answers: 81

  1. Rodion
    30.05.2019

    It seems that the Tokin-Sidewall 90 / 2.5 will be much more interesting than this lens. Well, she seems to have no drawbacks of critical and annoying.

    Reply

    • NEO
      30.05.2019

      Tokina is darker, longer, without an automatic diaphragm, the trunk leaves, at F / 22 it gives a blue spot in the center. In yong, the price is confusing, for 100-150 you can still think, but for 250 - no

      Reply

    • Den
      30.05.2019

      Tokina 100 / 2.8 solves all problems….

      Reply

      • anonym
        30.05.2019

        But nothing, that it is long and darker and generally with autofocus?

        Reply

      • R'RёS,R ° F "RёR№
        30.05.2019

        if you shoot macro, then cover still have much stronger.
        Since the focal length is more likely +, you don’t need to be afraid that the insect will fly away.

        Reply

  2. Denis
    30.05.2019

    I hope enthusiasts will release firmware that will add autofocus to this lens :)

    Reply

    • anonym
      30.05.2019

      and she will flash the focus motor there.

      Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        This is China, I won’t be surprised if there is a place for an autofocus drive there.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        Maybe even the built-in memory with ready-made photos immediately :)

        Reply

      • Denis
        30.05.2019

        I saw such a thing, it is called a kaleidoscope)

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        Speaking of full-frame lenses. I wonder what the multiplicity of the increase in Helius and Industarov on the same DF?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        I think about the same

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        So what's the point then from such a lens without autofocus? When can I buy an analogue for a penny?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        with this approach, you can ask the same question, for example, what's the point of someone CARL ZEISS Makro-Planar 2/50 T *, because you can buy Helios for a penny.
        And the answer is really simple - Helios and Industars are not analogs in any way for any more or less specialized makrik

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        It is not correct to compare - the quality of lenses and assemblies are of different levels. I don’t think the Chinese have better quality than Soviet lenses. I had a "joy" in the form of 35 mm from this manufacturer. If the Chinese would have made the focal length larger - then of course, but 60 mm ...

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        Don't underestimate these Yongs. If we have already started talking about Soviet lenses, then let's remember the number of their makriks? I remember one, and that one with a ratio of 1: 2. Therefore, in general, Soviet optics lags behind the same Yongs for decades. As much as I do not like Helios, but many Yongs will give at the output many times more benefit because of autofocus and automatic diaphragm. If you are talking about a negative experience with a 35-shot from Yong, then I can easily fend off a dozen problematic Helios, which were either impossible or difficult to shoot with, or the result was extremely sad. Based on this experience, I can say with confidence that the Helios are bad. But we understand that there are specific instances, specific tasks and expectations. Therefore, you need to think more broadly and not get hung up on Helios with the position “it used to be better, until I bring the old, I won't buy the new”.

        Reply

      • Molchanov
        03.06.2019

        I completely agree with you. You can’t say better.
        And thanks for the detailed review!

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        I tried Helios-81 with macro-rings ... and got a magnification greater than 1. And the diaphragm works. It didn't work with 105 / 2.5 - the lens unit for such an increase needs to be moved too far from the matrix. Need an optical design specifically for a macro lens. So I think that the Chinese have not invented anything with this lens - they simply move the entire lens unit away from the matrix, making a macro of 60 mm.
        “There is a very strong 'Focus Breathing' effect that is found in almost all macro lenses. When focusing towards the MDF, the angle of view decreases. In fact, focusing on the MDF produces a '120/4' lens. This can be both a plus (increase in focal length) and a minus (decrease in aperture). ” - Does it look like anything for those who used fur or rings?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        To be precise, it’s not so. If we take this Yong, then they made floating lenses here. If with lenses or fur you have the whole lens block just moving and is not optimized for a certain distance, then with floating lenses different lenses have different strokes, which makes it possible to better compensate for certain distortions. Even in this there is a huge leap in comparison with all the old Soviet optics.
        The fur removes the automatic diaphragm, creates additional inconveniences. With him you just won't go out and take off something interesting. Rings are often a great solution. I recommend everyone to start "macro" with rings for some old lenses, the same Soviet ones, for example, Helios 44, 81, etc. But there are limitations everywhere. If, for example, with this Yong in an open field I can easily shoot a landscape and a flower and a lady with this flower in any proportion, then with rings and fifty dollars I am chained to a certain set of distances, with the loss of infinity and medium distances. That is why rings and furs are not suitable for everyone.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        Arkady, my nitpicking about autofocus. Why such a lens when there are simpler macro solutions? Would autofocus be a different story. I wanted - I took off the bugs, I wanted - children ...

