a 3.5-5.6 budget 😅😂
also the size and weight. It could mean adding a lens to your bag vs replacing a lens in your bag
Not just the budget. Size and weight Is a big factor too
When I saw the comparison between the 85 GM and the f/1.2 competition I immediately figured out why Sony didn't bother with an f/1.2 lmao those lenses are ginormous and way too expensive for what is ultimately a 1/3 stop advantage.
I feel like I could reasonably justify jumping from an 85 f/1.8 to an 85 f/1.4, but looking at those f/1.2 lenses I don't think I could justify going to one of those if I had an f/1.4 lens. It's too big a jump for arguably too small a gain.
@@LoganSLRLockwood It's not always about a 1/3 stop advantage....usually f-stop advantages also include other quality improvements.
When people refer to "vintage look", what they eventually mean unknowingly is lenses that offer great contrast, color, nice quality bokeh, great tonal range... which was a standard up until 2012-2013. Modern lenses are often so over corrected that they're now very sharp, but that's all they are. Unfortunately, people have been wired through youtube influencers to believe that sharpness is everything. I too believed that until I got very sharp lenses only to realize that some "hipster" as Jared kind of bitterly refers was producing images I could never reproduce.l thus challenged myself and bought a modern manual focus voigtlander lens, which completely transformed my vision on photography. The lenses from this video might eventually turn out to be crappy, but if you think that modern lenses are better because they're sharper, you are gravely mistaken. The culture of over editing images is ultimately born from the fact that many new lenses render so dully that the images need to be re-imagined from scratch. A truly great lens will, however, leave you hesitant to make any changes to the photo as it is already so special. And yes, you need to know what you're doing in photography, but you also need the right tools that will expand your creativity.
If you want edge to edge sharp, then there,s nothing sharper than a Voigtlander or Leica 50 mm APO lens.
@ofeykalakar1 Indeed! which, by the way, still manages to have great characteristics for image rendering. That's due to a combination of great optical glass (leaded glass) + great optical formula + low number of glass elements that allows great transmittance of light with minimal data loss. The APO has 10 elements, while most zooms usually have been 16 and 23 elements. The Nokton line, on the other hand, has usually as few as 7 to 9 elements. I am mentioning Voigtlander as they are the most accessible lens manufacturer of the big 3 trio, which also includes zeiss and leica. There is a reason why professional photographers are paying those multi thousand dollars manual focus prime lenses and why their clients are paying even more money to get a gig out of them, it's because these photographers are savy for what makes images stand out, a special sauce of sorts. Sadly, most modern primes to be able to achieve tack sharpness at F1.2 were required to add as many elements as zooms, using glass that is compromised in quality. This means that they could achieve a very sharp image with very shallow depth of field at F1.2 and F1.4, but at the cost of color saturation, general contrast etc... So you end up with a prime lens having the attributes of a zoom and few of the qualities of a good prime. Sharpness isn't everything, it's the quality of the image that counts. Nobody cares how many pores can be seen underneath the eyelids of a supermodel, for instance!
There are people that actually want that vintage crappy lens look. Low contrast, blurry, lots of chromatic aberrations, etc. I do like good modern lenses which in my experience are sharp as well as offering good contrast and color. However I also like the look I get from my Voigtlander 60mm F0.95 lens. Although the Chromatic aberrations wide open can be distracting if shooting in color. I have a few other adapted vintage lenses that I like to play around with, but at the end of the day I can as Jared put it, "dumb down" my image in post. I can't do what my Voigtlander can do in post, so it gets more use.
@ElMundoDuro There are plenty of terrible old lenses of course, and there are some epic modern lenses. I am just referring to the fact that the reason why so many people are falling back to the vintage look is because there is a charm that is now missed from many (not all) modern lenses.
While I somewhat agree with what you wrote, don't forget that you have modern lens that are also better in every aspect of those that you mentioned. Be it contrast, micro contrast , color , 3d pop etc. top of the line modern lenses are not superior purely because of sharpness, they are superior in pretty much everything else as well
In contrast, I like Voigtlander's approach, which creates modern lenses that match the resolution of modern cameras, but the optical designs are based on old lenses. This gives you a vintage look, 3D pop, also: sharpness and contrast.
Just got Nocton Classic 35/1.4. Like soooooo much. My second most beloved lens after 50/1.2 GM. It’s just different in every way and a joy to use with A7C II.
$350 for bad photos, damn.... For that price you can actually get good gear/ accessories
Right? I can already take "bad" photos if I want to with the equipment I already have. Why spend $350 to get gear to help take bad photos when I can put that money towards a good travel tripod or a bag or something else I can actually use?
and they call it "character"
laugh all you want but I got a disposable lens adapted to my sony and my wedding clients absolutely love it. maybe this doesn't work for commercial work. but theres wedding photographers charging 30-50k for a wedding day using these lenses.
