TTArtisan 50mm f/0.95 lens review with samples (Full-frame & APS-C)

[@techtt6213]

For the APS-C users here, the 50mm F1.2 lens of TTArtisan is a great option under 100. Not quite this extreme of an aperture but still very nice.

[@voorachter2733]

Even though it's not insane amounts of bokeh it really gives you a full frame look on APSC which is a wonder on it's own.

[@techtt6213]

@@voorachter2733 Ja precies

[@SaLaGaDH]

better look at KamLan 50mm F1.1 Mark II

[@techtt6213]

@@SaLaGaDH not this great of a value

[@Muchtoobizy]

I bought one of these lenses from a shop that had three in stock at the time, They allowed me to test all three in the store, using my own Sony A7r3 on a tripod, focused on a fixed target. One of the three had way less purple fringing than the other two and was sharper in the centre when wide open. The difference in the image quality from the three lenses was astonishing to me. So of course I snapped up the best of the three and I have been very pleased with it. My sense is that the one you tested was one of the poorer examples from the production run. This is the main problem with low price lenses from China; the look and feel of the lenses in the hand can be impressive; but I think they keep the price down by compromising on quality control and so there is a significant difference between each copy.

[@Donbros]

Imo this is the worst thing to do. Unless hunting for lenses copies is ones hobby haha

[@OccultDemonCassette]

True. Though, the one chinese manufacturer I would say would be the exception is Laowa. They seem to have pretty high quality control.

[@WVMUSIC_NL]

It is a perfect lens! My favorite. A fantastic sharp sturdy lens

[@enkaphalin1111]

I feel the same with other Chinese brands as well. I own a copy of the 7artisans 25mm f1.8. I seem to have gotten a defective copy mechanically wise, but almost superb optics wise. It is extremely sharp and with good resolving power considering the price, and just generally pleasing image quality. Sadly, the iris blades are a bit lopsided. Closed down, it seems like 2 of the blades are misaligned, which might affect the sunstar shape at its maximum close down aperture. Also, the focusing ring just very slightly turns beyond infinity. Dosent bother me much with how vintage zooms have a shifting infinity point anyways, but just a sign of the lack of QC and low tolerance selection. I think it's a fair trade off to play a little lottery when the bank is dry

[@juliussternfeld428]

I heard that even voigtlander lenses, made in Japan, have this problem. I guess it’s pretty common.

[@SunnySoCal]

i never plan on buying these lenses but i do love watching your reviews

[@theDanDeleon]

Lmaoo I feel like the only way to try these lenses and misc gear is to be a KZbinr.

[@SunnySoCal]

@@theDanDeleon seriously dude because i feel like none of them would ever purchase these the manufacture sends a copy for free promo basically 😂😂😂

[@dtibor5903]

I checked his reviews for all lenses that I bought. I disagree on some aspects of lens testings, for example I like vignetting on portrait primes and I like minor barrel distorsion on wa and uwa lenses, but the overall I like his style and his methods of reviewing. Also i like his attention to details, he finds all the quirks and oddities of a lens.

[@funkyknuf]

The close focus limit is due to it being targeted for usage with rangefinder cameras . Usually the focus mechanism of these cameras only work up to 0.7

[@christopherfrost]

Good point

[@stevocem]

Exactly.

[@ThMehringer]

Jup, no Macro for my leica

[@CallMeRabbitzUSVI]

But being that as it may, you can get a leica close focusing adapter for any modern mirrorless camera and that would alleviate any shortcomings native leica lenses have with close focusing as well as do decent macro

[@aliendroneservices6621]

1:00 I wish manufacturers would provide both f-stop and t-stop ratings on all of their lenses.

[@thealaris]

Yeah, it would be so good to have easy accessible resolving power number, and t stops, but in this case they've probably didn't wanted to ruin the sales showing that the glass is not that good at transmitting light

[@0action847]

This is one of my favourite lenses, those flaws create character and I end up using it more than my Sony gm lenses.

[@symmetrie_bruch]

thanks chris it´s absolutely unfathomable to me how many reviewers fail to mention light transmission. i personally couldn´t care less about f stops. i wish every manufacturer would put at least both at least in the spec sheet and not just for cine lenses

[@anthonybodin5848]

Your a legend in camera reviews.

[@frandecatta]

Awesome review and video, as always! This lens is absolutely a bokeh monter. Also, talking about bokeh monsters, would be great to see a test of the 35 and 45mm 0.95 argus (specially this last one) of venus optics. Thanks a lot for all your content, Christopher!

[@ck.standard]

Great review as always. Can you possibly do the TTArtisan 90mm 1.25 lens?

[@philmtx3fr]

Nice lens indeed. Very well built, good at f1.4 and very good at f2 and you can really use its default at 0.95 for black and white portraits for instance. I hope I could find one on second market to test and keep it :).

[@juliussternfeld428]

The small difference of shutter speed between the two lenses wide open is mostly because of the difference in vignetting.

[@chilecayenne]

I've been on the verge of buying this lens for quite awhile now. HOWEVER, the new Voigtlander 50mm f/1.0 lens announced to be released this month has me rethinking this. Voigtlanter has been hitting homerun after homerun on their most recent lens releases...and losing only what, 1/4 stop or so....I'm going to wait to see how that lens performs. I have a Leica M10M...so, the M mount works for me, but like you said, this also makes it very adaptable to most any mirrorless camera, so I'd go that route

[@youmustmonthebiff]

You’re thinking about putting this junk on an M10M…

[@acouragefann]

@@youmustmonthebiff Doesn't seem like junk to me. Seems like decent value for money if I look at what a leica noctilux costs.

[@chilecayenne]

@@youmustmonthebiff Well sure...I don't have > $10K for an extremely fast lens like 0.95 from Leica, but for just a few hundred I can play with this. I love the M10M and mirrorless in general also to adapt lenses. I"m currently also playing with old Russian lenses on the M10M for the fun bokeh, I like the old Trioplan to get the soap bubbles....etc. So, spending a few hundred for the TTArtisan would be fun to play with, but with the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.0, I think I'll wait to see reviews on that. Sure, its a bit more at $1799, but VM lenses have been hitting them out of the park with their more recent offerings, and for only about 1/4 stop slower I'd take the VM lens as a solid VERY fast lens to add to my collection. But to the larger question, I have no problem playing with lenses on my M10M...or my GFX100, or ......etc. To me, it's half the fun and especially so if I can try lots of lenses at a reasonable price.

[@chilecayenne]

@Jim Baker Thanks for the reply!! Very interesting and I see your points!! Lol..well, I'll just save a bit more and go for the Voigtlander. I think this thing will turn my M10M into a super low light monster!

[@Greenteac]

I am always wondering if the corner is poor in an APSC sensor from a full frame lens. Does that mean when shooting such lens on full frame sensor gives the same bad result mid frame? For example in your sharpness test with the A7R3, would the poor quality found at the edge when using APSC sensor also be found in the roller coaster picture?

[@Amuppet]

Coma test is a really nice addition.

[@grdprojekt]

I bought the 21 mm f/1.5 a while ago for my Canon RP. As I'm new to buying lenses it's an amazing experience. It has roughly the same characteristics as this one, soft images at larger aperture but very usable, then stopping down a bit really sharpens everything up. But really, because both of these lenses were designed for Leica, when they adapting it to other mounts the minimum focusing distance is dreadful. 50 cm on my lens and it just doesn't accentuate the bokeh well enough. Though the bokeh quality is nothing to go by (when you get it anyway). It is a bright lens, amazingly built, but I won't really recommend for anyone hoping for highly out-of-focus background at wide angle. I found it super useful though when I use the camera as a webcam, bright image with enough field of view.

