answers: 58

  1. Radmir
    28.06.2019

    If you are real labor))) photographer take this device)))

    Reply

  2. Radmir
    28.06.2019

    It is better to buy a native under the canon, even used, but native. And shoot for fun. Nerves are more expensive.

    Reply

    • anonym
      28.06.2019

      Arkady wrote about this :) native take, native is better

      Reply

  3. Novel
    28.06.2019

    Good try, Yongnuo, but no. Flash you get better copy. Of glass, only 14 / 2.8 is of interest due to the wild price of the original from Canon. But budget glasses are better about the original. Even adjusted for 25 years of difference.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      28.06.2019

      Their 35 / 1.4 is quite suitable

      Reply

      • Novel
        28.06.2019

        35 / 2IS suits me more :)

        Reply

  4. Koba
    29.06.2019

    From a technological point of view, usually companies need 1-2 cycles to reach a high level of production of certain products. In China, usually the first samples are produced as trial ones; no one expects to take the high bar. At this stage, there may be exact copies of other manufacturers, or old models, or very mediocre or frankly poor quality, as well as a sample of a price niche that the company should not go beyond, but if they look that this product has a future in this price range, then they’ll already make their own product, the benefit is to calculate the lens in China now - these are mere trifles. At one time, Zhongyi counted and even produced lenses for many foreign companies, and then began to produce its own kind of even unique lenses. Other manufacturers follow his example, and Yongnuo also tried to make autofocus lenses. Personally, I don’t think it’s worth buying these lenses now, in theory they should have problems, including unrecoverable ones, but if they continue production, after 4-5 years (this is one technological cycle in time) we will see their new Versis or pretty modified old versions. This happened to their fifty dollars, but the second cycle is also not the main and top one, usually really good products are obtained starting from the third cycle. The same Japanese companies already have more than 70-80 years of product manufacturing experience, of course, new manufacturers cannot reach their level from the first run. Yes, of course, everyone can turn to Tamron and order the industrial design of the new lens (Kyocera did this when manufacturing the Zeiss Batis line), but it’s expensive and it’s quite possible that with this approach the lens itself will not be very cheap to manufacture. But sooner or later, based on my personal experience in manufacturing in China, I can assume that in the future we will see some lenses from Yongnuo in a new and better quality. In the meantime, their products have one single plus - this is the price, as well as two blier less acceptable products - 50 / 1.4 and 14 / 2.8.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      29.06.2019

      Thanks, good thoughts. They should have STM motors soon, and if they update everything based on them, it will be very cool. Also, again, their 35 / 1,4 is a very tasty solution

      Reply

  5. Igor
    29.06.2019

    MONTH BACK SELLED NEW 85 / 1.2L EVENING HARE catches like a bastard.

    Reply

    • anonym
      30.06.2019

      There are no new 85 1.2, there are only 82 / 1.2 LII

      Reply

  6. Alexander
    30.06.2019

    quite suitable glass for the money.
    By the way, appreciate this glass, who thinks about bokeh, color?
    https://a.radikal.ru/a09/1906/82/d370e6f142db.jpg

    Reply

    • anonym
      30.06.2019

      There is no color, no bokeh, the composition is weak, let's still

      Reply

    • Onotole
      30.06.2019

      I think that if you shoot not in the afternoon sun, the picture could be better.
      I also think that this is some kind of shirik, it seems like about 35 focal. At the same time, the aperture is not very wide, f / 4 or even darker - probably the zoom. Well, either the crop factor at the camera of the hoo.
      Bokeh is “nervous”, not the most pleasant on standard plots, but if you get creative, you can probably portray something interesting with this.
      About sharpness is not clear - the picture is small, pinched.
      In short, I would even venture to suggest that this is something like a soap dish with a fixed zoom with a small magnification (x3-x5).

      Reply

      • Onotole
        30.06.2019

        And an inch matrix or so.

        Reply

    • Novel
      30.06.2019

      Well, when shooting white or yellow flowers (and sometimes scarlet), it would be better to compensate for the exposure minus from a half step to a step, otherwise there are no details in the petals, and they are the most significant subject of the picture.

      Reply

      • Valentine
        30.06.2019

        The details in the petals remained with him, at least on my monitor I can see it. Also, it is easy to verify this by tidying up the light in any editor. Guessing about the lens is useless, because the picture is cropped, squeezed and does not contain any EXIF ​​traces. What they did to her and how far the result is far from the original frame, only the author knows. From such a picture you can only judge about this picture itself, but certainly not about the lens or camera. The picture is mediocre in all respects, there is nothing special to praise.

        Reply

    • Alexander
      01.07.2019

      all criticism is absolutely correct.
      but it is shot on a Samsung Galaxy S9.
      if you try, you can significantly improve the picture.
      Here are examples of what you can get on a smartphone
      https://www.dpreview.com/samples/9162675742/samsung-galaxy-s10-sample-gallery

      an obvious and simple fact - smartphones have reached the quality level of matrices 1 inch-crop 1.5, depending on the optics of the latter. but certainly not worse than a whale lens.
      in terms of high ISO, the same google pixel night sign provides better quality than crop 1.5 matrices
      https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/google-pixel-night-sight/

      the reason is simple, there are details
      https://vas3k.ru/blog/computational_photography/
      and this seems to be the future.
      Yes, I have a camera with a full-frame sensor and a set of lenses. but it gathers dust on a shelf, because the weight with a zoom lens is 1.5kg-2kg.
      and with a smartphone I can make a completely satisfactory photo quality and no weight on my neck.

      Cheap Chinese lenses are good, but their quality will be close to smartphones, with variations of course.
      pros will buy something else without options.
      therefore, IMHO, their market is strictly limited by amateurs with a limited budget who are not comfortable with smart but have no money for high-quality optics.

      Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        Nifiga itself scatter: doyma matrix - crop 1,5. It's like putting in a row micro 4/3 and SF like GFX.
        No, the quality is exactly that of an inch matrix, or maybe even 2/3, you can’t even get close to a crop of 1,5, even with a mic there will be a difference and not in favor of the phone.
        There is no point in shouting “phones are already shooting no worse than your DSLR bricks” while everyone said that the picture from the example is shit, and the colors are shit, and the bokeh is dumb. That's when they stop guessing - then you’ll drown for phones. In the meantime, yes, an almost full-fledged replacement for soap dishes (in the picture, but not for ease of use), as shown by the sales data of the same soap dishes with an inch matrix or less.

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        inch matrix - crop 1,5 differ little in many shooting conditions. Moreover, the same pseudo SF fuje often shoots worse in quality than some FF cameras. and mikra often cannot be distinguished from FF.
        you will have more practice, less confidence in the numbers on paper.
        full of paired frames in blogs, where you can’t determine where which matrix is, although the spread is much larger. here’s a couple for you, will you determine where who is? options - SF, FF, crop 1.5, mic, inch matrix, smartphone (crop 1: 1, frame center, focal lengths are slightly different, default conversion in native developers)
        https://b.radikal.ru/b30/1907/ee/a3fc8aa71f94.jpg
        So who is left and who is right? )

        Reply

      • Pokemon
        01.07.2019

        It looks like we have another sectarian like Misha.
        We take to the streets of a night city without a tripod and immediately see the difference.

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        I really like the expression of trolls “with us” - I thought that this is the site of Arkady and not trolls. ) Or have they already become masters?
        Arkady, will YOU have such a forum that you can express your opinion without the risk of getting a shortcut from the next troll?
        Well, another Pokemon troll hangs the label "sectarian" -
        Arkady, can I somehow ban such rudeness?
        Really, nothing can be discussed because of them.

        Reply

      • Pokemon
        01.07.2019

        Alexander, how old are you?

        Reply

      • Novel
        01.07.2019

        Tell me, do you take something else apart from juice packets with subsequent comparison for sharpness? A mirror (or even a mirrorless mirror) is a modular design of varying degrees of complexity. This is light control. These are specialized lenses. And the telephone is the telephone. A piece that can also be removed.

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        Roman, firstly it's just a couple of photos from the Internet, have you read what I indicated? try re-reading ...
        Secondly, if you bother to google it, you will find a huge number of paired photos from landscapes to portraits.
        Thirdly, judging by your comment, you can’t determine what is removed without an exif. Not at all)

        What was required to prove - under ordinary conditions, the size of the matrix does not have much significance today.

        I see no reason to discuss studio productions - there is a specificity there. As in the macro genre. And in the genre of reporting / sports. Etc. Specialized tools are used for these genres.
        Therefore, read the above - I directly pointed out that we must clearly understand when and where there will be a difference in tools.
        And now the question is - how many lovers of the owners of the crop D70, D7000 and others can, know and USE the production of light, carry reflectors, puffs with arsonists, a couple of three assistants with them? Is that honest? ))) Here I am about it.
        The result is obvious -
        The pros themselves know what he needs.
        It’s often IMPOSSIBLE to determine what is removed.
        The size of the matrix often does not matter (of course, not always).

        Reply

      • Novel
        01.07.2019

        A mirror is not the size of a matrix. More precisely, not only size. You take a typical scenario - a landscape or a portrait without special equipment, take a picture on the phone, take a frame at the equivalent focal length on the DSLR and compare. If you used your DSLR in just this way - automatic mode and fix and that was enough for you - well, congratulations, you coped with nailing with a microscope, now you have found a suitable hammer and are glad that you do not need to wear a heavy microscope.

        Most people who purchase a DSLR use it for other purposes. This is a problem for most people, not a tool that is not used even at 10% of the capabilities.

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        “Judging by your comment, you can’t determine what was taken without exispex. Not at all)

        What was required to prove - under normal conditions, the size of the matrix does not really matter today. ”

        All this only says that if the hands are crooked then the top FF with top lenses can be removed so that it seems that the phone could have been removed better, that’s all.

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        And Roman, if you want not to discuss technology and facts, but just flood or troll, then this, perhaps, without me, is not interesting for me to flood. Thank you for understanding!

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        02.07.2019

        Alexander, all your posts in THIS topic are flood. Take the trouble to read the title. Everything is as usual - just do not like something in the dialogue, shout “flooders, trolls!”, Not knowing the definition of this.

        Reply

      • Michael
        01.07.2019

        And now we look at 100% crop of the landscape at infinity and immediately everything will fall into place. While the phone is DIFFERENTLY different from the DSLR even in the afternoon. Comparisons can only be in a very narrow range of shooting and viewing conditions. Eight times an article is optional. The curious have already read. Yes, good, but still early. I myself would not refuse to take pictures on the phone, but I am carrying a brick and so far this is without alternatives.

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        100% crop there is a difference. Does anyone argue with this? it seems not. 8 times no one posted.

        The question is, how many people view pictures 100%? what are they looking at?
        the answer is 2MP or 4MP on a monitor or smartphone / tablet.
        the difference will be huge? your opinion?
        the link above is your opinion, the gallery on the Samsung S10 + preview is much worse than the crop of DSLRs? take a look at 4MP, paired photos with a SLR, show the difference)

        farther. evening shots of crop DSLRs are already worse, noticeably worse than night modes of smartphones if you shoot without a tripod. it’s just a fact who likes who don’t. take a couple of frames and see the difference.
        Well, a crop DSLR cannot do buffering of a dozen frames from exposure brackets and form a final frame. just can't.

        the link above is paired footage, what is shot? and this is the most common travel photo and crop 100% as you like ...

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        What difference does what% of people consider at 100% increase?
        What difference does% know how, they know and USE staging light, carry reflectors, puffs with arsonists, a couple of three assistants with them?

        The main thing is that I do all this and therefore I am shooting in the DSLR;
        You - you do not do this (or you do, but would like to stop) - you shoot on the phone.
        Everything is elementary.

        Reply

      • Michael
        01.07.2019

        They just brought crop above themselves, like we can’t determine where the phone is. Now the pictures already have a difference, but who is viewing them. I already see the article above, well for the 6th time. Shooting packages is an unusual shot for any trip. Arguments no one juggling. So it’s clear that while a phone for 50k shoots worse than a SLR with a lens for 15-20k. Like Instagram - you are welcome, only the site made a mistake

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        I wonder what I should understand from the two muddy packets of juice out of focus?
        I more or less accurately determined what your flowers were taken for, the rest just vomited a little from the picture, it would seem that what else is needed?

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        You probably don’t know what RAV is without using corrective profiles / curves. therefore, for you it is muddy), it happens.
        you cannot distinguish paired pictures, you took the smartphone for an inch matrix, RAVs you do not understand how they open, rude.
        further I see no reason to comment on your posts. either you interfere with the bulk one, “vomit” (after the weekend? did you drink or eat something stale in such a heat?), then hang labels for everyone who has an opinion different from yours. Thank you for understanding.

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        When the arguments in the dispute end, they pass on to individuals, distortions and direct insults.
        Even if I ate something wrong on the weekend, what does this have to do with the subject of discussion.
        And yes, I’m completely unaware of how you can open and look at the rav without any profiles at all, I used to think for some reason that this is impossible because the rav is just a data set from the matrix (separately from each of the pixels with a Bayer pattern) and the image displayed on a standard monitor is a quantized 3 by 8-bit RASTER for R, G and B for EVERY pixel.

        Reply

      • Paul
        03.07.2019

        two gavnofoto some packages of juice now began to characterize the progress of mobile photography? The best smartphone in terms of photography was and still is - Lumia 1020. Since It is a compact camera with phone function. The rest is still far from him, at least 12 lenses on the back cover hang. But he doesn’t make any comparisons in the picture even with any canon powershot sx 170 is due to the presence of at least the same optical zoom in the camera! Photography is not megapixels and detail. A photograph is a composition emphasized by exposure. And the laws of physics (optics) have not yet been canceled when constructing the composition.

        Reply

      • Michael
        03.07.2019

        Well, in fairness, soap dishes are removed worse than modern top-end phones. The processors are very dull, their lenses are also bad. But the phones still do not reach the “large” system cameras, and this is noticeable. To compare the phone even with a crop of 1,5 - you have to wait another 10 years.

        Reply

      • Onotole
        03.07.2019

        The cheapest - maybe. Medium and high-end either the same or better. The same photo with flowers reminded me of a picture from my old X20. That's exactly the exact same (except that the X20 does not make gray of white), which is why I suspected zoom and a small matrix

        Reply

      • Alexander
        01.07.2019

        To clarify - yes, I have a pair of tripods including a carbon one with a head for $ 600. Yes, I have an FF camera and everything that is attached to it. )
        Which absolutely does not change what was said above - the smartphone perfectly removes during the day no worse than a crop clamped to 5.6 on an inexpensive lens, and the quality of even evening photos is quite at the level - see links to the gallery with the link above.
        And google pixel WITHOUT a tripod takes BETTER crop of the camera WITHOUT a tripod. It is just a fact, like it or not. Reasons - see article link above.

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        That's when the smartphone can shoot not like a crop clamped to 5.6 on an inexpensive lens, but at least as FF with 135 / 1.8 or 14-24 / 2,8, then we ask you to be welcome, I will be the first to discuss all the pros and cons with pleasure.
        In the meantime, the Chinese hero of this review with a D90 line (giving himself up almost for a reason at flea markets) puts absolutely any smartphone on both blades into the light. Unless you put it in your pocket, the only negative.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        01.07.2019

        In this review, not d90, but 20d. I’m still inclined to believe that due to the specifics of perception, the final product for the masses from smartphones will soon win crop 1.5

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        Do you mean the specifics of consumption? In the sense that the most popular photo consumption scenario for the masses looks like an Instagram ribbon scroll (3 previews across the width of a 5-6-inch phone (or, in extreme cases, scrolling through the entire photo on the same screen)?
        In this regard, I completely agree. But then it is art, so as not to be accessible (or even understandable) to the first and everyone.

        Reply

      • Novel
        01.07.2019

        No, sorry. If the task is to shoot something at something at hand - go ahead, the phone gives an acceptable picture. If I have a photo bag with me, then I have a telephoto in it, a shirik, a universal makrik, something fast, the polarization for this thing, the ND filter is variable, the tripod I want some compact and lightweight and an external flash for two batteries. I solve all these problems, and then I finish the processing. And the telephone - what a telephone. It’s disgusting to pick up after the camera, as if your fingers were chopped off and you hold it with your hands.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        01.07.2019

        Cool said

        Reply

      • Onotole
        01.07.2019

        I advise the manfrotto of the element series - inexpensive, compact, quite decent quality, there are carbon versions, a convenient (for photography) head in the kit.

        Reply

      • Novel
        01.07.2019

        Thanks, I'll take a look.

        Reply

      • Novel
        02.07.2019

        Yes, carbon fiber small and take it perhaps.

        Reply

      • zengarden
        01.07.2019

        Alexander, a good attempt, but no. And too noticeable is the scent of personal interest in your opus. I hope this is not an advertisement for Samsung 😀 Okay, jokes aside.
        On a smartphone (especially modern multi-processor multi-lens multi-pixel) you can get a BEAUTIFUL picture, but here it is mainly the merit of post-processing the image (the processors there are now very powerful, advanced algorithms). This photo will be quite enough for publication on the Internet. Especially for all kinds of glamorous blogs (since there are many filters available, this is not for Photoshop to study). But you cannot view such photos under magnification - you can get a cultural shock. Well, of course, there is no need to talk about commercial photography either.
        Yes, I know, some people make good videos on iPhones; Not bad for viewing on YouTube or in your instagrams of yours.
        But the laws of physics cannot be fooled. Small multi-pixel matrix (s), small lenses (albeit complex ones, with autofocus and stabilization) will not give you an image comparable even with a double crop, and here none of the most advanced algorithms and neural networks will stretch the image (unless they “think out” the missing material, how to do it now).
        But smartphones have some undeniable advantages: they are compact, convenient, where you can immediately process photos and send them to the Internet, for example, after shooting. For the layman this is enough. For a blogger who shoots bows, food, scenes, short videos for instagram. Even for the photographer as a camera-prozheyumki. But do not compare the image received by the smartphone and the photo from the “real” cameras.

        Reply

  7. anonym
    01.07.2019

    Aah! Cyprid is back! How glad I am that she is back!

    Reply

  8. anonym
    01.07.2019

    Cool photos, and even without processing

    Reply

  9. Paul
    03.07.2019

    This lens is best used in a studio with good light. With a lack of light, the focus is always somewhere nearby, but not where it is needed (open 1.8-2.0). In a strong backlight (against the sun) refuses to focus at all! He seeks, seeks, and does not find. After a photo shoot in the sand pit, sand poured under the focus ring, as a result, it is sooo hard and now walks with a characteristic crunch. I didn’t put the camera on the sand, put it in a backpack when moving, but managed to grab the lens.
    The conclusion compared to the original is the sky (canon ef 85 1/8 usm) and the earth (YN 85 1/8). Even the top-end by the standards of YN fifty kopecks 1.4 just flies by focusing in conditions of medium complexity like plywood over Paris in comparison with EF 85 1.8, although it is not entirely correct to compare them.
    Nevertheless, I advise you to search for the originals. I hope YN finally takes a step forward and solves its most basic lens problem - focusing and abandons its micromotors in favor of ultrasound.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      03.07.2019

      Tell me, please, on which camera are you using the lens?

      Reply

  10. Alexey
    15.03.2020

    I want to take either YN85 / 1.8 or YN100 / 2 for use with 5D2. The focal lengths are approximately the same and I can “close my eyes” to this. What is much more interesting is which glass shows itself better in resolution and focusing reliability? Also in favor of 100/2 is the presence of a USB port. Who will advise what?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      15.03.2020

      hundred, as for me, more interesting

      Reply

      • Alexey
        15.03.2020

        Here, too, bow so far.

        Reply

  11. Marina
    09.08.2020

    Arkady, as an experienced photographer, give advice.
    I'm just starting to study photography, I bought a Nikon 3100 camera (old, but they say that for beginners), the kit comes with a standard 18-55 lens.
    Recommend a more advanced lens for portraits, for black budget constraints, again for a beginner.
    They advise just YN85 mm 1,8, but judging by your review, the version is not very good. And the original is not suitable for the budget.
    Give advice 🙏

    Reply

    • Marina
      09.08.2020

      For a limited budget *

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      09.08.2020

      Nikon 50 / 1.8G is better for starters

      Reply

Reply

Top
mobility. computer