You're becoming steadily the only honest reviewer of photo equipment on YT. Thanks!
Ok, I’m convinced I should brand and re-market lens Vaseline: for that soft look of yesteryear! I’m off to Kickstarter.😂😂😂
Throw some glitter in to get some sparkles with the bloom and you're gonna make millions.
PolarPro and Samyang are playing to the trend, can't blame them.
With people editing with dull colours, yellow or blue tints, crushed blacks, under exposure, low highlights, 2.35:1 aspect ratios, grain and black mist filters... having 20% focus, large flare, halos and ghosting totally makes sense!
The old 90's point and shoots were more disappoint and shoot than point and shoot.
I've got a 1960s film camera that will shit on those lenses
I'm thinking about rebranding vaseline into something photographic sounding like '"nostalgic lens optical jell" and selling it to the same people that really want their image quality to suck. Smear some on your lens to give it that "slick" dreamy effect. Want the effect only on one side? Just slob some on that side and not on the other. And as a bonus, I will include a Trojanic Photographic Latex shoot through lens protection device you can stretch over your lens for a really diffuse look to your images. These devices also come in various flavors and some even glow in the dark. The package says single use only, but if you use the lens optical gel along with it, you can re-use them over and over. But I will not be responsible if you end up with a lens-baby.
Its not like several recent productions have been made with helios lenses (soviet from the 70s) or anything...
I love my a6400, and my a7s, and I have decent sigma glass, and I get good quality images out...
I also love my olympus om1 film camera, and especially its relatively tiny 135 f3.5 lens, which is great for street photography, and very lightweight... give me a roll of repurposed cinema stock (candido 200 is my current favourite, and I'm happy as can be).
Both have a place in my photography bag, and I entirely understand why people want an "imperfect" look...
There's no harm in those lenses. They tell you what they are and show you the results to expect, so good on them. Noone will buy them for the wrong reasons, and some people might like it.
Okay, I’m old School. Take the cleanest photo possible then mess it up in editing. The biggest thing I’ve been doing lately is creating a pro mist series of presets. To give my photos that soft romantic glow like you would see in. Early 70’s playboy layouts. There have been some of my images that I screwed around with to make them look like old Polaroid photos but I always start with a fine clean image
There’s no way I’d buy any of those lenses. I suck enough as it is.
😂 This made me laugh out loud!!
It's funny how for years people said the Sony GM lenses were just spectacular.. but then when the new versions come out, so does the truth about how bad the older lenses were like the 85GM and 70-200 2.8 GM. The same tends to apply even with cameras as RUclipsrs tend to rave about a new camera, but when the replacement comes out, then we finally hear about what they really thought about problems with the old cameras that were never really mentioned before.
I'm not signalling out Jared as I think he's the most honest and open about reviews (unlike many of the paid Sony "Influencers" out there), but when I get FOMO when a new product comes out, I take all the initial hype with a grain of salt. In fact was one of the first to say the original 85 was not great. I think he or Manny also talked about how mediocre and inconsistent the original 70-200 GM was too.
Love that shirt so much btw! I can't find it on your website sadly.
I might buy them as my photos suck anyway ......... 🤣🤣
Those photos of the Civil War reenactment are gorgeous! Well done Fro. I gotta get those presets.
I've seen a lot of photos that were taken with vintage lenses adapted to newer cameras. Those photos have the vintage look. These photos shown were just terrible photos. I'm with FRO on this, I like my photos in focus and not washed out looking. Unfortunately, a lot of the people that will buy these lenses, can't take great photos anyway.
I don't get the "vintage look" new lenses. Get an actual vintage lens for $20-$30 and adapt it - you'll get the vintage look. Or just use a modern lens and smack on a filter and you'll get pretty much the same look and the target audience won't even know the difference anyway.
$20 vintage lens perform way better than that .
@@paulgood2218 probably, but I guess the target audience would see better image quality as a flaw... It's honestly ridiculous but it's their own money I guess
Exactly
Or just a get a film simulator in your phone haha
Yes. Helios 44-2, Pancolar, Orestor... lovely and cool looking lenses. Not as ugly as modern "vintage look" crap.
We have to stop hanging around so many surfers…but sick (701)
I had to double check if I was watching the April Fool’s episode 😂
(Not an AD) For those looking, there is actually a brand here in China these "special effect" lenses, that sell for around 10-20$. I have a few because it is makes a really fun look. nobody should pay 300$ for bad glass.