[@xiodcrlx]

there is a major impact from microlenses array on a sensor for large aperture lens, it is not the lems, it is the sensor that looses its light gathering efficiency due to microlenses for faster than 1.4 lenses - it is easy to check with THE SAME LENS - just set it at 0.95 - 1.2 -1.4 -1.8 - 2.0 and check EV (*granted that lens maker marks stops by geometrical aperture not T-stops)

[@Zamsky39]

I think what's going on on the small sensor in the image corners is a problem with the lens telecentricity - i.e. the rays focused by it are not parallel to the sensor and since APS-C sensors pixels are smaller it matters more that on a full frame.

[@radimpalus]

Looking at the comparison to the Sigma Art, the images are not equal in brightness-the Sigma image is quite a bit darker, so the exposure comparison is not proper. The reason may be the extreme vignetting of the TTartisan, which forces the average metering to expose brighter, which brings up the difference.

[@petertaylor4980]

It is darker, but it doesn't look 0.8 stops darker, which is roughly what you'd expect.

[@smdvisionphotography]

I had this lens with the AF adapter. It was fun at the time but I traded it in for a Zeiss 50 F/1.4 instead.

[@minibuns5397]

You got the better deal

[@jukeboxjohnnie]

I nearly tried to send you one of these! thanks for the review

[@MojoPapiFPV]

Its important to consider this lens is an impeccable and almost slightly improved version of the Leica Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ($12,000!!!) and are identical in build quality and optical characteristics, except its at a very accessible price point. That being said, this lens got me excited about photography again after feeling a bit stale. The build and feel of it was a big part of this. Having to manual focus on mirrorless is not too hard with peaking highlights but I would not recommend this lens for DSLR shooters (will it even mount?). What makes this lens notable and magical for me is the characteristics of the out of focus areas. Not just that its shallow, but how it has a circular effect that you don't get from modern lenses because they're too optically "perfect". I didn't see any portraits in your samples but like most Leica lenses, this is the application where they really shine. Their imperfections give it a dreamy, airy quality you just can't produce otherwise. My biggest gripe about this and its Leica original is that they have such an unfortunately long minimum focal distance as you mentioned which I find limiting but is not really a deal breaker. For video, this lens and its flaring characteristics are quite magical.

[@RTI_MD]

If you absolutely need a 0.95 lens, this could make sense - my opinion as an owner. Having other fast lenses (rokkor 58/1.2) I don't really like it - it's very heavy, too much compromise regarding image quality until F1.4. The TT artisan 50/1.4 makes much more sense in this regard if you need a rangefinder lens, just my 2 cents.

[@MojoPapiFPV]

@@RTI_MD agreed. It's niche. Has a beautiful look and feel though.

[@RTI_MD]

@@MojoPapiFPV It does :)

[@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691]

The corners on APSC are not just soft, they are actually out of focus. The lens must have some wild field curvature in the middle of its image circle.

[@WhySteve]

You got me from not wanting this lens to wanting it again because of all the interesting defects.

[@CommentRodent]

I just bought myself a 7Artisans 50mm f0.95; are you going to be reviewing it soon? I really really want to see the technical results of the lens! Thanks again for the reviews, always top quality!

[@derrenleepoole]

Great review. This would make a great lens for gigs in sweaty pubs! The close focusing limitation is due to it being a rangefinder lens. Great review.

[@CinematographyLischkaChannel2]

Das Objektiv ist hier gerade im Angebot für weniger als 600 Geldeinheiten. Ich denke du hast mich vor grösserem Unheil bewahrt hast. Der Bildvergleich bei Minute 1:00 zeigt mir dass das Sigma trotz geringer Unschärfe deutlich ansprechendere Bilder hervorbringt. Danke dass du die Lichtdurchlässigkeit angesprochen hast, das erfährt man sonst selten. Ich hoffe das Sigma bald eine hochwertige Hochgeschwindigkeitsalternative hervorbringt. Ich denke nicht dass es als hochwertig verarbeitet betrachtet werden kann, nur weil aus einem Metallgehäuse gebaut wurde.

[@ItsMeHammie]

I picked up a like new one for $150 and I consider it my fun creative lens. Hard to use, but when you get a shot you can't help but be awed.

[@rock3times]

I would love for you to review the Venus 35mm F0. 95 for FF... You did review the same Venus 33mm F 0.95 but for Apsc... i am looking for a FF bright 0.95. Many thanks..

[@flashback9966]

Having used this lens for nearly a year now on my S1R, all I can say that it's a keeper! Yes, it has many flaws, but it can produce that old MF look like no other. If you always lusted after that Leica Noctilux (I had that as well) you can save your life savings and go for this. . .

[@JordanCS13]

The 0.7m minimum focus distance is because it's a Leica M mount lens, which can only maintain rangefinder coupling to 0.7m....almost all Leica M mount lenses are limited to that focus distance.

[@teamhazardous201]

Seems like most lens made with this aperture or near have to always be stopped down to get a baseline of image quality.

[@Wreckedandruinedand]

If I'm not mistaken, close up image quality is always a weakness with any lens in the M-mount world.

[@janfrosty3392]

You are not mistaken, but clearly you are wrong. “close up image quality is always a weakness with any lens in the M-mount world” Leica lenses do have a floating element in many of their lenses that takes care of law of optics at close focal distances. But then the cost of these lenses is considerately more.

[@Wreckedandruinedand]

@@janfrosty3392 thanks for correcting, but what i meant with "weakness" is not only about the IQ itself, but also the minimum focusing distance of the lens: they cant get close enough to a subject, especially compared to other lenses within the same focal range.

[@alchemist_x79]

I know M-mount lenses tend to have IQ issues on Sony cameras because they were designed for the thinner sensor stack of a Leica camera, so bear that in mind, especially for the corners.

[@shmuelaryehkoltov241]

That's only really an issue with wide angle lenses, 28mm or wider. 50mm shouldn't be an issue in that regards.

[@RTI_MD]

@@shmuelaryehkoltov241 not really, they do perform better on Leica M. One real example is the superb Voigtlander 40/1.2 which has both M-mount and E-mount variants.

[@shmuelaryehkoltov241]

@@RTI_MD I'm not entirely sure what you take issues with in what I wrote?

[@benjamindover4337]

With more compact mirrorless bodies coming into fashion, perhaps you will consider a best-of compact lenses review.

[@OxygenGenesis]

Hm it was really confusing because TTArtisan releases 3 variants of 50mm f/0.95. the one in this video is tbe ASPH aka M50mm f/0.95. as opposed to their 50mm f/0.95 model which is priced at 200 USD.. perhaps it was conceived to retaliate at Brightin star, not sure how it compares to the more expensive model. Could you plz compare?

[@shawnj8765]

Chris, nice review! HOWEVER, you have to understand that ALL M mount lenses are designed to couple with rangefinder cameras, which are ALL limited to 0.7m or 1M. You can use close focus adapters on mirrorless if you want to get closer, something you should include in your future testing for M mount lenses.

[@dominiclester3232]

Matt Osborne does tons of M mount lens reviews and lots of them have 0.6m closest focusing...

[@minibuns5397]

Thank you as always for a well thought review. Lenses that open up this wide sacrifice quality. You cant beat physics..

[@madsbp]

Or weight as in Nikons 50 0.95. Optically perfect but 2 kg and 8000 dollars

[@swistedfilms]

I'd like to see a comparison to the Sigma 50MM f/1.4. The Sigma is a little more expensive but I suspect that the quality is much better and you get autofocus. If this was a $200 lens it might be worth it but at $750 it's not a bargain at all.

[@miaoxiang7377]

No way they sell this for only 200 though, that's just too good of a price for a full frame 0.95 with decent quality.

[@swistedfilms]

@@miaoxiang7377 and no way I'm purchasing it, so we're even on that score.

[@miaoxiang7377]

@@swistedfilms sure, it's a niche lens with very limited potential buyers.

[@BackFocus11]

Interesting. Still a good value compared to a $12k (US) Noctilux. Keep up the great work Christopher.

[@anamorphicalan]

Can this lens be used with epson rd1 without adaptor? Also focus is main issue. Any adapted lenses can not be used with this camera.

[@stevocem]

I am impressed. I expected much worse. Thanks for the test, Christopher.

[@messylaura]

did you ever do the takumar vintage review yet, i remember you saying it was in the pipeline

[@Re-InCarNation]

Will you do a review on the viltrox 13mm f1.4? If so could you do a comparison between it and the Samsung 12mm f2.0.

[@barrycohen311]

I like how they painted .95 in orange on the aperture ring. Like cautioning people- "Are you sure you really want to go there??"

[@brandplay1172]

Am I to understand from this that this lens will more or less cover a medium format sensor? I'd love to be able to use it on my GFX 100s :)

[@magiccarpetrider4594]

I’m about to pick up the TTA 0.95. Any idea which coding I should use- noctilux 0.95 or 1.0?

[@mariapapamichail5044]

Still waiting patiently for that Christopher Frost Tamron 18-300mm review ...

[@anthonyt4803]

Do you plan on covering the Canon 24mm TS-E?

[@TravisNutley]

Using this on the Z6 and really love it.

[@rango-konk]

Hey Chris, What do you think about canon shutting its entire DSLR manufacturing processes????

[@GordoFriman]

Hi Chris. are you reviewing the Argus 45mm 0.95 any time soon? This review Just appeared magically today for me :-) thank you so much for your time and effort

[@tomapaunovic]

This is quite a decent performance for 0.95 lens on FF. There is some usable resolution in image center and I believe chromatic aberration can be taken care of with right profile. IMHO it's looks much better than Mitakon 50mm 0.95. Are you going to test Sony FE version too? It should perform better than version optimized for Leica

[@RickMentore]

As always, 'first class work," Chris! A bit overpriced for a "limited, two-face lens." Hey, Happy New Year.

[@el-xy]

Thank you for this review! Also, would you consider reviewing the Sony FE 20mm 1.8 G lens? I've heard it's good, although I'd love to see it reviewed by you.

[@avavaviv1]

The light transmission is similar on the 7artisan 50mm f/0.95 for APSC. Basically 25 percent gain over f/1.4 and the purple fringing is extraordinarily high between 0.95 and 1.4. However It's a good deal even for a f/1.4 lens so I was not disappointed.

[@metphmet]

In the transmission comparison , the picture made with the Sigma f1.4 is darker .

[@mexmax1657]

I really like the TT Artisans Lenses. But this one seems way too expensive for its performance in my opinion.

[@v3par]

Can anyone knows if the RF mount version works on fullframe? And by works i mean does the lens force the camera to switch to apsc mode (like EF-S lenses do with the adapter)?

[@Fleet42]

Never would I shoot this unless it was converted to black and white!

[@westsenkovec]

Something that wasn't explained is that this is a Leica M mount lens. It seems expensive but it's a cheap alternative to original Leica lenses. There aren't many options because it's a small market and rangefinder lenses need a rangefinder coupling that is used for focusing on a rangefinder camera. You can't focus with normal lenses nor can you use an adapter. The minimal focusing distance is also affected by the rangefinder design because due to parallax the lens cannot be used on closer distances. The short throw is common on rangefinder lenses because the lens is usually focused with one finger. Maybe this is a preproduction sample and that's why you didn't show the packaging. Many rangefinder lenses come with a focusing tab for easier handling. All in all this is a bad lens for general use but it's a good, cheap alternative to full frame Leica lenses.

[@airdailyx]

True but if you own Leica cameras, is money really an issue?

[@westsenkovec]

@@airdailyx Yes, because not everyone buys them new.

[@dgodfrey9189]

You might have bought a Voigtlander Bessa before prices became a bit silly.

[@paulbeckmann]

Great review! Thanks!

[@hanzo3979]

newbie here, is it compatible with a6000?