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        I have already answered. There are no simple analogues. Please indicate an analogue with a 1: 1 magnification without rings and other things, with an automatic iris (consequently, with simple exposure metering on any camera, like the Nikon D7500), and even so this miracle should be with internal focusing and F / 2.0.
        Once again, carefully - Helios and Industars are not analogues. For rare tasks, count only for macro at certain distances, they can partially allow you to shoot what a specialized lens can immediately on the fly and many times easier.
        Most likely there is indignation that this Yong is lax in autofocus. This is a serious limitation. And, indeed, it is strange that they decided to release a manual lens. I agree with that

        Reply

      • Michael
        30.05.2019

        Yes, the lack of autofocus also surprises me

        Reply

      • NEO
        30.05.2019

        Arkady troll, knows that with d7500 your helix will only work in m mode. Or have sex with a dandelion. Perverts pecks a dandelion on rings. Manual ring with dandelion for different lenses

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        30.05.2019

        the fact of the matter is that, due to the large number of little things, it becomes easier to shoot. But I do not condone this Yong, he has enough stocks. You just do not need to think that if someone Helik with rings is enough, then someone else also does not need anything else.

        Reply

      • Denis
        30.05.2019

        well, or at least the electronic diaphragm will lose Smoke on the water

        Reply

  3. Past the crocodile
    30.05.2019

    And how to aim at a portrait? There, from one meter to infinity, the turn is minimal ... Like super shirikov ... Only at a width of 5.6-8 and forgot about the trick, but how? The idea for the crop is good, the implementation is shit.
    And with a hood - why, twist the metal?)))
    Wonderful.
    It’s hard to imagine what was in the head of the marketers.
    Maybe like in that vidos on YouTube about my fish, my sweet cherry? :-)

    Reply

    • anonym
      30.05.2019

      Arkady somehow fell for children, a matter of habit. I would take a 60/2 swab and not steam

      Reply

      • Vitaly N
        30.05.2019

        I suspect focus bracketing.

        Reply

    • Dva_kota
      31.05.2019

      I think the developers made the focusing exactly like this, with the expectation that this is a macro lens (and not a lens for portraits) - to make it easier to focus at short focusing distances. The lens is not positioned as a portrait or universal lens.))

      Reply

      • Michael
        31.05.2019

        For increasing the stroke of the ring, macro lovers would also say thanks.

        Reply

      • Rodion
        01.06.2019

        At the same Industar-61 LZ MS, the ring travel is almost 360 degrees like. To make a 180 degree move for an honest makrik without AF is simply unacceptable. Plus, the black corners at infinity are especially touching because of the construction of the body - the narrow-eyed can't go to school geometry?

        Reply

  4. anonym
    30.05.2019

    For your price - great photo, active!

    Reply

  5. Dmitriy
    30.05.2019

    Thanks for the great review and such beautiful photos!)

