SLRMagic 35/0.95 and 35/1.4 Stills and Info

K

Kholi

Section Moderator
Steve Huff's second part of the review: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/01/09/the-slr-magic-35mm-t-0-95-hyperprime-lens-review-part-1/

----

Update: 12/30

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/12/29/the-new-slr-magic-hyperprime-35mm-t0-95-and-35-t1-4-arrives-for-testing/

Steve Huff has the 35/1.4 and 35/0.95. 1.4 looks solid, still... that 0.95... UGH. So Killer.

_____

http://3dkraft.de/index.php?option=c...enses&Itemid=2

M-mounted, covers APS-C as well. Despite requiring another adapter, the wide open performance is pretty impressive and bokeh looks great. Very excited for this.

Hyperfast sets looking like 12/1.6, 17.5/0.95 (Voigt), 25/0.95 (SLR), 35/0.95 (SLR), 50/0.95 (SLR)

I think the only other things I could ever want for would be a 9/1.4~2 and a 42/0.95. Beyond that a very sharp wide open 85/1.4 would be plenty beyond the 50mm range.

Although a weird 65/1.4 wouldn't be so bad. =D
 
Last edited:
17.5 and 35mm are two of my favorite prime focal lengths on m43 (so far), and I'd be awful curious to compare this to my old Summilux-35. Pretty lens but far from sharp wide open.
 
CHeck out the stills, though. THe first few are wide open and it's comparable to the 35/2 Zeiss wide open (in terms of usability, I.E the absence of coma and aberration, not in regards to resolving power or detail) from first glance. That's saying a heap. It's comparable as well, since both lenses cover APS-C (the 35/0.95 and 35/2 Zeiss).

Go and check out the 35/T1.5 Samyang Wide open. YUCK
 
I'm a fan of SLR Magic liking the 12mm, but one concern I have is the reviews I've seen are all where reviewers have been approached by SLR Magic and loaned (or maybe given, I don't know what the score is with these review units) and no photos are being shown of issues such as glare and blooming.

Also the lenses are being sold as video lenses, yet videos are being done from tripods for the most part, try using one of these babies hand held with a follow focus on say a GH3 and you won't find them practical as they're very unforgiving wide open.

I think these latest lenses especially the T1.4 are great value for money but I hope no one is suggesting they're Voigtländer killers.
 
Last edited:
If you're speaking about the 12/1.6 handheld, wide open it's achingly simple. I can't imagine anyone having an issue with the lens that's practiced.

I personally like the flares wide open, haven't seen any coma that I would find displeasing either. In regards to Voigtlander, well I guess I come from CInema World anyway and the Voigtlanders are definitely not within the class of most Cinema Primes, sorry. They're still SLR quality, and aren't very usable wide open. If SLR's 25/0.95 matches this quality... why wouldn't it be a Voigt killer?

As a handheld shooter, I'm looking forward to strapping these onto Blackmagic and running wild.
 
I'm speaking about the 35mm handheld, the 12mm is fine, I've recorded a whole music video on the 12mm whilst dancing about myself.

I don't mind lens character but some people do, my issue is the fact there's been no photos yet posted by reviewers of any potential negatives, I have high regard for the likes of Philip Bloom (who himself has used the SLR Magic 12mm for the GH3 Panasonic video) in that when he reviews kit he'll say whether he's actually bought the product himself or not.

I find the Voigtlander useable wide open and recorded live with it for a period of 9 months or so, handheld and coped well, I've found the 35mm far more difficult to do so, it's likely the fact 35mm just shows up handheld movement that much more so without stabilisation.
 
Whats the word on the 35 and 25? I thought those were canned?

Kholi said:
http://3dkraft.de/index.php?option=c...enses&Itemid=2

M-mounted, covers APS-C as well. Despite requiring another adapter, the wide open performance is pretty impressive and bokeh looks great. Very excited for this.

Hyperfast sets looking like 12/1.6, 17.5/0.95 (Voigt), 25/0.95 (SLR), 35/0.95 (SLR), 50/0.95 (SLR)

I think the only other things I could ever want for would be a 9/1.4~2 and a 42/0.95. Beyond that a very sharp wide open 85/1.4 would be plenty beyond the 50mm range.

Although a weird 65/1.4 wouldn't be so bad. =D
Click to expand...
 
P13 said:
I don't mind lens character but some people do, my issue is the fact there's been no photos yet posted by reviewers of any potential negatives, I have high regard for the likes of Philip Bloom (who himself has used the SLR Magic 12mm for the GH3 Panasonic video) in that when he reviews kit he'll say whether he's actually bought the product himself or not.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying. Fair enough.

I find the Voigtlander useable wide open and recorded live with it for a period of 9 months or so, handheld and coped well, I've found the 35mm far more difficult to do so, it's likely the fact 35mm just shows up handheld movement that much more so without stabilisation.
Click to expand...

I think that's a matter of practice, really. It's definitely a more telephoto lens, but it's not uncommon in narrative and commercial to go handheld with a 50 or even 85.

On the Voigtlander wide open, how do you deal with the coma? I personally can't stand it but maybe it's tolerable to some.

bgundu said:
Whats the word on the 35 and 25? I thought those were canned?
Click to expand...

35 I believe is officially released, the 25 I thought was supposed to be headed soon, maybe beginning of next year? Maybe we can find out some more info on that one.

The review linked has photos from the production version of the 35/0.95
 
Kholi said:
On the Voigtlander wide open, how do you deal with the coma? I personally can't stand it but maybe it's tolerable to some.
Click to expand...
Maybe I've put that down to lens character, then again I see more obvious character issues with the SLR Magic.

I like quirks and character, I was asked by a mate if I'd been playing about with Video Copilot optical flares for my recent SLR Magic 35mm T1.4 first go, I hadn't so it saved me some post work. :happy:

I've attached a frame grab so you can see what I mean.

vlcsnap-2012-12-24-23h48m48s13.jpg
 
P13 said:
Maybe I've put that down to lens character, then again I see more obvious character issues with the SLR Magic.
Click to expand...

Ah, see, there's the catch: you see the coma as character, I see it as unusable. But, with the SLR 12, you see the flares as a flaw and I see them as a tool. So maybe it's not that the guys reviewing are trying to hide anything (Which I know you didn't say exactly but seemed to point toward, sorry if that's not the intent!) but maybe just not as important to them.

I'm more concerned than ever about wide open performance, and these guys are making solid strides to achieving usable images at wide open apertures.

Although this lens cannot be adapted to Nikon (and I don't think it can be adapted to EF mount either), since we're in the GH2 forum it's fair to compare of the fast 35mm's out there. Nikon's 35/1.4G, Nikon's 35/1.4 AI-S (old school), Canon's 35/1.4 EF, Zeiss's ZF 35/2, Zeiss's ZF.2 35/1.4, Rokinon/Samyang 35/1.5. There are surely a number more, but as far as performers and popularity go for fast primes these seem to be it--feel free to add more.

If you go and look at price to performance for each of these, and so far what we've seen from an even faster production copy of the 35/0.95 I'd have to say it's looking really promising. The Nikon 35/1.4 G is CA death (not a huge problem for stills, can be corrected but for video? NOOOO), the AI-S is coma central-- it's an old lens though so. The Rokinon is just outright nastyville wide open, not even sure why they bothered advertising it as a T1.5. Of all of those, The 35/2 Zeiss is the lens I would reach for, and perhaps the 35/1.4 Zeiss.

I like quirks and character, I was asked by a mate if I'd been playing about with Video Copilot optical flares for my recent SLR Magic 35mm T1.4 first go, I hadn't so it saved me some post work. :happy:

I've attached a frame grab so you can see what I mean.

View attachment 64150
Click to expand...

Ah you've got the 35/1.4 -- what's your take on the focus throw if you don't mind me askin'?
 
bgundu said:
Hey the 35mm F2.0 Leica is charismatic lens!
https://vimeo.com/50015182
Click to expand...

Isn't that a 2500.00 lens??? Yeah, though, those Leica's are killer. Matty_G rented a set for a commercial we shot on a pair of Blackmagics... =O really great stuff. Out of my realm of ownership (justification haha) but you're right.

