# 135mm f/1.4 full-frame lens coming from third party



## ahsanford (Oct 17, 2015)

Mitakon typically makes tricked out lead-pipe-like f/0.95 lenses for mirrorless rigs, but _check this out_:

http://photorumors.com/2015/10/17/mitakon-135mm-f1-4-lens-to-be-announced-soon/

They say it will be for "Sony FE, Canon (pictures above) and most likely Nikon mounts"

The picture is clearly a solid-topped (no pop-up flash) + non-integrally gripped body, which means 5D(something) or 6D --> that's a full-frame lens.

- A


----------



## Viggo (Oct 17, 2015)

This is mf right? 135 f1.4 with mf, yeah, I couldn't even use a 50 f2 with mf :


----------



## meywd (Oct 17, 2015)

MF is hard, really really hard, guess I should buy that focusing screen


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Oct 18, 2015)

MF with that lens would be easy. Just carry a tall rocking chair everywhere and rock back and forth while shooting in burst mode.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 18, 2015)

The sample images leave me thoroughly unimpressed.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Oct 18, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Mitakon typically makes tricked out lead-pipe-like f/0.95 lenses for mirrorless rigs, but _check this out_:
> 
> http://photorumors.com/2015/10/17/mitakon-135mm-f1-4-lens-to-be-announced-soon/
> 
> ...


I will wait for the Sigma 135mm f2 OS Art


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 18, 2015)

The way things are going with shallow DoF, pretty soon there won't be a picture in focus unless it was taken with a camera phone. 

Everybody is loving that creamy look in movies with dSLR shot scenes, and now it is everywhere.

Canon, dear Canon, where the heck is the new 50mm 1.2? The current model doesn't even work with MF! :


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 20, 2015)

OUCH. Only 100 to be made, price = $3k. It also weighs over 6 pounds.

http://photorumors.com/2015/10/19/the-new-mitakon-speedmaster-135mm-f1-4-lens-will-cost-2999/

- A


----------



## moreorless (Oct 20, 2015)

Not too surprised at the price given the specs and size although I'd have thought they could sell more than 100.


----------



## dolina (Oct 21, 2015)

Manual focus lens... what date is it?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 22, 2015)

As shallow as the depth of field in on the Canon EF 135mm f/2... I just don't know what this new third party lens could ever be used for in my life.


----------



## H. Jones (Oct 23, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> As shallow as the depth of field in on the Canon EF 135mm f/2... I just don't know what this new third party lens could ever be used for in my life.



If you ever wanted ultra-ultra-thin depth of field while photographing planes landing at airports, now there's a lens for you!


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 23, 2015)

H. Jones said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > As shallow as the depth of field in on the Canon EF 135mm f/2... I just don't know what this new third party lens could ever be used for in my life.
> ...



It's not _that_ long a focal length. 

Look, I'm making fun of the realities of a 6+ pound prime lens without autofocus, but there is an opportunity for Mitakon.

If you like taking portraits with a 70-200 f/2.8 lens shot wide open, _now imagine that with far creamier bokeh / far greater subject isolation_. There's absolutely a market for that. 

People who spoon with their 135mm f/2L lenses at night like people did with their Amiga computers when they were discontinued will understand. 

People who buy sell everything they own for used copies of 200mm f/1.8L or 200mm f/2L IS lenses will understand.

I'm not buying that monster because I'm not one of those people, but call me crazy, someone on this forum will absolutely buy one of these.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 23, 2015)

From the Photoplus Expo right now, see pics. Huge, as expected. It's hard to hide from physics.

- A


----------



## meywd (Oct 23, 2015)

The small size benefit of mirrorless shines here :


----------



## dolina (Oct 23, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> From the Photoplus Expo right now, see pics. Huge, as expected. It's hard to hide from physics.
> 
> - A


I'd love to see a side by side comparison with a 200/2.0


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 2, 2015)

H. Jones said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > As shallow as the depth of field in on the Canon EF 135mm f/2... I just don't know what this new third party lens could ever be used for in my life.
> ...



I'd be afraid of getting roughed up by the TSA.


----------



## NancyP (Nov 2, 2015)

lessee...200/2 = front element 100mm. 135/1.4 = front element 96mm. Yep, not too different in size. What I would really like to see one day is the legendary Nikkor 300mm f/2. Gulp. 150mm front element. This has got to be one of the lenses that had its own Shinto blessing ceremony, back in the day (a Nikon honor reserved for only a few of its lenses).


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Nov 2, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> H. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 2, 2015)

dolina said:


> Manual focus lens... what date is it?



And it will only set you back 1.21GigaBucks....


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 2, 2015)

135f1.4 is actually only slightly thinner DOF than 85f1.2, so this shouldn't be much different from the current "Bokeh Master" lenses on the market.

I've been reading rumors of a Fuji 33mm f1.0 lens and that actually has me excited. I know it's basically the same as a 50f1.4, but just the existence of an f1.0 lens is quite out of the ordinary. Fuji has pretty high standards and it could end up being one of the best crop lenses ever made.


----------



## risc32 (Nov 3, 2015)

There is more to bokeh than fstops. I don't think f1 lenses for little baby sensor cameras are rare at all. They are generally just manual focus and they tend to underperform. I wouldn't go getting to excited about DOFs shrinking away to nothing. We aren't really breaking new ground here, my 60 yr old camera is far beyond all this. I know this might seem hard to believe but they used to use tilt-shift lenses to combat the tiny DOF. Weird right? And here I thought they were invented for the sole purpose of making things look miniature.


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 3, 2015)

risc32 said:


> There is more to bokeh than fstops.



People looking at the Fuji system can probably look forward to more lenses like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-ckE1Hi9Zs


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Nov 3, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Mitakon typically makes tricked out lead-pipe-like f/0.95 lenses for mirrorless rigs, but _check this out_:
> 
> http://photorumors.com/2015/10/17/mitakon-135mm-f1-4-lens-to-be-announced-soon/
> 
> ...


How can I hanhold and do MF to this lens at 135mm and get sharp wide-open pictures? I can't. So, this is not in my wishlist


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 3, 2015)

I'd be inclined to go for a 200mm f/2 L rather than try to get service on one of these.


----------



## martti (Dec 5, 2015)

Does it come with a focus puller?


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 15, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> MF with that lens would be easy. Just carry a tall rocking chair everywhere and rock back and forth while shooting in burst mode.



That's funny! ;D


----------



## 9VIII (Dec 15, 2015)

meywd said:


> The small size benefit of mirrorless shines here :



Actually it's really nice to be able to fit the lens in a backpack with a body attached, thus smaller bodies are great even with supertelephoto lenses.
Everything but the 1200f5.6 would probably be easier to use with a smaller body (the mule carrying it won't care if there's a 1D stuck on the end).


----------



## AE-1Burnham (Dec 15, 2015)

Come on Canon! Do your magic with a 135 F1.8L IS!,-not that there is any pressure from this 1.4 but still..!


----------



## scyrene (Dec 15, 2015)

9VIII said:


> meywd said:
> 
> 
> > The small size benefit of mirrorless shines here :
> ...



I'm not convinced.


----------



## SOD (Dec 15, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> As shallow as the depth of field in on the Canon EF 135mm f/2... I just don't know what this new third party lens could ever be used for in my life.



Exactly. F/2 is as wide as I want to go at 135mm.


----------



## helpful (Dec 15, 2015)

9VIII said:


> 135f1.4 is actually only slightly thinner DOF than 85f1.2, so this shouldn't be much different from the current "Bokeh Master" lenses on the market.



No. The depth of field of a 135mm f/1.4 is more than twice as shallow than 85mm f/1.2, assuming other factors are constant.

For example, at a randomly chosen distance (about 10 feet):
85mm f/1.2 = 2.22 inches
135mm f/1.4 = 1.03 inches

In optics you can use the lens equation to show that depth of field is differentially proportional to the inverse square of the focal length. So to compare two lenses relative amounts of depth of field at the same f/number, you simply divide the larger focal length by the smaller focal length, then square the result.

135/85 = 1.588
1.588 squared = 2.522

So the 135mm has a depth of field more than twice as shallow as the 85mm at equivalent apertures.

Note that this is measured in a differential sense, i.e., in a subject-distance-independent fashion, which is the best way of assessing overall depth of field.


----------



## Ozarker (Dec 19, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> H. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



My 135mm f/2L is my 70-200's sister wife. That's how I spoon.


----------

