3:35 moire has nothing to do with the lens and is actually a sign that the lens is sharp. So ... not a con.

From what I've seen from TT artisan, I wouldn't go up the range this far in price. The real magic stuff from them is around the $100-$200 range where you can get pretty solid performance for a crazy low price. I have the 25mm F2 lens and while there's definitely a solid list of cons (Especially some edge softness and vignetting at the lower apertures), for $70 Canadian, it's given me a ton of great photos in a very compact and solid feeling body, for a fraction of the price that I would pay even from a more budget conscious company like Sigma for a similar focal length.

3:39 Moire just indicates that the lens is sharp. This is not a negative feature of the lens, it just means it can accurately transmit high spatial frequencies to the sensor.

For @markwiemels that would be “The lens that changed everything”, or “Lens changer” or “Best ever manual focus for the price”, or “The lens that should cost 4.000$ more”.

rough.. cons are huge issue for me... ty for the review

Feels surreal to see the photos of Culver City where I work, from someone who lives in Vancouver, where I only just moved from a year ago! Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the lens, Brandon. :)

I'm not into photography past my phone camera but I still love the art and dedication you put in your videos. Might pickup a dedicated camera one day soon to add to my list of hobbies 😊.

As you mentioned, worst is subjective, and I actually found I kinda liked the softness!

I just picked up the Ttartisans 90 f1.25, and I love it! Definitely dreamy. Incredible subject isolation while shooting portraits. Sounds like you’ll never get much background bokeh with such a wide angle lens, probably better to shoot for overall sharpness with a smaller aperture.

I've been a photojournalist for the past 31 years, and I really like this lens. A bit front-heavy on my Leica M9s, better balanced on my Lumix S5 (using helicoid adapter). Sharper than my Super-Angulon 21mm f3.4, which was always soft unless you stopped it down. I agree that the lens hoods for the TTArtisan 21mm are almost useless. I tend to use this lens with the subject in the foreground, so I don't need edge-to-edge sharpness. It's also built like a tank.

It seems like this is not just an issue with sharpness. This seems to have more to do with lack of contrast in the low and mid frequencies of the image affecting the overall perceived sharpness.

Give the Leica 21mm F2 APO a try, it is absolutely incredible.

Pls try the kamlan 21mm f1.8 It's fantastic and cheap (75 bucks on ebay) Small, nice microcontrast and nicely sharp. Also close focus is great.

Umm, I feel bad, I really liked the wide open images. Wait, is that why I am so rubbish at taking photos? Should I just sell my camera and stick to iPhone?

Isn't it generally a bad idea to adapt this kind of full frame lens to cameras with smaller sensors (e.g. the APS-C sensor on the Fuji)? It just shows their flaws much more because of the crop factor and the high pixel density

Love these m mount lens reviews!

Holly shit how sharp is that lens for that much moire to show up 😮

This Lens is like the voightlander heliar classic 1.5. They market that as being this way though. its very dreamy but a completely different lens about f4. I use it for mostly film photos as the grain counters the bloom, or when im doing portraits where the dreaminess is nice. Its also 50m. haha

seems like the 35mm f0.95. Pretty bad at 0.95 but improve a Lot in the 1.4 and above.

The video and photography in this video were so good !! Props for that. 5:00 was especially amazing xd Also thanks for giving a balanced review to other elements of the lens despite the obvious cons, I might pick one up since F4 as the closest price competitor is a bit too small...

Okay okay, you konw what would look cool though about pictures at night wide open with this soft mess of a lens? Shooting some 800T film (Vison 3 500D cinema film with the remjet removed, and cross processed in C41 chemistry instead of ECN-2) This has very strong red halation that will play very good with these bloomy lights, and this sort of film mistreated like that is a bit grainier so the loss of sharpness is not such a disappointment. But putting this lens on a digital body and shooting it wide open sounds like a waste of time...

Do you use any Canon FD lenses ? I personally love them : cheap and sharp (if in good condition ofc)

have u tried 21mm lux?

Serious question, why would you ever shoot scenes from far away at f1.5???? And why would you expect things to be nicely In focus? Am I missing something?

The cheap TT artisans and 7artisans are the best lenses I have tested for the price they go for

Some of photos looks like 50s or early 60s zeiss lens. How curious.

too picky imho. for being a 1.5 its really good. so if you test a summilux steel rim it would be the worst lens you have tested too or because it costs 3-4k its now good?

I have this lens and my pics aren't as soft even at 1.5, could be a bad copy

Few hundred dollar lens 5 thousand dollar camera lmfao. In all seriousness though, great review! It's nice to see more professional content about more budget lenses so buyers know what they're getting.

moire isnt a sign of a bad lens, quite the opposite actually. and its not the lens that would need to fix it, but rather an optical low pass filter over the sensor

Did you use the focus chart??? to calibrate the lens????

Wait, wait, this is usually the norm, lenses wide open suck. Kids these days :v :v

bro doesn't like the lens but still shoots the most banger street photos on this platform. jokes aside this was an interesting perspective! i've personally enjoyed the bloom at f1.5 but I do agree that I wish it would've been a little sharper. this dual "character" of the lens reminds me of some of the Voigtlander lenses, such as the Noktom 40mm f1.2, which is also bloomy wide open but sharpens up quickly starting from f2. Though the TTArtisan presented here seems to be too blurry wide open when it comes to detail, not bloom, especially in the corners, so in the end I do agree that this "uncorrected" feel may be too exaggerated. I also personally for some reason seem to enjoy in many cases this onion bokeh which receives a lot of hate online, so that wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. An optical flaw I don't enjoy and I'm not sure you've mentioned is chromatic abberation, which from your example photos seems quite pronounced - in comparison to the bokeh imperfections I'm never a fan of these abberations. As for the build quality, it is indeed quite a pity that the lens hoods don't fulfill the role a lens hood should fulfill, especially given that the lens is also not properly corrected for flare. I can also see the points about weight and size. great video, great photos! thank you for the presentation. left me with a lot of thoughts. have you by any chance reviewed that TTArtisan 50mm f0.95 which is an imitation of the famous Leica?

3:32 That is not the lens though.

i mean, if you dont like it you can give it to me :)

I hate that they just blatantly copy Leica, at least have some creativity, but I guess that’s how Chinese manufacturers roll

That would mean more if you reviewed cheap lenses. Something I don't think I've seen you do. Don't you own a Leica? Man I got into this channel for interesting reviews. Now you are copying Marques for clout. Please don't make this a trend.