[@parshua]

Thanks for the review Chris. You adapted this lenses to the worst ML mount though. Sony has the thickest sensor stack in between mirrorless cameras. The best option is to adapt M mount lenses (and in general any old lens) to the Nikon mount. Nikon has the thinnest sensor stack, and I expect you will see significantly better performance there.

[@janfrosty3392]

Better still use M mount lenses what they are intended for Leica M or Leica SL via adapter bodies.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

Once these companies get their optical coating formulas down-pat I think they'll be a much better investment.

[@bradwiggins2332]

You've reviewed other 0.95 lenses now, and there's a handful of f/1 or wider lenses for Sony cameras available... How does this lens compare to those? It sounds like you review this lens more negatively than the Mitakon.

[@nightcoder5k]

Thanks for the video. I think I'll stick with my 7Artisans 50mm f/1.1. The bokeh of this f/0.95 lens looks creamy. I like it.

[@armand.olv44]

If you can try the new Samyang 24-70 2.8 AF and the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8 it will be perfect. They can be very good lenses. Btw nice video

[@kevin-parratt-artist]

There is no point buying this lens. Cheapskates lured by the possibility of buying such a fast lens for so little, learn the reality that good quality costs more. Thanks for the video. I hope it saves atleast a few people from wasting their money. 👌

[@notjonniecandito7224]

This lens literally performed better than the Leica Noctiliux on a MTF chart which is 13,000 dollars, with the exact same dimensions. They're almost identical in images too, as you can find articles taking head to head pictures with both. Other TTartisan lenses are cheap crap imo, but this one is 755 dollars.

[@InterMaus]

As Chris from Dpreview would say it weights 0.66 noct

[@make_it_nashty7206]

And here I am using it on M4/3rds because I forgot about crop factor

[@SyntheticFuture]

So basically it's a 50mm f/2 lens unless you happen to like very soft and weird images =\

[@Alda1981]

I did not expect to read greek at the close up of that Bible (Genesis part from what i read)

[@mitchell2719]

Looks like it has a built in mist filter

[@rock3times]

Wow..I thought only in America they greet each other by saying ' Howdy '.... Do you Welsh say ' Howdy ' colloquially as well ? Thank you Chris for making my dream come true... This lens is on my list, just waiting for your opinion. Unimpressed, I would wait for the next iteration.

[@hedydd2]

Vincent. We Welsh actually greet each other with friendly insults. In Welsh of course. A common greeting among friends is ‘siwdi pwrs?’ Translated literally this means ‘howdy scrotum?’ Yes really.

[@rock3times]

@@hedydd2 oh.. really ? I don't know that Welsh are preoccupied with sex.. More power to you, though.

[@hedydd2]

@@rock3times Nothing whatsoever to do with sex. Different culture with a totally different language that doesn’t always translate well and sometimes not at all.

[@rock3times]

@@hedydd2 i am joking...you just don't get it...

[@RFGfotografie]

Not a lens I will ever buy. But still loved this review :D

[@alexanderpahlberg]

Hi... Mein Englisch ist leider sehr schlecht. Deine Tests bedarf jedoch keinerlei sprachlicher Kenntnisse. Deine Abläufe erklären sich sehr gut und teils von selber. Du konntest mir bei Fuji Produkten sehr gut helfen. Thanks... 👍👍👍

[@techtt6213]

After seeing this I am curious how good a Leica F0.95 performs. For the price and name you expect really great sharpness.

[@lorenzogattaldo3764]

Unfortunately, no.

[@oliverlison]

The Leica performs quite well. Basically no CA, better contrast, good sharpness across the frame. This lens is here is crap. It is better take empty milk bottles and cut the bottem off. Sharpness is not there.

[@GreySectoid]

I don't understand why you say don't use it on APSC when it's an APSC lens. Doesn't putting it on full frame just exaggerate the soft edges and other IQ problems? On APSC all those areas just get cropped out.

[@JimBaker-ks4io]

It is NOT APS-C. It's the Leica M full frame version. You're talking about a different TTa lens.

