Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 85mm f/1.2 lens officially announced

Update: the lens is now available for pre-order at B&H.

The Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 85mm f/1.2 lens is now officially announced. The price is $799. Shipping will start in May, 2015. Here are the details:

Product Description:

The Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 85mm f/1.2 is a ultra-fast portrait lens that delivers unbelievable optical performance. A maximum aperture of f/1.2 makes it extremely convenient for shooting without flash in low light conditions. Designed for the use of full frame cameras, the large aperture also provides fine control over depth of field for fascinating portrait photography. The truly circular aperture creates a shallow depth-of-field that brings attention to the subject and blurs the background, which is critical for portraits. The lens incorporates 9 elements in 6 groups with 2 pieces of Extra-low Dispersion elements & 4 pieces of High Refractive Index elements. This helps reducing aberrations and maintain excellent sharpness even at f/1.2. . Manual focus design and a click-less, silent aperture ring promote smooth handling and are especially well-suited to video applications. The lens is built of metallic enclosure with additional protective processing, which gives extra durability and aesthetic.

Technical specifications:

Focal Length 85mm
Max. Aperture 1.2
Min. Aperture 16
Aperture Blades 11
Angle of view 29 degrees
Format Compatibility Full-frame
Elements/Groups 9 elements in 6 groups (2pcs of Extra-low Disperson glasses & 4pcs High refractive index glasses)
Min. Focus Distance 1 m
Filter Thread 77mm
Net Weight 921 g
Mounts Canon EF / Nikon F / Sony FE (Sony A & Pentax K mounts will be available later this year)

Mitakon lenses are now available at B&H.

This entry was posted in Mitakon and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Daedbird

    So anyone have thoughts on this compared to the Samyang 85mm?

    • Spy Black

      The Samyang is cheaper.

      Seriously tho the Samyang is an older design, it would be interesting to see if they updated it a la 135mm they just introduced, which is pretty killer.

      • Hagbard Celine

        The Samyang doesn’t have the same build quality as this lens, not to mention the Samyang even looks like a cheap turd.

        • Corbin Dallas

          Who cares how it looks when it delivers images comparable to a lens that costs 4x more…?

          • Hagbard Celine

            The main point was the the BUILD QUALITY. The cheap look was an aside comment, plus I don’t want to be using a lens that looks like a trash can in front of my clients. So, I care.

          • Spy Black

            So you suffer from an inferiority complex?

          • Hagbard Celine

            But I see you suffer from a superiority complex. You’re probably a short little prick who like to be the cool guy on the interwebs because in real life you’re a wuss.

          • Lukasz

            your behavior here perfectly fits a definition of a person with complexes

          • Hagbard Celine

            Whip out the textbook pal.

          • Spy Black

            It’s always entertaining to see someone use the small penis line, thinking it will somehow have an adverse effect on the recipient. I suppose if one has a small penis the concept would appear to make sense.

            Even more entertaining however is your perception that your client is going to call out your professionalism because you’re using a lens you perceive to be “ugly”, as if they would even have a clue.

            Yeah, no inferiority complex here…

          • Hagbard Celine

            You see how you took something out of context, tried to turn it around on me, but then you used it yourself?

            I wasn’t implying a small penis. I was implying you were small, as in short. You turning int into a small penis issue speaks volumes about you (well, actually your penis).

          • Spy Black

            Um, no, you were implying a short little prick. However your obsession with looks being more important than talent is still obvious.

          • Hagbard Celine

            Um, are you a fucking mind-reader? I know what I meant, I was inferring you were short, and and a fucking prick to boot. Point proven. We all know you have a tiny dick now because you admitted by being so sensitive about it.

          • Corbin Dallas

            Have you ever actually used a Samyang lens? Their built every bit as solidly as any modern lens, more so in fact if anything. The only part of them I’d ever describe as “cheap” is the hood, which is super light and it works, so I really don’t care.

            I’d be willing to bet a large sum of money that 9/10 “clients” wouldn’t know the difference between a Samyang, Canon L or Zeiss Otis.