Some cheap ones are 3D printed and actually somewhat sharp in the center, some have pretty good build for their prices and give unique optical effects (swirly bokeh, flare and light-leak included). The most popular product is a 500mm that is literally two pieces of plastic water pipe and two elements.
I think the 1.4 advantage over 1.2 is the size and price, personally even having a 1.4 lens not every time 1.4 or lower is needed. The new 85 GM version is a truly a masterpiece
I've been taking crappy photos for free but now I can buy specialised equipment to get the same outcome, I'm in...
Dayum this episode is a rapidfire SHOTS FIRED roast and im loving it ❤
Oh, the Froknow's hair is flat, the Fro is not complete.
He moused it! LOL
Those lenses do indeed suck! If people want old style photos, buy an old camera or a very old camera, put some film in it and snap away! Putting a crappy lens like this on my R3 defeats the object of owning an R3.
Also the optical exchange lenses look visually fascinating... not saying I'd buy one new, but definitely would have a place on my camera shelf for fascinating concepts...
Recommendations pleaseeeee!! Newbie your vids helping me learn manual. Got a z50 kit cam. 50-250mm struggling in low light and long shots. Mainly shooting daughter at horse shows which is usually bad lighting or good lighting during day just large arenas. Opinions on wha to get please. 180-600 mm Nikon lenses ?
Love your comments about disposal cameras and why on earth spent $350 deliberately bad lenses. I was lucky not to be blocked from the use a real camera, so some of my first pictures were from an already back in the 70s vintage Leica 2F from 1938 with 50/2. Still have camera!
The L mount alliance is dissolving and forming the P mount alliance.😂😂
Lol. Fkin Savage on the polarpro “sick”-ness and point and shoot. 😂
Those cheap lenses are a solution to a problem we didn't have.
The old polaroid/disposable camera look is "cool" I guess...for 5seconds
If I wanted that look, I'd simply crank the f-stop until it is defraction party and use a FroPack preset like acid wash, waffle house, wonder years etc
Wow, i never stopped a video so fast in my life.
Technology has given us amazing photographic cameras with amazing resolution and image capturing abilities, so let’s put the lens of a broken $20 camera on it!
I am keen on lenses with character but these on offer just suck. For Nikon the 58mm 1.4 was a unique lens and I can't reproduce the look in editing. I guess now overall you make a look in editing?
Well if samyang would go with better image quality ,like lvl nifty fifty, instead of horrible they would make a great set for starters in photography.
Say 350 for main body and the lenses with the af feature for people who start with a nikon z30 ,zfc or sony 6400 for example ,that would be a great way to interest more people in making photos who avoided it due to the extreme prices and place for stocking the lenses.
Those light leaks look fun. In the right place and time they could be great.
I'll never buy crappy lenses. You can always "unsharp" and "crappify" on purpose in post, but never "unshittify" a picture.
Sure you can, in Photoshop it is called a hide all mask. 😂
I'm gonna pretend I'm buying those crap-results lenses, then instead, put the $ towards real lenses. Then I'll feel like I got a discount
I don't need special lenses to take crummy photos. That's my specialty. Didn't know that this was a desired end product.
couldn't the light leak deal just be done in a preset? For cheaper?
It can. I swear there's actually an Instagram filter that applies to look to your photos too.
LMAO you went in on Polar Pro.
it was pretty sick 😁
No Fing Way. “Hey it would be SICK you just want bad pictures and direct sunlight on your sensor.” Unfortunately these things will sell. Five years ago when I was going through Gear Acquisition Syndrome I probably would have bought these. Why, because I was new and stupid.
I have a 25 year old camera that sucked back then but is now cool 😎. bidding starts at $2000
💀
Do you ever do anything to soften your image?
I'm bout to take the best most terrible quality photos with those Sick lenses!!
I had the same lens system on my film Zeiss Icon. Not sure it is a good idea Samyang.
How about a lens with 100 micro lenses so my pics look like a fly's POV.
Whatever preset you applied to those Civil War re-enactors makes for a shocking improvement. It's perfect.
Lightleak or those Samyang lenses? I don't need any help screwing up a picture! Thanks anyway? 😆
I remember the good old days when I wanted a shitty lens I could just go on eBay! LOL.
When a hipster tries to sell me something, its a no before they even give me their "sick" elevator pitch
Wouldn’t that makes it possible for dust to enter your sensor too, it is a physical opening right
Someone was plotting, planning, and conniving to come up with these awful ideas 🤣
The only 'Photo News Fix' I got this week! 🙂
Light leak lenses..."There's a sucker born every minute" P.T. Barnum
Surely you can easily achieve these effects in post?
Dude, your shirt rocks! XD
So sick…I can even do that sickness in post… oh THATs why I don’t need a lens like that!
