Zhong Yi Optics officially announces the Mitakon 200mm F/4 APO Macro Lens

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Shenyang China, 21st July 2023 – Zhongyi Optics (ZY Optics), the leading Chinese manufacturer of camera lenses, proudly unveils the Mitakon 200mm F/4 Macro Lens, poised to redefine the realm of macro photography with its exemplary features and exceptional capabilities. Explore the beauty of the macro world with the Mitakon 200mm F/4 Macro Lens! This

See full article...

 

[koenkooi]

A lens similar to this is what I'm personally missing in the RF system, I love my EF180L, but it's heavy, slow focussing and the aperture takes ages to close and reopen. I do want auto-focus, so this Mitakon isn't for me. But still great to see a company doing a 200-ish 1:1 macro lens!

 

[Del Paso]

A lens similar to this is what I'm personally missing in the RF system, I love my EF180L, but it's heavy, slow focussing and the aperture takes ages to close and reopen. I do want auto-focus, so this Mitakon isn't for me. But still great to see a company doing a 200-ish 1:1 macro lens!

And the EF 180 is also bitterly missing OIS !
An RF 180-200 L + OIS will be an instant buy for me. Even if expensive, and it will be expensive...

 

[koenkooi]

And the EF 180 is also bitterly missing OIS !
An RF 180-200 L + OIS will be an instant buy for me. Even if expensive, and it will be expensive...

Provided I have the budget, same here! I'm expecting €2500 for a lens like that....

 

[Del Paso]

Provided I have the budget, same here! I'm expecting €2500 for a lens like that....

I wouldn't be surprised if Canon turn the 180 macro into a horribly expensive RF 100-200 Macro zoom (which could be the perfect lens).
Thinking of the RF 100-300, they have proven recently a zoom could be at least as good as a prime.

 

[P-visie]

My wishlist for an RF 180 or 200mm L macrolens, ranked by importance (to me), from high to lower:

• Same (or better) optical quality as the EF 180 mm
• 1:1 magnification
• Fast AF
• Compatible with RF extenders (for increased working distance with dragonflies, butterflies and other insects)
• Sufficient number of aperture blades for a round opening with good bokeh
• Image stabilization
• Internal focusing (like the EF 180mm)
• Focus limiter for close up focus range i.e. from closest focus to +/- 1 meter
• F 2.8
• Removable tripod collar
• Weight: equivalent to, or lighter than, the EF 180mm

What I do NOT want:

• Spherical Aberration Control: I don’t like the results, it adds unnecessary complexity, weight and cost
• Focus shift

 

[koenkooi]

[...]
What I do NOT want:

• Spherical Aberration Control: I don’t like the results, it adds unnecessary complexity, weight and cost [...]

According to Canon, SA control is just a matter of driving the 2 nano USM motors independently, so the weight cost is the added ring minus the amount of plastic removed from the shell.

The whole marketing spiel revolved around SA control not needing changes to the optical or mechanical design of the lens groups, just a software change in driving the motors.

Having said all that, SA control has no value to me, so if leaving it out makes the RF180L cheaper, I'm all for it

 

[LSXPhotog]

I don't think I could ever give up automatic focus bracketing! But if you're a real/serious macro photographer, then you probably never touch such a novice feature. LOL

 

[Tahoejr]

Let's hope the attention was paid to image quality as aesthetics and design didn't look to be a priority

 

[chrysoberyl]

What quality and quality control do Zhongyi Yi Optics lenses usually have? Currently, I use a Sigma 180 + 12mm ET + Canon 1.4 X III Extender and AF is quite good on my R6. I would consider the Zhongyi Yi Optics 200mm if the forum members have had a positive experience with Zhongyi Yi Optics lenses. Comments, please.

​

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I'm assuming this 3rd party lens is manual focus only?

 

[P-visie]

I'm assuming this 3rd party lens is manual focus only?

Yes, it is a manual focus lens.

 

[vladk]

Working distance is 256mm (10’’), but
Minimum Focusing Distance is 1’7” (0.48m).
What does this mean?

 

[Steve Balcombe]

Working distance is 256mm (10’’), but
Minimum Focusing Distance is 1’7” (0.48m).
What does this mean?

Working distance is measured from the front of the lens; focusing distance is measured from the sensor.

 

[AlanF]

Working distance is measured from the front of the lens; focusing distance is measured from the sensor.

Working distance has to be shorter than the focussing distance!

 

[David - Sydney]

I assumed that a macro lens in the 180-200mm range would be to get working distance from flighty/dangerous subjects. Without IS/AF, what would be the use case? If manual focusing is used then wouldn't it be on a tripod/rail and if so, wouldn't the 100mm macro be just as useful?
I would not have thought that there would be little perspective difference with the 100 => 200mm focal length change when it comes to macro shooting but could be wrong.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I assumed that a macro lens in the 180-200mm range would be to get working distance from flighty/dangerous subjects. Without IS/AF, what would be the use case? If manual focusing is used then wouldn't it be on a tripod/rail and if so, wouldn't the 100mm macro be just as useful?
I would not have thought that there would be little perspective difference with the 100 => 200mm focal length change when it comes to macro shooting but could be wrong.

There is nothing saying that you need to be that close.
The longer focal length means you can be farther away.

 

[David - Sydney]

There is nothing saying that you need to be that close.
The longer focal length means you can be farther away.

I thought that was what I was saying... 200mm provides working distance but without OIS and AF.... manual focus would be very hard handheld for instance.

 

[Del Paso]

I thought that was what I was saying... 200mm provides working distance but without OIS and AF.... manual focus would be very hard handheld for instance.

"Longer" macro lenses can be very useful for insects. But without AF and OIS, I can only imagine a static use for a 200mm macro. A very limited use, indeed!

 

[Steve Balcombe]

I assumed that a macro lens in the 180-200mm range would be to get working distance from flighty/dangerous subjects. Without IS/AF, what would be the use case? If manual focusing is used then wouldn't it be on a tripod/rail and if so, wouldn't the 100mm macro be just as useful?
I would not have thought that there would be little perspective difference with the 100 => 200mm focal length change when it comes to macro shooting but could be wrong.

Arguments like this just don't follow - macro shooting, just like any other photography, can benefit from a range of different focal lengths depending on the subject and circumstances. 100 mm is certainly not "just as useful" if you need to shoot from further away, for whatever reason. Also, a longer lens can result in more background blur at the same depth of field. Manual focus is often used both hand-held and on a tripod, and even to pre-focus when using a rail. IS and AF are both useful, and both can be switched off when you don't want them - but can't be switched on if you don't have them.