          • Hagbard Celine

            I don’t use cheap slave labor made Chinese lenses, but I have picked them and handled them. They are indeed cheap feeling and trust me, most people photographers or not, can spot cheaply made products.

          • Corbin Dallas

            Samyang lenses are made in Korea.

            Your ignorance and adolescent remarks speak volumes of your character.

            You have my pity.

          • Adam Atkinson

            I’ve shot with them. They produce great images. The build quality is fine if you’re using them as a hobbyist, or for studio use. For regular use on events and weddings they seem to last about a year before getting junky.

          • Corbin Dallas

            Maybe I’ve just gotten really good copies, or you’ve gotten really bad ones… I’ve been using my 85mm for over a year regularly and the only change it’s had since new is that it’s a little easier to focus now (it was really firm when new).

            I also had their 8mm for over a year and it never gave me any issues either.

          • Adam Atkinson

            Fair enough. I love the 85 cine lens. And for the price it’s exceptional. You could literally buy one a year for over a decade until you’ve spent as much on Canon’s counterpart.

          • Lukasz

            You do not know what you are talking about, I doubt you ever had Samyang in your hand…

          • Hagbard Celine

            Sorry to offend your cheap lens.

          • Lukasz

            Are you twelve or something? Sad to read your silly comments…

          • Hagbard Celine

            I’m not the one defending an inanimate object here. You are. It’s the “my cheap toy is just as good” argument little kids have. So, are YOU 12?

            I can’t state my opinion that a lens looks cheap?

          • CERO

            you’re not stating your opinion, you’re pushing your “opinion” as “facts” and down everyone’s throat.
            I recommend you sit back for a few minutes and reread your ridiculous line of arguments.

            If you weren’t a normal poster in these rumor sites of photography, you would already be labelled as a classless troll.

          • Hagbard Celine

            I don’t care if some dummies on the internet label me as a classless troll.

            How am I “jamming it down your throat?” You’re the one interacting with my opinion. You’re jamming it down your own throat. Ignore it if you don’t like it.

          • CERO

            boy, you sure have issues.

  • saywhatuwill

    Everytime I see that name Speedmaster I think of this:

  • Spy Black

    For 8 clams, that better rock.

    • Greentablet

      Well, this is it.

      I’m all for 3rd party gear. My Sigma and Zeiss stuff is great.
      I happen to shoot Nikon and if my 85 1.4D dies, from what I read the 1.8G takes an awful lot to beat it and is only $500. The extra 1.5 stops is very interesting, but I’m not sure I can manual focus 85mm at f/1.2 anyway.

  • eman akcip

    Meanwhile.. the nikon F lens team is scratching their heads on some day making a 85/1.2 like Canon did decades ago. Hope they copy Zhongyi. how’s that for irony?

    • Hagbard Celine

      Not sure how you consider it ironic because it’s simply your personal speculation on what the Nikon designers are thinking.

      So, how’s that for irony? It’s not irony at all.

      Not to mention Nikon wouldn’t put out a MF 85 anyway (if they did the jerks over here would scream “retro hipster” for years). Also Canon has a larger lens mount which allows them to make an 85 f/1.2 AF lens.

      You should think about things before you post. Or at least do some research.

      • alreadyupsidedown

        The size of Nikon’s mount has nothing to do with them being able to produce an f1.2 lens, either 50mm or 85mm, with autofocus or without. This is a very common misconception. If you look at rear of any fast lens, you will see the rear element stretches right to the mount, and no autofocus components occupy that space. Even older screw drive lenses only have a drive shaft running through the mount plate it’s self. The auto focus gears or hypersonic motor simply sit on the outside of the moving element, and do not encroach on any part of the optical design. The addition of AF only adds additional bulk to the outside of the lens barrel.

        The real reason Nikon doesn’t have an 85mm f1.2, is because they feel their 85mm f1.4D and f1.4G are more than good enough. The 85mm 1.4G is a fantastic lens, capable of creating wonderful images.

        Also I haven’t been on Photo Rumours in ages, just started paying attention again a few weeks ago. I can’t help noticing your snarky comments correcting people in nearly every thread. Also, almost every one of your comments mentions ‘people hating hipsters’. I think you’re vastly overestimating this ‘anti-hipster sentiment’. As a self identifying hipster, I don’t think we need your support. Can you just like… Relax? We all play for the same team… Photography isn’t some sort of competition. We’re all commenting on Photo Rumours because we like photography, not to ‘battle’ each other. There’s nothing to win here.

        • Hagbard Celine

          It’s not the length of of the rear element, it’s the diameter of the opening. Nikon’s F mount lens opening is 44mm with a 46.5mm flange to focal plane length. Canon’s EF mount opening diameter is 54mm and the flange to focal plane is 44mm. The size of the rear element of an 85mm f/1.2 is the factor that precludes them from making a true 85mm f/1.2. Obviously it can and has been done with a 50-58mm lens because they have and still do produce an f/1.2 lens.

          I’ll be willing to bet testing shows that this f/1.2 lens doesn’t have a t/1.2 because of the smaller size of the rear element to make it fit into the F mount. The Chinese know that it well sell to dumb Americans just because of the number even if they fudge it a little.

          It’s not argument, it’s physics. Just pointing out mistakes. Like yours.

          Also, I’m not here to “support” hipsters. I just hate the fact the “photographers” on here use that word as a pejorative to discredit anything they don’t like. And self-identifying as a hipster is about as un-hipster as you can get.

          • Corbin Dallas

            You have to be the biggest tool I’ve seen on the internet in a good while… and that’s truly saying something.

            You do realize Nikon still manufactures a 50mm f1.2 for f-mount, right? You can buy it today and use it on any Nikon DSLR.

            Literally every post you’ve made on this page has made you look like an idiot and worse, a d-bag, so please, just stop…

          • Hagbard Celine

            You fuckwit. READ before you post.

            I said that Nikon has and still does make 50mm f/1.2 lenses.

            It’s the 85mm f/1.2 they can’t make you stupid twat.

            Again RE-READ what I posted. Who’s the idiot now? Yep it’s you because you spout off shit before you bother reading what I wrote, which was correct.

          • Kr en MuLc

            Hagbard Celine, how do you explain this vintage camera-lens combination.


            As far as i have checked its mount is really close to Nikon F-mount and it has aperture of f0.33. I had this type of conversation month ago with one guy that claimed the same. I did quiet big research to found out some optical truths:

            – the front element is responsible for gathering light, not rear (seems logical)

            – physical size of aperture can be smaller than calculated one

            – rear elements of the lens are there to remove optical lens imperfections (fringing, difraction,…)

            – smaller rear opening does not mean you can not make fast aperture lenses, it just makes the design more complex

            This is what i know about this topic, you can interpret it as you wish.

          • Hagbard Celine

            Haha. Did you READ the article? I’ll kick down the highlights for ya dummy.

            “…you won’t find any sample photographs captured with this lens. Why? Because the lens was never designed for real world use, and was never functional.”

            “Zeiss Ikon public relations guru Herr Wolf Wehran decided that he wanted to draw attention to his phenomenon by creating a product poking fun at the fast glass fad.”

            “Prior to Photokina in 1966, Wehran visited a buddy of his in the Zeiss lens design department. The two found an old condenser lens sitting around, and used it to create a Contarex-mount “frankenlens” using various found pieces. Along the way, they arbitrarily decided that their lens would have a focal length of 40mm and a maximum aperture of f/0.33.”

            “The lens was given the name “Super-Q-Gigantar.” The “Q” stands for “Quatsch,” which translates to “nonsense” in German.

            And that’s how the “fastest lens ever made” came to be.”

            It was a fucking JOKE you dipshit. The lens can’t and doesn’t work. It’s not REAL.

            That makes all of your supposed “research” unreliable. If you ACTUALLY researched you wouldn’t have linked to a fucking Petapixel article about a fake lens. You would have linked to REAL research.

            Now go back to shooting your momtographer type boheh photos.

          • Corbin Dallas

            Unbelievable. What are you, 12? Your parents would be ashamed of you for using that language, they might even take your Internet privileges.

            I like how your last juvenile rebuttal got removed and yet you still didn’t get the picture and had to come get another word in. How have you not been banned?

          • Hagbard Celine

            Ignore the fact that I’m RIGHT and criticize me for my language. Classic deflection technique.

            This coming from an internet tough guy who called me an “idiot” and a “d-bag”.

            “d-bag” what are YOU 12? Who says that anymore? You’re like some sort of bro-dude.

          • Corbin Dallas

            You mad bro?

          • Hagbard Celine

            Nope, but apparently YOU are because you keep coming back for more. You should stop. You look like a complete idiot now.

            “You mad bro”? Another classic bro-dude thing to say. Don’t you have to go take some mirror selfies of you flexing for your tinder profile or something? You should go do that.

          • Corbin Dallas

            Cool story bro, tell it again. 😉

          • Hagbard Celine

            I’ll let you have the last word. Apparently you need to show your internet friends how big your dick is.

          • Corbin Dallas

            Yup, that’s totally what it is, I’m having such a revelation right now.

          • Hagbard Celine

            Hey dummy. Go back and read my post again. Pay special attention to the part that says: “The size of the rear element of an 85mm f/1.2 is the factor that precludes them from making a true 85mm f/1.2. Obviously it can and has been done with a 50-58mm lens because they have and still do produce an f/1.2 lens.”

            So you, being a moron, tried to prove me wrong by pointing out the 50mm f/1.2 lens which I already pointed out in the first place.

            READ before you post ass-hat.

      • eman akcip

        You don’t know how the canon 85 1.2 works. likely never will no matter how much you research

        • Hagbard Celine

          I have a good idea how lenses work. I’m not the one posting links to joke posts and thinking that they are factual.

          • Kr en MuLc

            Reply to Hagbard’s: “Haha. Did you READ the article? I’ll kick down the highlights for ya dummy.”

            Well usually i would not reply to person behaving like you, but let’s just say i am answering also to other people in doubts.

            This f0.33 lens was experimental lens, made only for showing people like Hagbard that it is physicaly possible to achieve great f numbers even on smaller than Canon mounts but still film format 36×24. Because there is a another physical law/limitation at f0.5 this means this lens actually just captures a lot of light but doesnt render image. Eiffel tower was also experimental building made for Paris expo just to educate people that higher buildings are possible. This lens is built on same principle, to show that lens like this is not impossible.

            I also read about other ultrafast lenses and found some interviews with lensmakers, but i dont have the time to search for those articles for you Hagbard. You are young, you still have many years ahead and time to educate yourself about lenses.

          • Hagbard Celine

            Boy, now I’m not sure who’s dumber, you or the original dummy that posted the petapixel article.

            It wasn’t an “experiment”. It wasn’t even a real working lens. They just threw some shit together they found lying around.

            “Zeiss Ikon public relations guru Herr Wolf Wehran decided that he wanted to draw attention to his phenomenon by creating a product poking fun at the fast glass fad.”

            Read that last part. Read it again. And again. Now read it another time. THEY WERE MAKING FUN OF PEOPLE TRYING TO GET THE FASTEST LENS POSSIBLE. Get it?

            How do you know how old I am? I’m not young. I know more about lenses than any of you dumb-asses on here. You don’t even bother to thoroughly read things before you post responses.

            And if you want to make a point, but don’t want to show the proof, then why bother? You dumb fuck.

  • Lcky

    11 Blades, No clicks. F1.2 – I will buy every FF Speedmaster focal length they make.

  • The only REAL speedmaster:

    Mooneyes FTW

  • andy kahl

    is there a reason they no makey for teh Leica?

    If it’s full frame on Nikon wouldn’t that give enough sensor coverage or am I missing something? Seems like they would have a gold mine on their hands if they could sort that out.

  • johnny

    I have this lens. It has better resolution than Leica R80/1.4 and less CA than Canon 85L. It’s sold for $670 in China. Samyang has better value for half of the price, but Mitakon is 1/3 stop faster.

  • Back to top