[@ReclusiveEagle]

It doesn't matter if there is no Auto Focusing, Massive Focus breathing and constant chromatic aberration. The monopoly first parties have over gear is over. Never again will the public have to pay premium for brighter than f1.8 lenses due to artificial market segregation

[@aashakitchen]

Manual or autofocus

[@ReclusiveEagle]

Just as a PSA if you are disappointed *ALL* under f1.2 lenses perform like this. Every single one ever made. Even $500,000 (at the time) cine lenses like the Zeiss Biotar f0.73. You will not find better. Its just the natural consequence of such a shallow depth of field. If Zeiss can't get it right for the medical and film industry? That says a lot

[@lorenzogattaldo3764]

Still hoping for tests of *good* lenses.

[@andrear9500]

The 0.95 aperture has a lot of drawbacks. Price becomes steep …

[@MetalSlugzMaster]

F-Stop of 0.95, T-Stop of 1.35...YIKES!

[@MetalSlugzMaster]

@Jim Baker Hi! I calculated the T-stop proper instead of estimating off the top of my head at the time of the OP, and it's T1.2965, so T1.3, essentially. The clue in the video that allowed me to calculate this is the TTArtisan lens compared to the Sigma Art lens. TTArtisan being 1/25 second shutter to the Sigma 1/20 second, we know the TTArtisan is transmitting 1/4 stop brighter than Sigma. Knowing F-Numbers are based on a logarithmic scale to the square of 2, we calculate for a quarter-stop brighter than the Sigma lens, which is: f(equivalent) = √2^(3/4). This is of course, assuming the Sigma lens wide open is a true T1.4.

[@momchilyordanov8190]

If this was $300, I could buy it just for fun. At $750 no way. And, like with most of them, the 0.95 is nothing more than a gimmick.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

Boy, howdy!

[@smarthousetech8593]

It's funny but this lens seems to perform better at F2 🤷‍♂️

[@navagiopoint]

wow, thats quite a bargin

[@hedydd2]

Seems to me you might as well save about £400 by getting a Meike 50mm f1.7

[@craighall1419]

A shame you didn't shoot any portraits in this review - For me, this lens only has one primary usage and that is portraits. Soft and Dark corners are often advantages for portraits as well as the dreamy, hazy vintage feel. Other than portraits wouldn't use it for anything else other than the absolute darkest shots where speed is of the absolute essence. I looked at a Canon FL 58mm as a soft portrait lens, but I might buy this instead. I think its flaws could be an advantage and this will let you get some unique shots out of the bag, it's a toolbox remember - you ain't gonna be shooting landscapes on this.

[@0action847]

My copy of this lens is sharper at 0.95 than my Canon FL 55 1.2 @ 1.2.

[@Wakodaf]

Its just ou your god! :)

[@trakkino]

This lens must be a t/1.2

[@diegorivera2711]

First! After all!

[@heppoify49]

that is indeed very important!

[@christopherfrost]

Happy new year!

[@neboise1377]

brother you could have done a better review for this wonderful lens... why half ass it

[@voradorlinux]

...sorry but this lens is garbage and not worth they money they ask for. I tested one at a store here in Hong Kong as I was very interested (and intrigued) in a new f0.95 lens. My old CONTAX 50mm f1.4 C/Y mount and my Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 M-mount are way sharper and resolve better image quality throughout the whole aperture range and both were half the price than this TTArtisan lens. Even my old Mamiya Sekor C 80mm f1.9 has way less purple fringing than this TTArtisan lens. Never understood these manufacturers that claim to have fast lenses that in reality only have "usable" image quality at f2.0 and above. As always Christopher, thanks for sharing another unbiassed review, your YT videos rock! Cheers!

[@Donbros]

Would only use it if I get for free lol. Really dissapointed

[@Ashmodai]

so it's basically a 50mm f/2 with a useless experimental mode attached to it...

[@Xinrui24]

I like this lens, it worth it's price.

[@Xinrui24]

another, are you going to review ttartisan 90mm f1.25? they seems just released e mount for this lens.

[@iliyinichna]

second!!