If you really want that old time look I have a complete set of original Nikon F primes as well a mint Nikon Ftn film body that I keep around for nostalgia sake. I used to shoot Rock and Roll professionally in the later 70's and early 80's.
I’m liking the doom style shirt!
Hmmm... That gun looks weird... Hey, wait a minute! LOL!!!!
That image quality made me sick
Is that “I shoot raw” shirt you’re wearing available on your store website? I quickly looked but couldn’t find it.
Hey Jared do you still do photo critiques??
Bro this was just bad.
I get it your journalist that takes tact tile sharp photos for events and shit. But damn most people like that vintage look for a creative choice.
Feel like you were going in on them on an unnecessary situation. If it ain’t for you just come out it with respect. Not shitting on creative choices photographers make.
Still love your videos keep up the great work. But just my 2 cents.
Well it’s just better to get old vintage glass and use it on a Mirrorless camera and I think it’s way cheaper to get the analog vibe …
Purposely offering bad lenses is an interesting business strategy. I'd not buy them, but it IS interesting, in a Chinese "three curses" sense.
Not that I exactly have the money to spend triple digits on gimmick lenses anyway but they made my decision not to buy much easier by not even giving me the option to buy a Nikon F mount version of their lenses.
TY Jared for calling out Polar Pro and their obnoxious Hippy Products! Like seriously, Hipster photographers belong in one place: the Dumpster 😂
Your are right! This lens sucks! Light leak, I have one, I take couple picture, and then I’m not used again! Nottttttt gooddddd!
I commented with the link to my website but it seems to have been removed.
Hahaaha the guy said sick 700 times in a matter of sick minutes
he should get aqua net to sponsor this fix. since we can find out how many can of aqua net it takes to keep fro and jerry curl up and good.
I think the light leak lenses are 'sick.' I bet I can have fun and take sick photos with them too
its not f/1.2 because the E-Mount is NOT big enough for f/1.2 for 85mm focal length. E mount was made for APS-C cameras which Sony adapted for Full Frame. Now imagine how much Sony is going to loose the market if they change the mount like Nikon Z & Canon RF mount to make exotic lenses like 85/1.2, 58/0.95 or f/2 zooms ..... !!!!!!
This sick look can be made in any sick editor without spending sick money unnecessarily which would just make you sick.
those lens not going nowhere “DEAD IN THE WATER” before the shark arrived!!
Dude that shirt is sick😂
I always try to get the sharpest photos and the beat lens and now they sales crapy lenses . I can do that with out spending $300 bucks 😒
These lenses are for creative purposes similar to mist filters. For 300$ that's a steal.
Sick video. Sick info. Sick.
L-mount probably laugh in the corner somewhere having the top-of-the-line Sigma Art lens with no need of any other lens. 😅😅 (Not an L-mount shooter but honestly their lens are superb.)
very sick
I'm guessing the people behind the junk lenses are counting on AI to fix the photos in post processing.
Ooooooooo good one.
Next fropack. Disposable 1, 2, 3.
Just use what you have and buy the preset 💪
yeah i don't understand this crappy lenses trend. If you want that look u can get it in editing, also there are lots of vintage lenses that are cheaper and much better, and even with the adapter is less expensive, also that's the real old feeling
Sony would have to software correct the crap out of that 1.2 lens because of small diameter E mount.
“That disposable look that was so hot in the 90s…” wtf we couldn’t afford anything but that look, most of us didn’t choose it, it was all that was available. wtf our lenses have gotten soo good that we have to start making them shitty now
3:16 one thing that comes to mind when I see that product is WTF?!?!?!?!
NGL. I kinda like that idea of having the ability to introduce light leak into an image in the camera. That's kinda cool. Just a shame they introduce that feature on deliberately horrible lenses that are sold at an obviously too high price point for how shit they are (also... Did I see a fixed f/11 lens? 😶).
I think I understand why canons not letting other lenses mount to their systems, they don't want shitty gimic glass representing their cameras
I agree.. if you want your PICTURES to look like you TOOK them with a TOY CAMERA… you DON’T need to spend $120!
Hey Jared, I've got an idea. Why don't people save money and dig out their old iPhone 4 from the back of the bedside drawer (you know the one that has all the toys in it), and use that instead of these crazy lenses that will give a similarly crappy photo. Or they could just stick with what they have and use Lr or Ps to give the same effect...... just sayin' 🤔
Wow!!!
Great Video!!
These people do be spending hundreds of dollars for the point & shoot look. Meanwhile with my 3D printer, I can just 3D print an point & shoot adapter for my digital camera's mount from Thingiverse, gut an real disposable point & shoot film camera to harvest the lens and assemble it together using hot glue for almost nothing as your local film lab will likely be glad to give you an already processed disposable camera for free.