Trying out the Mitakon 25 0.95 for M 4/3 by V.Roger Rubin

Hi Steve,

I shoot available light. Always have, always will.I have owned and used a “Dream Lens” (Canon 0.95- but you know that) for years. It was modified for use on my M6 and M3  (by the way I had to modify the M3 to use it).

MITAKON

When I switched to m4/3 because that format would let me use my “legacy” Leica Glass, the Canon Lens had an efl of 100 mm and weighed almost as much as my DSLRs. That weight defeated my purpose. Using the Canon lens on Lumix digicams, the lens results on m4/3 were excellent. Lugging it around was quite another story. Imagine my delight, therefore, when I learned of the Mitakon 25mm 095 (efl 50mm). The lens was supposed to be released to consumers in late October- well, it’s late October and my supplier had no idea when he would be receiving the lens. Frankly, I couldn’t wait so I picked one up at PhotoPlusExpo for $399 the day before yesterday.I had to pay cash as they had no credit card  machines at the “China Pavillion”.

I used the Mitakon at the show but only at 0.95. Some of the results are attached. The lens is very tiny (comparatively speaking). It is even smaller than my Leica 25mm Summilux. The results are quite good. I also shot at the show with the Canon 0.95. I have provided one image for comparison.The images are limited in scope but you might find them interesting.

All images below are from the Mitakon except the last one, which is from the Canon 50 0.95. Digicams were 2 Lumix GX1s and a Lumix G3. The images were produced with my usual post processing.

MITAKON 1

MITAKON 2

MITAKON 3

The Canon Dream Lens…

CANON 0.95

Related Post

Share This!

26 thoughts on “Trying out the Mitakon 25 0.95 for M 4/3 by V.Roger Rubin

  1. The lens seems to have a aperature of 1.4. I used a e-m5ii for testing. When I go down from 2.8 to 0,95 the speed is only 4 and not 8 times faster. I compared it with a Nikkor 50 1.4. There is the is the same speed with the aperature wide open. For less money i could get a Panasonic 25mm 1.4. Now I understand why the lens is so small.

  2. You have made some nice framing of your models but something is strange about them? Could you revert to the original files and repost images -I BET they would be super especially the monochrome images.

  3. I love your images. Great Job.
    What’s up with all these people with their negative comments? Do you have some kind of vendetta with them?

    1. People behind a keyboard are anonymous, so they get nasty. It’s usually very unhappy people who do this. I’d say 99.9% of the time it is. Just a part of the internet age.

      1. “People behind a keyboard are anonymous”
        You can fix this to a large part on your site Steve.
        Before an anonymous critic can comment, they should have to leave a link to their website or at least a photo with there name on it.

        I think that would cut down on at least 50% of the hate.

        BTW; once I finally send you some photos for your site, I’m gonna let everyone have it ‘with both barrels!’ Until then I’ll be quite.

        Also, I think the photos from VRR show the bokeh of the lens on a cropped sensor. That is all I wanted to know.

        A big part of why the women look like zombies is because most don’t want to be at the show. Especially if the shots are taken near the end of the day. Lets see all the critics go to a show and do better.

  4. Roger, your interaction with the models seems just right. They look calm, relaxed but also have a good expression in their faces.
    I think thy don´t need that much processing. And may be you should take care a little for the skin tones.
    With m43 i often have a problem with blurred backgrounds. They often look like painted a little with watercolors, very uneven especially in darker zones. You can see this in your first picture.
    In my opinion part of the problem of over processing the pictures is the wrong Sensor-size. Yes, m43 has come a long way, but when it comes to post-processing, larger sensors just have more headroom to work with. They just don´t look unnatural as fast and can take much more processing.
    If i owned you Canon i definitely would give it a try with the new Sony A7-series, may be a used A7 Mark I to keep the cost in control? Just an idea. Greetings, Ingo.

  5. I can’t get over how rude people can be behind the shield of internet anonymity!

    In any case, it is hard to judge the lens due to the post-processing here–unfortunately very unflattering. It appears you have a nice eye for portraiture though.

    Cheers,
    Mark

    1. I was expecting sharp shots but these look plasticky for want of a better word.

      I don’t think people are being rude; it’s not easy nor pleasurable to point out what you think are shortcomings.

      What is thoroughly unpleasant though is to be attacked with words like “rude” for giving honest opinions; it smacks of trying to censor comment and if that reigns it turns the forum into a meaningless swamp of insincere praise which benefits no one.
      Are you genuine about your “nice eye” for portraits? Or is it a counterbalancing sop for what you said about the pp? Now, I do believe you, but if “niceness” rules who would know.

      Maybe the poster should resubmit one or two of these with less pp “work”.

  6. sorry, i have to tell you : the post processing is destroying their pretty face !

    And there is much effect that we can not talk about the lenses

  7. Agree on the first 3… Is it intentional ?
    I imagine the glass had some direct impact even if postreatment is quite hard

    The Canon one looks much classy

  8. WTF is wrong with your processing? these look awful, sorry to be blunt, but they look either like zombies or just cartoon characters with the sharpening you have done on the eyes etc

  9. Great pictures but I don’t understand why people will use these lenses with m43 cameras unless it was for video. I had an em5 with a voigtlander 25mm 0.95, great piece of glass, but it was so heavy, and unbalanced on the camera, just to achieve a little bit of DOF, that it actually made my D800 with 50mm 1.8, much easier to carry around, and confortable.

    I don’t know how big is the mitakon, but if its compared to the voigtlander I can imagine it not been easy to carry around.

      1. Thanks Steve, if thats the case, then it must be an awesome lens, I had also had the panasonic 25 1.4, and it handle quite good with the em5.

        Must be then a very good combo 🙂

    1. It’s not just about limited DOF. The Canon lens is magic (yes, I have one) but really happier on a larger sensor, and (as VRR noted) a chore to carry on a small camera. The Mitakon looks like an interesting M43 alternative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: