2

I like my Samyang 35mm f/1.2, and it is the lens I use most often with my Sony alpha 6000. It gives me superb photos even in bad lighting, but it produces some distortions at the edges though - but this bothers me rarely.

I consider buying the Mitakon Speedmaster 35mm f/0.95, as its aperture would have an area of 1066 square millimeters (as compared to the Samyang with 668).

Is it worth going from 1.2 to 0.95? Apart from spending the money, is there a reason against it?

  • 1
    Is your primary concern fewer artifacts, or more light? – Please Read Profile Dec 15 '17 at 14:15
  • More light. I always shoot with available light, and my primary concern is night sky, landscapes and street photography. – user258532 Dec 15 '17 at 14:25
  • 1
    If you problem is "low light photography" maybe you want to explore upgrading body to camera that can work at super high iso with simpler f/1.4 lens – aaaaa says reinstate Monica Dec 15 '17 at 23:39
  • At more than ISO 6400 (or 8000, at the most), the pictures get very grainy, especially in such dark situations. And well, I'm not yet in the market for a new camera body, but I'd rather buy some good lenses in the mean time - which I'll keep for the next E-mount camera. – user258532 Dec 16 '17 at 19:11
  • Now I've ordered a Mitakon Speedmaster 35mm/f=0.95. As a Christmas gift to myself. Thank you for your comments! – user258532 Dec 28 '17 at 13:19

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.