    Reply

  6. anonym
    30.05.2019

    Photo with pink blur can be on the desktop

    Reply

  7. Lynx
    30.05.2019

    In short - an inexpensive good makrik, for those who are embarrassed to buy a used one.
    As a portraitist and so on - average crap, tk. far focusing limit - 3,5 meters

    Reply

  8. Alexey
    30.05.2019

    I have an old Makrik Nikkor 105 2.8d, I rent them on the canon and I don’t know any problems :)

    Reply

  9. anonym
    31.05.2019

    Arkady, did you become Yongnuo Ambassador?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      31.05.2019

      No, otherwise I would not describe all the jambs of their lenses and in each review I did not say that the original solutions are better :), look, for example, in the previous one yn85 / 1.8n and tell me, who wants to buy it after my review?
      Yongnuo sends me lenses for free review, which is quite convenient, as it does not limit me in the time of creating a review. They then use some of the photos from the reviews somewhere in China for their own purposes. After the review, I change them to something else. I just sell this yn60 / 2 after the review, as I don't need it. As a result, I even have nothing to “ambassador” with. By the way, I can joke that if I am already an ambassador, then only Heliosov, only hardcore!

      Reply

      • Alik
        31.05.2019

        Hello Arkady! I read your article and at the end a site was written, and that you can comment without reg. But not at all ... In general, I have a question. Tomorrow I'm going to buy a Canon 80 D. For a photo studio. Can you please tell me which lenses are better to use for macro photography? For example, an ant, a butterfly, a dust of flowers, a pupil, and so on ... Thank you!

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        31.05.2019

        What is completely wrong?
        For macro photography, you should use macro lenses, best of all, native ones, listenough budget :)

        Reply

      • Alik
        02.06.2019

        Thanks for the list. Now for the second question, depth of field issues. It is not possible to get the sharpness of the background. There are no problems with blurring, but with a sharp background, well, no way ...

        Reply

      • Michael
        02.06.2019

        Stacking

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        02.06.2019

        Staking. But I always say that macro is difficult.

        Reply

      • anonym
        10.06.2019

        for a macro you need a carcass with good iso workers, because you will have to creep the aperture terribly.

        Reply

      • Novel
        10.06.2019

        The 80D will be a lot of things native.

        The EF-S 60 / 2.8 is a good macro glass for crop and a good portrait lens. Suitable for a start - small and budget.
        EF-S 35 / 2.8IS - with illumination and stabilizer. On occasion, a good staff with macro capabilities. From the pros - it allows you to focus very close, but this is also a minus - the living creatures usually run away.
        EF 100 and EF 100L / 2.8 (elka with stub) are almost identical optically. Plus Elke - all-weather performance and stub. Really very good stub. In principle, excellent glasses even for a crop, although in terms of sharpness they are even slightly inferior to 60 mm (on a crop), because designed for a full frame. IMHO, for serious applications the best, especially Elka. Plus a wonderful portrait lens. Stub helps both in the dark and when shooting handheld, the diaphragm is tight.
        EF 180 / 3.5L is a very specific glass. The best macro lens, it washes the background well and gives a 1: 1 magnification at a great distance - the living creatures scatter after all. But it also focuses more slowly than a hundred. So only for very, very macro lovers.

        So there is a choice, it would be better to try something before buying, of course. I settled on 35 and 100L as a result. 35 has become a handy crop holder, the 100L is convenient for both crop and FF. Stub and all-weather conditions help well, sharpness across the entire field of the frame is also often not superfluous, especially for a subject. But I love these ... universal solutions.

        Reply

      • Novel
        10.06.2019

        Yes, I missed my own Canon MP-E - it gives a fivefold increase, but there you just need stacking and macro mech with an automatic drive and special software, this is for stoned ones.

        Not so stubborn use a 100L + nozzle magnifying Raynox DCR-250 (gives an additional increase, for the TV range you need to use close-up glass instead of macro pipes). And Raynox due to enlightenment and several elements almost does not affect the image quality. Well, the macro-flash from Yongi, because even the clamped aperture and stub are not enough.

        Reply

  10. anonym
    10.06.2019

    Soap. Some kind of bushy sigma / tokina screwdriver for the same money will take a better head off

    Reply

  11. Dmitriy
    11.12.2020

    Good day! Can anyone have anything to say about the experience of use?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      11.12.2020

      I can, I described everything in the review. Or what else interests you?

