Yongnuo Lenses Anyone?

B-9

B-9

Devin Bro
Local time
2:44 PM
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
2,448
Pretty surprised by how cheap these Yongnuo lenses are.

50/1.8 for 47.97$
35/2.0 for 83.79$

Appear to be their best deals. Those are BH prices for new not eBay used!

Has anyone tried these? I’m sure the 50 is as good as the next but I really wonder about that 35 it’s so cheap compared to say it’s Canon or Nikon competition.

Comments?
 
Some have mentioned AF hunting issues but really I’d
get one, if it has probs send it back.
The 50 1.4 and 40 2.8 are more interesting to me.
 
I did toy with the idea of getting the Yongnuo 100mm f2 lens for Nikon for a while. 100mm is about my favorite focal length and the price of the Yongnuo is excellent at around $160 USD.

But some reviews were a bit disparaging with regard to the "plasticy" build quality (though for the price this does not bother me so much as it is to be expected), the firmware and to some extent the optics (though it is a straight copy of a Canon lens which means that the basic design should be OK but some photos I saw had flare and contrast issues it seemed to me). In the event I decided to hold off for now while I investigated further. In principle I would still like one and am half tempted to get one eventually just not right now.

I did have a Nikon 105mm f2.8 AF D but sold it. The above could be a replacement for that lens possibly as I only ever used it as a normal prime.
 
Yeah it seems they are basically copies of Canon lenses.

Funny, I remember hearing about fake 50/1.8 MKII.. that’s basically the Y50/1.8

I’m not planning to buy but thought they were interesting and certainly cheap!
 
I have original 50 1.8 with all caps and hood as made in Japan, plus L style lens pouch for 100usd.
If you read review on YN 50 1.8 it is optically worse than original. But might be fine on film.
35/2 original was so-so lens, I doubt YN knockoff is better.
OP supposed to be one camera one lens already anyway :)
 
Kofe

What’s the correct hood? For the canon

I’m not planning to buy. I have the 50/1.8 MKI like you.

I actually just saw these in the BH catalogue that came Monday.
 
I have the 40/2.8. Have tried it on my N80 and D700. Next will be on my F100. I think it is an OK lens for the price. I use it for casual walk around shooting. Don't pay a lot and don't expect a lot and you may be pleasantly surprised.
 
Thanks KoFe!

I got mine with caps for 49.99$
A sweet little deal I think. Nifty Fifty for a Fifty.

I’m gonna want that snap on hood!
 
I want the 35mm's in Nikon and Canon mount

I want the 35mm's in Nikon and Canon mount

Dear B-9,


I have the original Canon 50mm f1.8 EF. I also have a Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D.


I want something brighter aperture wise at 35mm for use on APS-C digital Canon and Nikon cameras. I've had it in my cart several times but never pulled the trigger. I'll get them eventually!


Regards,


Tim Murphy


Harrisburg, PA :)
 
35/1.4? Rokinon maybe.

The 35/1.4 Nikkor is a stellar lens. Easily adapted with a AF-Confirm EOS-F adapter.
 
Canon has literally done zero with their primes (optically speaking) in decades.
They are kind of subpar in comparison to more modern lenses to boot.
Why would anyone want to duplicate them?
Seriously, their are better lens's to knock off.
 
Very true. Nikon played the same game for a long time (fortunately for us a lot of their primes have always been stellar).

The YN50/1.4 has the look of an old MKI Canon lens but couldn't possibly be optically.

The unique part being the USB port on the lens offering you future firmware updates and maybe even home focus tuning.
 
Very misleading post and inaccurate post.

filmtwit said:
Canon has literally done zero with their primes (optically speaking) in decades.
Al ot of them kind of subpar in comparison to more modern lenses to boot.
Why would anyone want to duplicate them?
Seriously, their are better lens's to knock off.
Click to expand...

50 1.8 USM is optically improved. 40 2.8 is new lens.
Where are MII L lenses with different optical formulas.
35 L MII is 2016 lens.
35 f2 IS is new optical formula. And so on.

From what I have seen, L lenses are still hard to beat for their optical quality. Every time I use L, I see zero reason to buy similar Leica lens. :)
 
filmtwit said:
Canon has literally done zero with their primes (optically speaking) in decades.
Al ot of them kind of subpar in comparison to more modern lenses to boot.
Why would anyone want to duplicate them?
Seriously, their are better lens's to knock off.
Click to expand...

I think the reason they started with Canon lenses might be that Canon's focusing mechanism has been far easier to replicate than Nikon's. That also means they are easier to adapt than Nikons when placing onto an AF adapter for Sony cameras for example. Yongnuo no doubt saw this as a market opportunity.

And if Canon really has not upgraded their optics (I will take your word on this as I know little about their lenses being a Nikon shooter) this might well also make it easier to replicate Canon lenses as there would be less need for latest coatings etc. Having said this the Nikon version of the 100mm f2 is based on the Canon version with appropriate changes to allow AF. Though I have read that there are or were some issues with focussing speed and maybe accuracy with the Nikon version. Not sure if its been resolved.
 
Interesting points Peter!

Is that the 100mm E series? or the 105G? Couldn't be the 105DC?...... no.... lol
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Very misleading post and inaccurate post.



50 1.8 USM is optically improved. 40 2.8 is new lens.
Where are MII L lenses with different optical formulas.
35 L MII is 2016 lens.
35 f2 IS is new optical formula. And so on.

From what I have seen, L lenses are still hard to beat for their optical quality. Every time I use L, I see zero reason to buy similar Leica lens. :)
Click to expand...

They surely did roll out those MKII L series one after another. Never tried any but I believe you. I honestly thought the MKI 17-35L was a damn good lens for its time as well as the 28-80L I never owned the 28 or 24-70.

What about the tiny 24STM?
 
The vast majority of "L" lenses from canon are zooms. Most are fantastic.
What "L" primes you find are kind of one-off's.
The 50mm f1.2 is soft as hell. Most folks I know, avoid it. and would use a Nikkor 50mm ais f1.2 on a convter first then the canon.
The 85mm f1.2 is astounding.

But again, most of the Canon's primes are good (but old too), but not that good either, most are not modern by any means of the word too. Most of the Sigma primes in canon mount are far better for instance. Or if you're ok with manuel, you have fantastic ziess primes too.

So why oh why would you copy the Canon primes, when you can copy so much better these days.

Ko.Fe. said:
From what I have seen, L lenses are still hard to beat for their optical quality. Every time I use L, I see zero reason to buy similar Leica lens. :)
Click to expand...
 
filmtwit said:
The vast majority of "L" lenses from canon are zooms. Most are fantastic.
What "L" primes you find are kind of one-off's.
The 50mm f1.2 is soft as hell. Most folks I know, avoid it. and would use a Nikkor 50mm ais f1.2 on a convter first then the canon.
The 85mm f1.2 is astounding.

But again, most of the Canon's primes are good (but old too), but not that good either, most are not modern by any means of the word too. Most of the Sigma primes in canon mount are far better for instance. Or if you're ok with manuel, you have fantastic ziess primes too.

So why oh why would you copy the Canon primes, when you can copy so much better these days.
Click to expand...

For those like you I had picture of me and my in-law laughing. Picture was taken with 50L and @1.2.

46989110805_a6a8be77df_b.jpg


I can't take seriously non AF lenses on Canon. The whole reason of EF system is to able to shoot at f1.2 and have it constantly in focus.
But many are just not so good to shoot Canon EF system properly. Then "soft" talks comes.
Sigma in EF has and have crappy AF. It is known issue for second decade now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom