@@CartyCantDance nah that marketing on crop lenses is just annoying really. It makes comparisons in field of view needlessly complicated. In a perfect world we would just use field of view numbers really but I don't think that will ever happen. So at least making all focal lengths somewhat standardized around one system would help a lot 😅
@@SyntheticFuture Field of view depends on sensor size, or combination of lens and body. In perfect world we would just use physical attributes of the lens. For example we might use optical attributes like focal length and etiher maximum aperture or light transmission (personally I would prefer later, but I understand its harder to measure so former would be fine too). Then, to have an idea what it would look like on different sensors, we should find one standardized system, which is quite hard in photography. Fortunatelly small format, today known better as fullframe have well defined size (not like medium format, large format or aps-c). So then if used on some different system we could apply some number that calculates it to FF equivalent. That would be a logical, easy to understand and simple system. Oh... Thats what we already do... If we would use field of view then you would have multiple numbers, lets take a lens made primarily for Phas One system that could be adapted to different systems. You would need at least 2 different number for medium format, another for fullframe, 2 for aps-c (because canon aps-c is 1.6x crop factor), another one for m42... 6 different FoV numbers for single lens and that is just those quite common sized sensors, nothing obscure... A lot of systems use same mount for different sensor sizes, so its not problem for just adapted lenses, but native ones too.
yeah this would be a good lens for video...Many cameras punch in with raw modes like my Reg Gemini say if I want 4k instead of 5k or My Eos R5 when I use the Ninja V+ and do 5k60 proresraw i have to enable in camera 1.6x crop (it has to crop to give you the 5k because raw data is full sensor) thats also why Red cameras do that.
I was waiting for this review, seems it's high quality lens also usable a bit on fullframe. As a manual lens it makes for great price/performance, even more if used with a5100 which got poor max iso but all together it makes for lightweight option. Also I can try it to see limits of low light on A7IV, maybe even to record some falling stars 😁
There are a lot of APSC lens that can cover a full frame sensor. Almost all of the Sigma Art Full Frame lenses can cover the GFX medium format sensor. The reason for that extra coverage is for the entire sensor to be covered by the best quality of the center of the lens.
Hey, Chris! I remember writing to you asking if you could review this lens some time ago. So happy to see the review out and the lens performance turn out to my liking. Thank you for your work. Two things. 1. The link you provided returns a 404 error and there is no 20mm f0.95 stills lens on their (ZY) website. As I mentioned in my email it did show up on their japanese label (Choichi Kogaku) web store. Did they actually commit to releasing the lens with their ZY or Mitakon labels and their respective stores in more countries? I'd love to get me a copy to EU (PL). 2. Laowa recently introduced an S35 cine 20mm T1.0 lens as well! Sadly they didn't announce a stills version. They also announced a 28mm T1.0 FF lens which makes it faster than their Argus stills F1.2 lens. Any chance of you taking those for a spin? If anyone could get their hands on those, or get some unofficial leaks about upcoming stills versions you'd be my bet!
I've noticed the error too! Their PR email address seems to have stopped working though so there's nothing I can do. I'm requesting the Laowa lenses. Glad you enjoyed the video!
I’m new to photography - would this lens be good for astrophotography? All I know is I want a wide angle lens, and the lower number the aperture the more light gets in, the more stars I see. Or are there other lenses available that would be much better (for say under $700)
I can't wait to test it. The short answer is...when Canon have one ready for me! A review of the 24-105 f/2.8 is coming soon though (already available to Patreon supporters ;-)
what does this have in terms of 35mm? when i use at 50 0.95 on apsc i have the light exposure at 0.95 80mm and i think dof stays the same, anything change from 20mm 0.95?
would be a equivalent of around 30mm on full frame. Depth of field doesn't change because of the sensor size, it's just that if you're taking the same composition you need to stand further away from your subject than you would with a full frame setup, that results in a wider depth of field. So if you were taking the same composition it would look similar to a 30mm 1.4 (or around that)
@@gerardferry3958 yes, you multiply your aperture in the same way you do focal length by the crop factor of the sensor. This will give you your equivalent focal length and aperture (only for depth of field purposes, the amount of light received by the lens not effected)
It would be the full frame equivalent of 75mm f1.5 (with the light gathering of f0.95) If mounted on a full frame camera you get 50mm F0.95, and it seems if you set your aspect to 16:9 or if you shoot video it seems to cover enough of the full frame circle to handle withour cropping
@@CallMeRabbitzUSVI you're miles off there i'm afraid fella. Assuming a crop factor of 1.5 (for sony, Fuji APSC sensors) it's a 30mm f/1.4 equivalent. You're correct about light gathering, it isn't affected by crop factor.
I keep wanting to try one of these 0.95 lenses, but I'm a bit hesitant about transmission after being let down on some 1.2 and 1.4 lenses performing closer to T1.8. Anybody done any tests?
ZY Optics Mitakon beats everyone in terms of bokeh. There are many f/0.95 lenses out there, but if you test them all, ZY Optics Mitakon is simply the best.
Am I the only one to find it a bit strange that on all of the reviews made, you don't even talk about the centering problems of the samples you review ? And why always pick the best corner available without even showing the quality difference ? Thanks for yout explanation.
Why those f0.95 lens just be like f1.4 lens so lens can reduce weight, size perheps price as well. And we can use it wide open at f1.4 for no hesitation.
Because it's not a 30mm lens, it's 20mm. The focal length of a lens is a physical attribute of the way it's optics are designed. The focal length doesn't magically change when you mount it on a different sensor.
I’ve never been this early. A 20mm f/0.95!?!?!? What a wild concept
Yeah
Crop so technically more like a 35mm. Which is a very nice focal length to have though.
@@SyntheticFuture 20mm is still 20mm, that full frame coverage looked more like a 1.2/1.3. So this could be closer to a 25mm
@@CartyCantDance nah that marketing on crop lenses is just annoying really. It makes comparisons in field of view needlessly complicated. In a perfect world we would just use field of view numbers really but I don't think that will ever happen. So at least making all focal lengths somewhat standardized around one system would help a lot 😅
@@SyntheticFuture Field of view depends on sensor size, or combination of lens and body. In perfect world we would just use physical attributes of the lens. For example we might use optical attributes like focal length and etiher maximum aperture or light transmission (personally I would prefer later, but I understand its harder to measure so former would be fine too). Then, to have an idea what it would look like on different sensors, we should find one standardized system, which is quite hard in photography. Fortunatelly small format, today known better as fullframe have well defined size (not like medium format, large format or aps-c). So then if used on some different system we could apply some number that calculates it to FF equivalent. That would be a logical, easy to understand and simple system. Oh... Thats what we already do...
If we would use field of view then you would have multiple numbers, lets take a lens made primarily for Phas One system that could be adapted to different systems. You would need at least 2 different number for medium format, another for fullframe, 2 for aps-c (because canon aps-c is 1.6x crop factor), another one for m42... 6 different FoV numbers for single lens and that is just those quite common sized sensors, nothing obscure... A lot of systems use same mount for different sensor sizes, so its not problem for just adapted lenses, but native ones too.
3:23
Always funny to me when he says: stop down to f1.4
With that kind of Full Frame coverage, if you set it to a video 16:9 video mode, it might just fit the entire image.
That's what I was thinking. Full frame 16:9 video with a tiny crop would give you perfect coverage.
Honestly, can't wait to get my hands on it
yeah this would be a good lens for video...Many cameras punch in with raw modes like my Reg Gemini say if I want 4k instead of 5k or My Eos R5 when I use the Ninja V+ and do 5k60 proresraw i have to enable in camera 1.6x crop (it has to crop to give you the 5k because raw data is full sensor) thats also why Red cameras do that.
wow incredible! I need to pick this lens up and test it out!
I was waiting for this review, seems it's high quality lens also usable a bit on fullframe.
As a manual lens it makes for great price/performance, even more if used with a5100 which got poor max iso but all together it makes for lightweight option.
Also I can try it to see limits of low light on A7IV, maybe even to record some falling stars 😁
The coverage looks like the lens is made for APS-H sensor
There are a lot of APSC lens that can cover a full frame sensor. Almost all of the Sigma Art Full Frame lenses can cover the GFX medium format sensor. The reason for that extra coverage is for the entire sensor to be covered by the best quality of the center of the lens.
pretty good, thanks for showing
Hey, Chris! I remember writing to you asking if you could review this lens some time ago. So happy to see the review out and the lens performance turn out to my liking. Thank you for your work. Two things.
1. The link you provided returns a 404 error and there is no 20mm f0.95 stills lens on their (ZY) website. As I mentioned in my email it did show up on their japanese label (Choichi Kogaku) web store. Did they actually commit to releasing the lens with their ZY or Mitakon labels and their respective stores in more countries? I'd love to get me a copy to EU (PL).
2. Laowa recently introduced an S35 cine 20mm T1.0 lens as well! Sadly they didn't announce a stills version. They also announced a 28mm T1.0 FF lens which makes it faster than their Argus stills F1.2 lens. Any chance of you taking those for a spin? If anyone could get their hands on those, or get some unofficial leaks about upcoming stills versions you'd be my bet!
I've noticed the error too! Their PR email address seems to have stopped working though so there's nothing I can do. I'm requesting the Laowa lenses. Glad you enjoyed the video!
I’m new to photography - would this lens be good for astrophotography? All I know is I want a wide angle lens, and the lower number the aperture the more light gets in, the more stars I see. Or are there other lenses available that would be much better (for say under $700)
When are you going to review the new Canon RF 35mm F1.4l VCM?
I can't wait to test it. The short answer is...when Canon have one ready for me! A review of the 24-105 f/2.8 is coming soon though (already available to Patreon supporters ;-)
Banger or not, well I trust Frost to tell us
what does this have in terms of 35mm? when i use at 50 0.95 on apsc i have the light exposure at 0.95 80mm and i think dof stays the same, anything change from 20mm 0.95?
would be a equivalent of around 30mm on full frame. Depth of field doesn't change because of the sensor size, it's just that if you're taking the same composition you need to stand further away from your subject than you would with a full frame setup, that results in a wider depth of field. So if you were taking the same composition it would look similar to a 30mm 1.4 (or around that)
@@jamesThadley seems dof gets multiplied because of forrnat in real use
@@gerardferry3958 yes, you multiply your aperture in the same way you do focal length by the crop factor of the sensor. This will give you your equivalent focal length and aperture (only for depth of field purposes, the amount of light received by the lens not effected)
It would be the full frame equivalent of 75mm f1.5 (with the light gathering of f0.95)
If mounted on a full frame camera you get 50mm F0.95, and it seems if you set your aspect to 16:9 or if you shoot video it seems to cover enough of the full frame circle to handle withour cropping
@@CallMeRabbitzUSVI you're miles off there i'm afraid fella. Assuming a crop factor of 1.5 (for sony, Fuji APSC sensors) it's a 30mm f/1.4 equivalent. You're correct about light gathering, it isn't affected by crop factor.
I keep wanting to try one of these 0.95 lenses, but I'm a bit hesitant about transmission after being let down on some 1.2 and 1.4 lenses performing closer to T1.8. Anybody done any tests?
The coma thing is so sad this could have been a BEAST for astrophotography if coma wasn't such a problem.
ZY Optics Mitakon beats everyone in terms of bokeh. There are many f/0.95 lenses out there, but if you test them all, ZY Optics Mitakon is simply the best.
7:25
Caught me off guard
Am I the only one to find it a bit strange that on all of the reviews made, you don't even talk about the centering problems of the samples you review ? And why always pick the best corner available without even showing the quality difference ?
Thanks for yout explanation.
Yes
@@TheRockandroy If you are happy with not knowing the true IQ of a lens, then why visiting this channel ?
@@OtusEzylryb yes
Demand double your money back.
You mentioned focus "slop" resulting in difficulty precisely achieving a sharp focus, but then this comment is strangely forgotten....
Why those f0.95 lens just be like f1.4 lens so lens can reduce weight, size perheps price as well. And we can use it wide open at f1.4 for no hesitation.
Why do we even need 0.95? the focus area is like a needle
Thank you Blah blah blahhh :)))
Patreon blah blah blah
Can be good on a 1.2 crop sensor😂
Red Komodo anyone?
The link in the description is dead. Looks like a fun lens, what mounts is it available in aside from Sony?
This would be great for milky way shots.
In your initial examples from 0:51 it's so soft that I struggled to even find the exact point of focus
if canon design this lens, it was only f4 because sharpness is horrible !
Blah blah blah no L mount (sad) blah blah.
We just need a Chinese camera brand to dethrone the old Canons and Nikons
DJI is working on it I’m sure
You really ought to have an a6700 to test apsc lenses, please
Why?
@christopherfrost To have a body representative of current generation 26mp sensor.
@@WiwatChang Will the resolution test results at 100 ISO be much different from the 24mp sensor, and if so, in what way?
Why not call it a 30mm? Misleading
Cos it’s designed for APSC cameras and they don’t give you FF equivalent in lens names. Nobody does.
Because it's not a 30mm lens, it's 20mm. The focal length of a lens is a physical attribute of the way it's optics are designed.
The focal length doesn't magically change when you mount it on a different sensor.