      Reply

      • Dmitriy
        11.12.2020

        If you are using it, there may be something that came to light during operation. Maybe wear and tear of mechanics, maybe optically something for themselves noted.
        I am considering buying it based on macro, focus and price)
        Confused by the brand and the short move at non-macro distance. And the lack of service in Belarus too, to be honest.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        11.12.2020

        Well, I wrote in the review for the lubrication and friction of the ring after prolonged use, a hell of a vignette at infinity. For macro - an interesting option.

        Reply

  12. Novel
    14.03.2021

    Hello! I'm trying to do subject photography. Knives, combs, cosmetic bags, dishes, bottles. I have fifty Nikon and kit 18-55 in stock. Lacks sharpness. I read about macro, that they have good sharpness. I choose from the most budgetary ones. Tell me, if you choose from this and DX AF-S Micro Nikkor 40mm 1: 2.8G SWM, which is preferable? They are about the same price.

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      15.03.2021

      It's strange that you lack sharpness from fifty dollars. Are you not covering up enough? I think from your options, the Nikkor 40mm 2.8G will be sharper.

      Reply

    • Seladir
      15.03.2021

      A lot can be hidden behind “lack of sharpness”, from insufficient depth of field control to poor light. Before you start swapping out some good lenses for others, it would be great to see the originals of a few shots in which you see problems (for example, upload to the cloud).

      Reply

      • Novel
        17.03.2021

        Look here please.
        https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1hdj2bka7y8tdmUBK4EQe6fNyVIiLvxXj
        This is 5,6 kopecks. In one place it seems to be sharp, although not very much, in another it is already blurring. Maybe I'm doing something wrong? I tried diaphragms 7 and 8, freaked out and set 20 - there is generally trouble, everything is blurry.

        Reply

      • B. R. P.
        18.03.2021

        At 20, everything is blurry due to diffraction. You need to master lighting and framing, what is in the photo is horror.

        Reply

      • Novel
        18.03.2021

        What is in the photo is cut out on a white background, so I didn't bother with cropping. And the lighting is yes, there are ordinary 25V lamps with a coarse calico diffuser and a reflector below to make it easier to cut. I bought softboxes, but I still can't install it. Are you saying that as soon as I put the light on, sharpness comes?

        Reply

      • Victor
        18.03.2021

        "Are you saying that as soon as I put the light on, sharpness comes?"

        Yes, the picture will get better, definitely.

        Reply

      • B. R. P.
        18.03.2021

        With framing it is worth freezing, at least so that the subject completely falls into the grip.

        Reply

      • Novel
        18.03.2021

        Do you mean that you need to position the subject perpendicular to your gaze to get it in focus? But there are times when you need to shoot along or diagonally. Does cropping help then?

        Reply

      • Victor
        18.03.2021

        Why “cut out on a white background” when you can just shoot normally, your objects are still unevenly lit.

        The sharpness in the photo is normal.

        Reply

      • Novel
        18.03.2021

        On the marketplace, the requirement is on a white background. I, apparently, have a complex, a feeling that even the central part is blurring)

        Reply

      • Trueash
        18.03.2021

        Looked at examples; As far as I noticed, everything is in order with sharpness - where the object falls into the DOF. For example, at 9899, ​​the ends of the scissors clearly floated away, which is logical with such an increase. If you hold down the aperture, the DOF will increase, but the diffraction will eat away the details. You can try staking - I think 5 frames will be enough.
        And yes, the light should be better, because harsh shadows cause an unpleasant feeling, as if the edges are doubled.

        Reply

      • Novel
        18.03.2021

        Stacking for a photo that costs 80 rubles? Or is this normal practice? And yet, tell me, will macro 40 be sharper? Or is there less depth of field and staking will definitely have to be applied?

        Reply

      • Trueash
        18.03.2021

        >> Stacking for a photo that costs 80 rubles? - The picture does not know how much will be paid for it. The object either fits into the depth of field or not. Physics cannot be fooled.
        DOF when shooting from half a meter at 40 mm, f / 8: 4,61 cm. (https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof)
        Or place objects differently.

        Reply

      • Novel
        18.03.2021

        Well, yes, then it is better to place it in a plane and then rotate it.

        Reply

      • twm
        18.03.2021

        Very smart calculators. Thank.

        Reply

      • Novel
        18.03.2021

        Cool calculator. Only I didn't quite understand if there is a difference in depth of field between conventional lenses and a macro with the same focal length?

        Reply

      • B. R. P.
        19.03.2021

        Macro lenses are generally sharper. But still cover the diaphragm) At 40mm grip a little more than 50, but this is unlikely to be very noticeable. In general, roughly speaking, the smaller the focal and / or the size of the matrix, there is more grip. On some conventional nikonvan or compact, your scissors will be sharp “from the fence to lunch”. Cheap and cheerful) Just for 80-ruble pictures.

        Reply

      • Novel
        19.03.2021

        You are laughing, but I looked at Nikon 1 and thought. Are you in the subject? Seriously, tell me, what disadvantages can he have for my purposes (T-shirts, panties, combs, cosmetic bags)?

        Reply

      • Michael
        19.03.2021

        When the depth of field does not fit (and it does not fit for you) or to clamp the aperture (diffraction and loss of detail is possible) or stacking. The symmetrical arrangement of two identical light sources relative to the camera - no buzz - there will be ghosting of the contour and the feeling of a blurry image.

        Reply

      • Novel
        19.03.2021

        Do you do the subject? What scheme would you recommend?

        Reply

      • Michael
        19.03.2021

        No, I'm in the landscape. You can just see from the photo that two identical bulbs were used. The scheme does not need to be changed. Sources of the same power cannot be used from the side of light and shadow. One source, "painting", has to bring out the shape and structure of the object. If the shadows are too dark (the contrast is high), then they put a second source for highlighting (just backlighting, not lighting) the dark areas. For a start, it's better to try and deal with one source, and then add.

        Reply

      • Novel
        19.03.2021

        For such purposes, tilt-shift lenses are used. More precisely, even tilt lenses, shift is usually not needed there. It allows you to "turn" the grip in the way you want by tilting the front of the lens relative to the optical axis. Naturally, they are manual (although Canon seems to be cutting autofocus).

        What is there for Nikon? for a full frame and even more for a crop with all shifts and tilts. With stacking, you get bored of collecting everything.

        Reply

      • Novel
        19.03.2021

        https://www.takefoto.ru/articles/raznoe/1100_primenenie_tilt-shift_optiki_v_predmetnoy_syemke

        Well, in general, read Dmitry Novak on the subject, he seriously studied it, even wrote a book, maybe he has already released it. Yes, by the way, because of the big flu, it was Olympus who advised. But for your purposes, the tilt payoff will be higher.

        Reply

      • Novel
        19.03.2021

        Roman, tilts are expensive). I want to try with little blood for now.

        Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      15.03.2021

      Take your native Nikkor

      Reply

  13. Arkady Shapoval
    18.03.2021

    It just so happens that I have used almost all Yongnuo lenses. Added YouTube videos for all Yongnuo lenses (generations, lineups, etc.) https://youtu.be/AfQ76sAwIac

    Reply

  14. B. R. P.
    19.03.2021

    Since there is no answer button, for Roman. I'm not laughing, just smiling) There shouldn't be any drawbacks in terms of depth of field, for example. Small matrix, hence noises, therefore good lighting is needed. Then, because of the 2,7 crop, the fifty-kopeck piece, for example, “turns” in the viewing angle into “135mm”. I do macro from time to time, last summer I shot a good macro video. To smartphone)

    Reply

  15. Matthew
    30.06.2022

    I liked the lens in the review, if I had a Nikon, I would think about buying it.

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      30.06.2022

      It's on Canon too. And through adapters it is possible to other mounts.

      Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer