I should have mentioned it's perfect place is on a tripod. Great point Nicholas!!! 👍

Loyal audience of your channel! @pal2tech Love your reviews! I have this TTArtisan lens for my Sony camera. It's very useful. To be honest, it's really not sharp enough at 0.95 for sharpness lovers, but considering it could cover both full-frame and APS-C frame at this cheap price. What else I can expect! It becomes my 2022 lens!

Thanks Florian!!! I'll be in/out on discord throughout if you want to connect. Hope you're doing well buddy!!! 👍

I have video planned on this. It's a fairly large topic, and will require a few as in a series I'm thinking.

@@pal2tech A whole series would be awesome!

Wanted it for my xs10, cannot wait

The RRP on the 7artisans 50mm F0.95 is $236 not sure where you get the impression this is "much less money" than $228 but it's not, it's $8 more. And performance-wise, I can tell you (as I have both) they are almost identical. And the lens is not "insanely" soft, it's got a very narrow focal plane at F0.95 as all F0.95 lenses have. This is not "soft", it's completely sharp within the focal plane but if your corners aren't in line with your subject's eyes? Then, they aren't going to be in focus.

@@NickBarang I do apologise for the mix up with the 7artisans pricing. It can be found for about 30% cheaper in the UK if you look around but I'll admit I had my pricing off. I suspect sample variation is an issue. Pal2Tech's testing here suggests it's very soft indeed below f2.8. I've seen similar results from the 7artisans. The plane of focus is narrow but let's not pretend It's so narrow that it makes it particularly hard to evaluate sharpness. It's about the same as a 50mm f1.4 on a FF system. I think one of the biggest issues is that the these 0.95 lenses make a lot of sacrifices. They are certainly significantly less sharp than say the 50mm 1.2 from ttartisans (which is a lot cheaper). They don't offer much if any light gathering advantages, as they have pretty average true light transmission. So they are pretty much purely designed for a "dreamy look". Which could be replicated by using a filter. I still stand by the recommendation of the ttartisans 50mm 1.2 over this lens. It's a lot sharper, cheaper, just about as well built, smaller, lighter... and the DoF is not that different in real world use.

@@SuttonBen Pal2Tech's testing is, quite literally, out of focus (as others have pointed out too). You can't determine an image is "soft" unless it's in focus. I also have the 50mm 1.2 from TTartisan (in fact, I have all the TTartisan lenses and most 7artisans too), as I collect lenses, the 50mm 0.95 is a far better lens. It's a studio portrait lens. Which if properly mounted on a tripod and kept parallel to the subject delivers exceptional results for $230. And it balances the XT-4 better than the F1.2 and when cranked up to F8, it's superb for street work.

Nope, they are two different companies is my understanding. Some will argue that 7artisans is better.

It's to do with the "optical formula" of a lens design, separate from whether the focus group is moved by a force from a motor or by hand.

7artisan doesn't have 'click aperture' when you rotate your aperture, and it got me pissed sometimes, it changes unintentionally. But this TTArtisan does have that clicky aperture, and i do prefer TTArtisan

Yes, for sure but you need to be VERY CAREFUL in low light as it will be harder to see your DOF and easier to misjudge the focus.

Half a stop difference.

Waaaaaaayyyyyyy better :)

Haven't reviewed that one yet. Just the 35mm, which I liked.

@@pal2tech i had the TTartisans 35mm 1.4 too. It was sharp and had warm look to it. Really enjoyed using it. Unfortunately i sold it and bought the XC 35mm f2. Planning to buy the TTartisans 35mm again and also the 17mm soon.