Samyang 135mm f/2.0 Announced?

I'm curious to see how well it performs. I'd like a good 135 f/2 lens for portraits and this might tide me over until I can bring myself to buy the Zeiss model, but I suspect I'd get much better bang for my buck with the Canon 135 as that could do low light sports as well.
 
Upvote 0
Hmm, that'll have to come down to more like $400 to succeed. The 135L is at a street price of $7-800 used, and the refurb is right around $800. Cant see many (non-video) people saving $2-300 and losing one of the best AF lenses Canon has.

Also means the cine version would be like $700ish on release. Which is pricy as well.
 
Upvote 0
distant.star said:
preppyak said:
Hmm, that'll have to come down to more like $400 to succeed. The 135L is at a street price of $7-800 used, and the refurb is right around $800. Cant see many (non-video) people saving $2-300 and losing one of the best AF lenses Canon has.
Also means the cine version would be like $700ish on release. Which is pricy as well.

I couldn't see paying $550 for an manual focus, non-Zeiss, lens - why not pay a few hundred more for a lens with excellent AF and L build quality - the Canon 135L?
 
Upvote 0
bholliman said:
distant.star said:
preppyak said:
Hmm, that'll have to come down to more like $400 to succeed. The 135L is at a street price of $7-800 used, and the refurb is right around $800. Cant see many (non-video) people saving $2-300 and losing one of the best AF lenses Canon has.
Also means the cine version would be like $700ish on release. Which is pricy as well.

I couldn't see paying $550 for an manual focus, non-Zeiss, lens - why not pay a few hundred more for a lens with excellent AF and L build quality the Canon 135L?

The image quality looks excellent from this first review.
 
Upvote 0
raptor3x said:
bholliman said:
distant.star said:
preppyak said:
Hmm, that'll have to come down to more like $400 to succeed. The 135L is at a street price of $7-800 used, and the refurb is right around $800. Cant see many (non-video) people saving $2-300 and losing one of the best AF lenses Canon has.
Also means the cine version would be like $700ish on release. Which is pricy as well.

I couldn't see paying $550 for an manual focus, non-Zeiss, lens - why not pay a few hundred more for a lens with excellent AF and L build quality the Canon 135L?

The image quality looks excellent from this first review.

Image quality looks pretty good from that review! Aberrations look well-controlled, but sharpness and light falloff looks significantly lost at 2.0. 2.8 and on look pretty good though. Seems like a great lens, but focus peaking would need to be used. Forget about it w/ an OVF.
 
Upvote 0