Still, 0.95 smells like some really awesome opportunity for creative storytelling. Vantage T1's are next on the list of toys to play with.

Did you get a Scarlet, Bob? No more AF100?

(I realize I may be pretty ecstatic about this lens, sorry. xD)
 
I slowly put together a Leica R set and sent it off to Duclos for cinemod them. And no my 35mm didn't cost that at all. I think I paid $600. The prices are getting out of had now though. Yes the .95 is great. I love the Voigtlander 25mm on my Af100 (which I have but thinking of selling, because I do have a Scarlet now).

leica_1500.jpg
side.jpg
 
You're confusing my lens comments, I'm happy with the 12mm, I used it as a second angle for the test above and it didn't show the rainbow effect above for example (groovy though that is).

I use lenses at night, the reason I got a Voigtlander to begin with, what I want to see of a review, if anyone is to claim a Voigtlander contender is both side by side from a reviewer that's bought both with hard earned cash, using them both hand held and a tripod would be nice.

Demonstrate to me (via a photo or screengrab) the Voigtlander coma and I'll see how the SLR Magic compares as I've been generally happy with my Voigtlander F0.95 night images, I've found them sharp without obvious quirks even with a Optex anamorphic on which by its nature adds (desirable and undesirable) quirks. For example. here's a F0.95 video grab with parcans in the background and I can't see any obvious quirk effects (other than a bit of glare).

vlcsnap-2012-04-08-02h00m06s117.jpg

On the T1.4 35mm, wide open I find the bokeh pleasing but on the GH3 with its viewfinder a tricky b'stated, TBH even with an SmallHD DP4 on it's nigh on impossible to record live with a singer moving back and fourth unless you have the reactions of a ninja on 9 Redbulls.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I got confused. It did seem like you liked both lenses, didn't get that part wrong, just that you didn't quite get what you wanted out of reviews.

P13 said:
I use lenses at night, the reason I got a Voigtlander to begin with, what I want to see of a review, if anyone is to claim a Voigtlander contender is both side by side from a reviewer that's bought both with hard earned cash, using them both hand held and a tripod would be nice.

Demonstrate to me (via a photo or screengrab) the Voigtlander coma and I'll see how the SLR Magic compares as I've been generally happy with my Voigtlander F0.95 night images, I've found them sharp without obvious quirks even with a Optex anamorphic on which by its nature adds (desirable and undesirable) quirks. For example. here's a F0.95 video grab with parcans in the background and I can't see any obvious quirks effects.

View attachment 64154
Click to expand...
That Photo's a tad small to tell, really. If you could post a larger version that would help, but here's a similar experience to what I had with the Voigt 25/0.95 (NOT MY PHOTO)--

Taxi-0.95.jpg


If this were moving imagery, it would be completely unusable for any stretch of time, and likely would never make it into a cut. I could not produce, with a GH2, any sort of "fantastic" Imagery with the 0.95 wide open, but it was definitely okay for something that wasn't important or just knocking around.

That's mostly what I mean. It just wasn't acceptable to me, though going in a good direction.

On the T1.4 35mm, wide open I find the bokeh pleasing but on the GH3 with its viewfinder a tricky b'stated, TBH even with an SmallHD DP4 on it's nigh on impossible to record live with a singer moving back and fourth unless you have the reactions of a ninja on 9 Redbulls.
Click to expand...

Or you're just used to pulling focus for years shooting action etc. =P

You can also check Philip Blooms GH3 video. There are some night shots (01:53) that were obvious done with the 25/0.95 as that's just how it looks, bloomy and hazy wide open.

Anyway, that's just me. I like the Voigts for what they are but not sure I could rely on them wide open. And so far, at least from the photos, the 35/0.95 gets a lot closer to performing solidly wide open.
 
The image above looks general blurry so it's hard to judge, here for example F0.95, we have a full power club parcan on it's way down to tilt towards the GH2 with the Nokton and there's not a lot of light issues going on (to my eyes, if I'm missing something please correct me), compared to the SLR Magic which is rainbowing off just an LED light. I see a halo effect around the lights as the area is out of focus, but no rings of lights outside of that.

P1050188.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top