[Brightcolours]

http://photorumors.com/2015/10/17/mitako...nced-soon/

[Rover]

Well, a little while ago we were thinking that f/1.4 lenses are only available in the 24mm to 85mm space, but this week it has been extended significantly on both ends. Other than that, I'm not very sure of this lens's utility, but it's nice to see some boundaries being redefined again by a minor player.

 

If only it hadn't been MF...

[JJ_SO]

Focussing automatically on a razor-blade thick DoF might be to big a challenge?

[toni-a]

@JoJu yes DOF is thin at f1.4 but it won't stay like that one stepped down. This lens has no aperture coupling so unless you are always shooting at f1.4 you will have to focus at the aperture you chose with a rather darker screen. Surely other players will reply to the challenge and then things will become more interesting

[JJ_SO]

Most AF lenses focus wide open - so I was referring to Rover's "If only it hadn't been MF..."

 

​Chances are very high that it would miss focus a lot of times, even if it's only a small movement of the photographer or the model or both. On the other side, there are 200/2 lenses which are similar in that aspect and - to make things worse - heavier at the same time. Interestingly, there's only one 135/2 in the current line-up of Nikon. It appears this formerly popular focal length is one of the victims of the more versatile zooms.

[toni-a]

The worst part of the story is it misses the focus on the best shots

[Brightcolours]

Most AF lenses focus wide open - so I was referring to Rover's "If only it hadn't been MF..."

 

​Chances are very high that it would miss focus a lot of times, even if it's only a small movement of the photographer or the model or both. On the other side, there are 200/2 lenses which are similar in that aspect and - to make things worse - heavier at the same time.

And 400mm f4/ 500mm f4/5.6, 600mm f4/5.6 lenses and so on... The AF can cope with thin DOF. For MF, you need a god focussing screen.

[davidmanze]

Most AF lenses focus wide open - so I was referring to Rover's "If only it hadn't been MF..."

 

​Chances are very high that it would miss focus a lot of times, even if it's only a small movement of the photographer or the model or both. On the other side, there are 200/2 lenses which are similar in that aspect and - to make things worse - heavier at the same time. Interestingly, there's only one 135/2 in the current line-up of Nikon. It appears this formerly popular focal length is one of the victims of the more versatile zooms.

 The practical solution "is" the Nikon 135 F2 DC, with variable defocusing control enabling the background blur to be changed. It's an auto-focus lens so the keeper rate will be infinitely better and should give a similar bokeh to Mitakon F1.4. (maybe)

  The bottom line is it's one of Nikon's sharpest  and  proven lenses.

 There was one came up on "the bon coin" a couple of weeks ago for 795€............man did I agonize over buying it!

 

   Who the hell on earth would want the Mitakon all manual over the Nikon AF variable defocus? The DC is also built like a bulldozer!

[Rover]

Most AF lenses focus wide open - so I was referring to Rover's "If only it hadn't been MF..."

 

​Chances are very high that it would miss focus a lot of times, even if it's only a small movement of the photographer or the model or both. On the other side, there are 200/2 lenses which are similar in that aspect and - to make things worse - heavier at the same time. Interestingly, there's only one 135/2 in the current line-up of Nikon. It appears this formerly popular focal length is one of the victims of the more versatile zooms.

Sorry, that logic doesn't fly in my opinion. Like BC said below, every supertele has similar (or larger) FL to aperture ratio - so probably similarly small DOF, but most of them have AF and work wonderfully in this regard (I had a chance to do a few frames with a 300/2.8 in the field... magnificient!) Besides, MF is likely an even bigger chore in the same conditions. I can admit that I was never any good at precise MF but I'm sure others would agree.

 

UPDATE: Hey folks, there's an answer to the question that must've been bugging you all... The price is $2999. Guess that kills any remaining interest someone might've had. It's a limited production item to boot: only 100 units. So, don't ditch your 135/2 L just yet.

http://photorumors.com/2015/10/19/the-ne.../#comments

The commenters make a reasonable point that the ZA 135/1.8 - widely lamented for the high price - suddenly seems like a bargain. To top it all off, we're likely to see a SSM version soon which will inevitably lead to the old screw driven one to become cheaper on the second hand market... but a screw drive AF is better than none at all.

[davidmanze]

 The practical solution "is" the Nikon 135 F2 DC, with variable defocusing control enabling the background blur to be changed. It's an auto-focus lens so the keeper rate will be infinitely better and should give a similar bokeh to Mitakon F1.4. (maybe)

  The bottom line is it's one of Nikon's sharpest  and  proven lenses.

 There was one came up on "the bon coin" a couple of weeks ago for 795€............man did I agonize over buying it!

 

   Who the hell on earth would want the Mitakon all manual over the Nikon AF variable defocus? The DC is also built like a bulldozer!

   At that price haha, "I rest my case me lad"!

 

 

 

Agonizing update:

                             Still agonizing slightly!, should be feeling less tense tomorrow when I pick up my AF85mm F1.8D from the Post Office!