LensTip.com

Lens review

Mitakon Speedmaster 50 mm f/0.95

22 December 2017
Arkadiusz Olech

11. Summary

Pros:

  • solid, metal casing,
  • sensational image quality in the frame centre but only from f/2.8,
  • sligth longitudinal chromatic aberration,
  • negligible lateral chromatic aberration,
  • low astigmatism,
  • very nice out-of-focus areas.

Cons:

  • very weak image quality near the maximum relative aperture,
  • high level of spherical aberration,
  • huge coma,
  • weak flare resistance,
  • very high vignetting level on full frame,
  • unblackened parts inside the construction,
  • lack of contacts meaning also a limited use of focus peaking function.
The producers of the Mitakon can afford good optics specialists who know how to design complex optical instruments with a lot of untypical glass inside. Why the same producers don’t blacken the inside of the lens properly? Leaving shiny, raw aluminum parts in the tube from the side of the mount is a basic mistake; what’s more it’s a mistake which has happened more than once because the same reservations concerned the Mitakon Speedmaster 35 mm f/0.95.

Please Support Us

The coronavirus crisis has been adversely affecting many businesses and, sad but true, ours is not an exception. Despite that difficult situation we would like to preserve continuity and high quality of publications available on all our websites. Still, we are now aware it might be impossible without additional financial help. That's why we would like to ask all those who visit, read, and care about Optyczne.pl, LensTip.com i Allbinos.com for support - it's enough you send us a small sum of money via PayPal. If a lot people decide to support our websites we think we'll stand a chance and survive next months without any lasting harm. We count on your support and understanding, stay safe and be healthy.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - advertisement - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I suppose a company which does such a sloppy job with a lens costing around $800 won’t have much success. Apart from that a f/0.95 device with such a performance as presented in our test is rather a case of pointless muscle flexing. It would be better to focus on manufacturing a flawless f/1.2-f/1.4 instrument with a sensible image quality near the maximum relative aperture.