Samyang announces the AF 85mm f/1.4 for the RF mount

FamilyGuy

EOS 90D
Feb 5, 2020
115
167
It doesn't have Canon control ring because this is the exact same lens they already make for the Sony E mount, which does not have Canon control ring.
Right. I guess what I'm wondering is if any third party manufacturer will make a "true" RF lens using the control ring feature? Or will they all be mirrorless versions of the EF lenses adapted for the shorter distance to the sensor? If that's the case, Canon did something unique that will make native glass more appealing to some. I know it's not "needed"; but some will want a control ring.
 

jeffa4444

EOS 5D Mark IV
Feb 28, 2013
1,507
161
66
The EF85mm f1.4L IS USM works just as well on the EOS R using the adaptor as it does on my 5DS. Sure I wound like to see Canon do a native RF85 f1.4 IS USM lens but I don't think it is a priority for them currently. The EF85 f1.4L IS USM lens is truly a great portrait lens and Im truly glad I bought it.
 

BeenThere

EOS R
Sep 4, 2012
1,094
526
Right. I guess what I'm wondering is if any third party manufacturer will make a "true" RF lens using the control ring feature? Or will they all be mirrorless versions of the EF lenses adapted for the shorter distance to the sensor? If that's the case, Canon did something unique that will make native glass more appealing to some. I know it's not "needed"; but some will want a control ring.
Could be a patent issue for the control ring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Normalnorm

RBSfphoto

EOS M50
May 18, 2020
25
29
If Samyang are jumping into the RF mount along with others, I think it is time for me to dump Fujifilm X and GFX and go all in on Canon. Fuji fans keep saying APS-C is the sweet spot, which in some ways, it is, but it really depends. For still life APS-C is way way behind, showing less detail and more noise as base ISO and in low light, the X can't focus and shows very soft results after ISO 6400. It has really great rolling shutter performance. It has nice small lenses, but none of them are inexpensive and most have poor focus rings and there is little uniformity between them in feel. And until right now and excepting the Zeiss Touit lenses, there have been no 100% compatible third party lenses.

And Canon cameras are easier to use, and there are loads of great lenses already available thanks to adapters... Can't wait for the R6/5 announcements.
I have both Canon and Fuji systems I think of them as different tools for different jobs, have not had an issue with focus on my xt-3's but would like to see the low light performance improved. I have had pretty good success mounting my canon lenses on the fuji with a finger adapter. Now you want to talk about poor focus my phase one body has the worst auto focus ever but even my older model IQ180 sensor beats my canon 5ds for an amazing look every time, but I would never try and shoot a soccer game with it ,wrong tool. I don't think of any system as being a perfect solution.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy
Dec 6, 2018
180
294
Finally! Thanks Samyang. Guess Canon was too busy making absurdly priced $3k lenses the past two years to bother with a consumer priced 85 RF that should have been out long ago. Now we just need a 50mm.
That sounds ignorant to me.

Considering the EF 85mm 1.4 works like a hand in a glove on the EOS R, there shouldn't be any need for Canon to rush new RF lens designs. Canon's present pace seems more than ample.
 
May 28, 2020
1
0
Does anyone know if this lens is any different from the Canon EF version? I've been using the EF version on my EOS R from day one and love it, but if there's any improvement to be had with this new RF model (specially the CA correction) I'll go for it in a blink
 

gzroxas

Canon EOS R / Travel and Landscape
Oct 3, 2018
48
58
Italy
Does anyone know if this lens is any different from the Canon EF version? I've been using the EF version on my EOS R from day one and love it, but if there's any improvement to be had with this new RF model (specially the CA correction) I'll go for it in a blink
Yeah! It’s not the EF Design but the one they used for the FE Mount! It has 11 elements instead of 9 and other bonuses such as different coatings etc!
Try to look for some review of the Sony FE version to have an idea of the performance difference! :D
 

Tremotino

EOS M6 Mark II
Jan 23, 2018
62
33
Munich
Why would someone buy a samyang with an Sony FE bottleneck lens design for a RF mount Camera??

I mean, paying more for a worser lensdesign doesn't makes sense to me.
I would wait for Sigmas lenses for the nikon/canon/Leica ML Systems, which will have an advantage of the short and lange ML mount. Or a canon rf 85mm 1.4 or 1.8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

gzroxas

Canon EOS R / Travel and Landscape
Oct 3, 2018
48
58
Italy
Why would someone buy a samyang with an Sony FE bottleneck lens design for a RF mount Camera??

I mean, paying more for a worser lensdesign doesn't makes sense to me.
I would wait for Sigmas lenses for the nikon/canon/Leica ML Systems, which will have an advantage of the short and lange ML mount. Or a canon rf 85mm 1.4 or 1.8.
I agree on the idea of the bottleneck (although Sony lens reviews on sharpness and performance say the opposite) but it seems evident that some changes have definitely been made to the lens. I would assume the elements closer to the sensor have been changed to make it fit the flange distance and RF Mount effectively eliminating the elements that would create the bottleneck. But that’s just my assumption. Still a good value lens either way.
 
May 30, 2020
2
1
Why would someone buy a samyang with an Sony FE bottleneck lens design for a RF mount Camera??

I mean, paying more for a worser lensdesign doesn't makes sense to me.
I would wait for Sigmas lenses for the nikon/canon/Leica ML Systems, which will have an advantage of the short and lange ML mount. Or a canon rf 85mm 1.4 or 1.8.
I tested the EF 85mm F1.8, F1.2 L and F1.4 IS L with my EOS R. Every lens has its advantages. Adapted F1.4 and F1.2 are not very well-balanced to my taste. The RF version is to expensive for my hobby. I stayed by F1.8 for its weight, and I am waiting for the 3rd party 85mm RF lens. I will give this Samyang lens a chance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KrisK

djack41

EOS RP
Jul 12, 2014
213
154
Re-sale on the Samyang is poor. So you pay less on the front and lose it on the back. It might be a decent buy if you plan to keep it. Canon L glass holds its value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gzroxas

Frodo

EOS RP
Nov 3, 2012
365
52
Re-sale on the Samyang is poor. So you pay less on the front and lose it on the back. It might be a decent buy if you plan to keep it. Canon L glass holds its value.
Keeping an open mind on this. My Samyang 14/2.8 is much sharper and has less coma than a friend's EF 14/2.8L (both first versions) and the Samyang was about a fifth the price of the Canon.
 

ohm

AF Stickler
Apr 8, 2019
15
13
Japan
YouTube.com
I have both Canon and Fuji systems I think of them as different tools for different jobs, have not had an issue with focus on my xt-3's but would like to see the low light performance improved. I have had pretty good success mounting my canon lenses on the fuji with a finger adapter. Now you want to talk about poor focus my phase one body has the worst auto focus ever but even my older model IQ180 sensor beats my canon 5ds for an amazing look every time, but I would never try and shoot a soccer game with it ,wrong tool. I don't think of any system as being a perfect solution.
I certainly understand the different tools thing. I used to shoot with dual CFV-50 and 50c backs on bellows and then mounted to two different SLR bodies for studio work. Today I have a GFX. It isn't as versatile on bellows and can't mount as many lens types, but it is way easier to use in studio. That said, it is a slug to work with in macro. The reason is the same as the X-T3: when the lights go down, the sensor or processor starts to hiccup to such an extent that it is hard to tell what is in focus and what isn't. This isn't a problem with a Leica SL or even Canon 5D MKII. The GFX outputs good image quality (similar to the 50c) but it isn't better enough to justify its spot in my studio. I will go back to FF for that.

The X-T3 is sort of in a tough spot. It should by now have the advances to AF that the X100V and Pro3 have, but it doesn't. I also use the Fringer adapter. It works great. But AF-wise, Fufjilm are behind Canon, and not by a little, especially as it regards focusing in indirect low light.
 

RBSfphoto

EOS M50
May 18, 2020
25
29
I certainly understand the different tools thing. I used to shoot with dual CFV-50 and 50c backs on bellows and then mounted to two different SLR bodies for studio work. Today I have a GFX. It isn't as versatile on bellows and can't mount as many lens types, but it is way easier to use in studio. That said, it is a slug to work with in macro. The reason is the same as the X-T3: when the lights go down, the sensor or processor starts to hiccup to such an extent that it is hard to tell what is in focus and what isn't. This isn't a problem with a Leica SL or even Canon 5D MKII. The GFX outputs good image quality (similar to the 50c) but it isn't better enough to justify its spot in my studio. I will go back to FF for that.

The X-T3 is sort of in a tough spot. It should by now have the advances to AF that the X100V and Pro3 have, but it doesn't. I also use the Fringer adapter. It works great. But AF-wise, Fufjilm are behind Canon, and not by a little, especially as it regards focusing in indirect low light.
I was so disappointed with the focus on the leica Sl the sl2 is better but still not as good as the canon