Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Yongnuo Lenses Anyone?
Old 05-21-2019   #1
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Yongnuo Lenses Anyone?

Pretty surprised by how cheap these Yongnuo lenses are.

50/1.8 for 47.97$
35/2.0 for 83.79$

Appear to be their best deals. Those are BH prices for new not eBay used!

Has anyone tried these? Iím sure the 50 is as good as the next but I really wonder about that 35 itís so cheap compared to say itís Canon or Nikon competition.

Comments?
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #2
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,047
Some have mentioned AF hunting issues but really I’d
get one, if it has probs send it back.
The 50 1.4 and 40 2.8 are more interesting to me.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #3
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,311
I did toy with the idea of getting the Yongnuo 100mm f2 lens for Nikon for a while. 100mm is about my favorite focal length and the price of the Yongnuo is excellent at around $160 USD.

But some reviews were a bit disparaging with regard to the "plasticy" build quality (though for the price this does not bother me so much as it is to be expected), the firmware and to some extent the optics (though it is a straight copy of a Canon lens which means that the basic design should be OK but some photos I saw had flare and contrast issues it seemed to me). In the event I decided to hold off for now while I investigated further. In principle I would still like one and am half tempted to get one eventually just not right now.

I did have a Nikon 105mm f2.8 AF D but sold it. The above could be a replacement for that lens possibly as I only ever used it as a normal prime.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #4
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Yeah it seems they are basically copies of Canon lenses.

Funny, I remember hearing about fake 50/1.8 MKII.. that’s basically the Y50/1.8

I’m not planning to buy but thought they were interesting and certainly cheap!
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #5
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Huss I didn’t notice the 50/1.4.

Looks interesting for sure!
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #6
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
I have original 50 1.8 with all caps and hood as made in Japan, plus L style lens pouch for 100usd.
If you read review on YN 50 1.8 it is optically worse than original. But might be fine on film.
35/2 original was so-so lens, I doubt YN knockoff is better.
OP supposed to be one camera one lens already anyway
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #7
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Kofe

What’s the correct hood? For the canon

I’m not planning to buy. I have the 50/1.8 MKI like you.

I actually just saw these in the BH catalogue that came Monday.
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #8
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
ES-65 came with my 50 1.8 MkI.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-ES-65.../dp/B004UAES90

Those YN lenses were out for long time. Every time I read review about them, I'm not convinced.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #9
Gerry M
Gerry
 
Gerry M is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Medford, Oregon, U. S.
Posts: 902
I have the 40/2.8. Have tried it on my N80 and D700. Next will be on my F100. I think it is an OK lens for the price. I use it for casual walk around shooting. Don't pay a lot and don't expect a lot and you may be pleasantly surprised.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #10
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Thanks KoFe!

I got mine with caps for 49.99$
A sweet little deal I think. Nifty Fifty for a Fifty.

I’m gonna want that snap on hood!
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

I want the 35mm's in Nikon and Canon mount
Old 05-21-2019   #11
Tim Murphy
Registered User
 
Tim Murphy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 378
I want the 35mm's in Nikon and Canon mount

Dear B-9,


I have the original Canon 50mm f1.8 EF. I also have a Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D.


I want something brighter aperture wise at 35mm for use on APS-C digital Canon and Nikon cameras. I've had it in my cart several times but never pulled the trigger. I'll get them eventually!


Regards,


Tim Murphy


Harrisburg, PA
__________________
Then the coal company came with the world's largest shovel
And they tortured the timber and stripped all the land
Well, they dug for their coal till the land was forsaken
Then they wrote it all down as the progress of man.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #12
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
35/1.4? Rokinon maybe.

The 35/1.4 Nikkor is a stellar lens. Easily adapted with a AF-Confirm EOS-F adapter.
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #13
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is online now
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 2,972
Canon has literally done zero with their primes (optically speaking) in decades.
They are kind of subpar in comparison to more modern lenses to boot.
Why would anyone want to duplicate them?
Seriously, their are better lens's to knock off.
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #14
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Very true. Nikon played the same game for a long time (fortunately for us a lot of their primes have always been stellar).

The YN50/1.4 has the look of an old MKI Canon lens but couldn't possibly be optically.

The unique part being the USB port on the lens offering you future firmware updates and maybe even home focus tuning.
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #15
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
Very misleading post and inaccurate post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by filmtwit View Post
Canon has literally done zero with their primes (optically speaking) in decades.
Al ot of them kind of subpar in comparison to more modern lenses to boot.
Why would anyone want to duplicate them?
Seriously, their are better lens's to knock off.
50 1.8 USM is optically improved. 40 2.8 is new lens.
Where are MII L lenses with different optical formulas.
35 L MII is 2016 lens.
35 f2 IS is new optical formula. And so on.

From what I have seen, L lenses are still hard to beat for their optical quality. Every time I use L, I see zero reason to buy similar Leica lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #16
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmtwit View Post
Canon has literally done zero with their primes (optically speaking) in decades.
Al ot of them kind of subpar in comparison to more modern lenses to boot.
Why would anyone want to duplicate them?
Seriously, their are better lens's to knock off.


I think the reason they started with Canon lenses might be that Canon's focusing mechanism has been far easier to replicate than Nikon's. That also means they are easier to adapt than Nikons when placing onto an AF adapter for Sony cameras for example. Yongnuo no doubt saw this as a market opportunity.

And if Canon really has not upgraded their optics (I will take your word on this as I know little about their lenses being a Nikon shooter) this might well also make it easier to replicate Canon lenses as there would be less need for latest coatings etc. Having said this the Nikon version of the 100mm f2 is based on the Canon version with appropriate changes to allow AF. Though I have read that there are or were some issues with focussing speed and maybe accuracy with the Nikon version. Not sure if its been resolved.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #17
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Interesting points Peter!

Is that the 100mm E series? or the 105G? Couldn't be the 105DC?...... no.... lol
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #18
B-9
Devin Bro
 
B-9's Avatar
 
B-9 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Very misleading post and inaccurate post.



50 1.8 USM is optically improved. 40 2.8 is new lens.
Where are MII L lenses with different optical formulas.
35 L MII is 2016 lens.
35 f2 IS is new optical formula. And so on.

From what I have seen, L lenses are still hard to beat for their optical quality. Every time I use L, I see zero reason to buy similar Leica lens.
They surely did roll out those MKII L series one after another. Never tried any but I believe you. I honestly thought the MKI 17-35L was a damn good lens for its time as well as the 28-80L I never owned the 28 or 24-70.

What about the tiny 24STM?
__________________
Made in Michigan

RangefinderGuy @ Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #19
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is online now
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 2,972
The vast majority of "L" lenses from canon are zooms. Most are fantastic.
What "L" primes you find are kind of one-off's.
The 50mm f1.2 is soft as hell. Most folks I know, avoid it. and would use a Nikkor 50mm ais f1.2 on a convter first then the canon.
The 85mm f1.2 is astounding.

But again, most of the Canon's primes are good (but old too), but not that good either, most are not modern by any means of the word too. Most of the Sigma primes in canon mount are far better for instance. Or if you're ok with manuel, you have fantastic ziess primes too.

So why oh why would you copy the Canon primes, when you can copy so much better these days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
From what I have seen, L lenses are still hard to beat for their optical quality. Every time I use L, I see zero reason to buy similar Leica lens.
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #20
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by filmtwit View Post
The vast majority of "L" lenses from canon are zooms. Most are fantastic.
What "L" primes you find are kind of one-off's.
The 50mm f1.2 is soft as hell. Most folks I know, avoid it. and would use a Nikkor 50mm ais f1.2 on a convter first then the canon.
The 85mm f1.2 is astounding.

But again, most of the Canon's primes are good (but old too), but not that good either, most are not modern by any means of the word too. Most of the Sigma primes in canon mount are far better for instance. Or if you're ok with manuel, you have fantastic ziess primes too.

So why oh why would you copy the Canon primes, when you can copy so much better these days.
For those like you I had picture of me and my in-law laughing. Picture was taken with 50L and @1.2.



I can't take seriously non AF lenses on Canon. The whole reason of EF system is to able to shoot at f1.2 and have it constantly in focus.
But many are just not so good to shoot Canon EF system properly. Then "soft" talks comes.
Sigma in EF has and have crappy AF. It is known issue for second decade now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #21
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by B-9 View Post
They surely did roll out those MKII L series one after another. Never tried any but I believe you. I honestly thought the MKI 17-35L was a damn good lens for its time as well as the 28-80L I never owned the 28 or 24-70.

What about the tiny 24STM?
I have 16-35 L 2.8 II and it is just another lens which leaves no practical reasons to buy RF lenses in 16-28 focal lengths. Even small size doesn't count for optical quality and large aperture, plus fast, quiet and accurate AF.

16-35L 2.8 II on ISO25 film.




24STM is high quality glass and fast AF.

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #22
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
...

But some reviews were a bit disparaging with regard to the "plasticy" build quality (though for the price this does not bother me so much as it is to be expected)...
My Nikon D and G lenses feel very plasticky too. Cuz they are mostly made of plastic so I don't think that's a valid criticism. My Sigma Art lenses feel much better built than my Nikon AF lenses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-21-2019   #23
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is online now
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 2,972
I have the 50mm f1.4, not quite the same lighting surcomstance, but sharper then the f1.2L



I've used this lens for years, but it's not as sharp as modern Zeiss Planar, the nikon 50f1.2 or my v3 Summilux.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
For those like you I had picture of me and my in-law laughing. Picture was taken with 50L and @1.2.
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2019   #24
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
My Nikon D and G lenses feel very plasticky too. Cuz they are mostly made of plastic so I don't think that's a valid criticism. My Sigma Art lenses feel much better built than my Nikon AF lenses.
No neither do I which is why it is not such an issue for me but I felt I should mention it nevertheless. And you are right about some Nikon lenses - the Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF D comes to mind as plasticy but wow, those optics!
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:06.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.