Up next in 10
SainSonic Kamlan 50mm f/1.1 | Image Quality and Review | 4K
12K views
Jul 25, 2023
SainSonic Kamlan 50mm f/1.1 | Image Quality and Bokeh Examination and Review | Photographer Dustin Abbott breaks down the image quality and bokeh from the Kamlan 50mm f/1.1 for mirrorless in detail and gives tips for maximizing performance. he gives his final verdict on the lens as well. Read the written review: http://bit.ly/kamlan5011 | See more photos here: http://bit.ly/kamlan50IG | Purchase the Lens: Amazon: http://amzn.to/2zCZVbG | Amazon Canada: http://amzn.to/2i36jln | Amazon UK: http://amzn.to/2zvwfhK | Ebay: http://bit.ly/kamlan | From SainSonic: http://bit.ly/2yjZbLx) Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at: B&H Photo: http://bhpho.to/1TA0Xge Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/shop/dustinabbott Ebay: http://bit.ly/DustineBay Make a donation via Paypal: paypal.me/dustinTWI Get a discount off all Skylum Editing Software (Luminar, Aurora HDR, AirMagic) by using code DUSTINHDR at checkout: http://bit.ly/LuminarDLA Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/dustinabbott | Check me out on: Personal Website: http://dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: http://bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: http://bit.ly/DLAinsta | Google+: http://bit.ly/24PjMzv | Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1nuUUeH | Twitter: http://bit.ly/1RyYxIH | Flickr: http://bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: http://bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu My filming setup: Sony a7R III: B&H Photo: https://bhpho.to/2D6ibNO or Amazon: http://amzn.to/2CNxOvH | or | Sony a9 @ B&H Photo: https://bhpho.to/2HyWIyt or Amazon: https://amzn.to/2s1vYE0 Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD @B&H Photo: https://bhpho.to/2FA00la or Amazon https://amzn.to/2G2kaEr Lights: Rotolight AEOS @B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/2IK7mqV | Genaray Contender @B&H Photo: https://bhpho.to/33HbGNM | and Aputure AL-MW: https://bhpho.to/2N3MtZV DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Keywords: KamLan 50mm f/1.1, KamLan 50mm f/1.1 Review, Kamlan 50mm f1.1, KamLan 50mm f1.1 Review, KamLan, 50mm, f/1.1, Sainsonic, Dustin Abbott, Sainsonic KamLan 50mm f/1.1, APS-C, Sony E, Fuji X, Canon EF-M, M43, Sony a6500, Kamlan f1.1, KamLan f1.1 Video, kamlan 1.1, kamlan f1.1 low light,
View Video Transcript
0:00
Hi, I'm Dustin Abbott, and I'm here to give you a closer look at the image quality from the little Camlan, 50 millimeter
0:14
This is an F1.1 lens, and so it has a huge maximum aperture, and even better, it has a very low price tag of only around 169 U.S. dollars
0:27
And so today we're going to take a closer look at the image quality it's able to produce
0:31
I'm also going to give you a few tips on how to use it to its potential
0:36
and also to give you a final verdict on the lens. So the first thing, of course, we've already taken a look at the build quality and the handling of it
0:44
And if you want to take a look at this episode here, you can see more information about that
0:49
But overall, it actually has a really nice build quality. It has a really nice manual focus ring that moves just as it should
0:57
On my copy, I find the aperture ring is a little tighter in what I would like, but it has loosened up some
1:03
The lens would itself can sometimes also be a little bit stiff because it doesn't really have a definite click at its final point of travel
1:14
And so as a result, it kind of will stick there a little bit. And as you can see right now, I'm having some trouble breaking it free
1:20
And so anyway, that's just something to look for. But overall, I mean, for the money you're paying, this is a beautiful
1:27
built little lens. More importantly I know for many of you is you want to know about the image
1:33
quality. You also want to know about the boca quality. And so we're going to take a look at some
1:37
images and make some determinations. I'm going to compare it to one of my vintage lenses that I
1:43
think is maybe an appropriate benchmark. And so we'll jump in and we'll take a look at some of these
1:48
images together. I'll say first of all that doing these kinds of carrot comparisons is somewhat
1:53
difficult, particularly when you're dealing with lenses that don't have any kind of electronics
1:59
And so you're left to kind of guess at the aperture values and, you know, all of those type
2:03
things. But in this case, also finding, obviously, a fair comparison point. And so what I've elected
2:10
to do is to use one of my favorite vintage, wide angle lens or wide aperture lenses, the SMC
2:16
Tacumar 50 millimeter F1.4 lens. And so it, I think it should be a pretty fair point of
2:23
comparison or a frame of reference. So on the left we have the Camlan on the right
2:28
we have the Takumar and so if we look at the center of the frame obviously even with
2:35
the same white balance set you get a little bit different rendering a little bit
2:39
warmer color rendering from the Takumar and a little bit cooler from the Camlan
2:46
lens which is here on the left the center of the frame you can definitely see
2:50
you know traces of some kind of softness haze from both lenses and I can also see of course that this is letting in more light and as you would expect
3:01
looking up towards this corner here you know definitely there is some vignette affecting both
3:06
lenses and you can see the evidence of that all around it seems like it's a little bit heavier
3:11
on the cam land lens than the takumar right out towards the very edge of the frame we see that
3:18
the it's very very soft on the cam land it's not necessarily amazing on the tachymar
3:23
either, but it's definitely sharper and with more contrast than with the Camlan wide open
3:31
But at the same time, you do have a range here in the center where you do have some usable
3:37
sharpness, you know, you just have to deal with some chromatic aberration as a part of it
3:42
So if we stop down to around F2 here now, and remember, that's very approximate on the Camlan
3:47
lens. There are no fixed apertures, so I'm getting it as close as possible, but don't read too much
3:52
into light transmission figures here because there are no hard preset aperture stops and so you're
3:59
just trying to approximate that we can see now however that the camelan has definitely shown some
4:04
improvement in sharpness here and in the center of the frame it's looking pretty decent here around
4:11
f2 and if we go out towards the edge of the frame however we see that it's still pretty soft towards
4:16
the edge more chromatic aberration and just not a lot of detail definitely getting a better
4:22
edge performance from the old Takumar lens. So now stop down to around F4 and we're going
4:28
to see that here we've got definitely more contrast, less chromatic aberration on the
4:34
Takumar lens. However both lenses look pretty good in terms of detail rendering
4:39
Let's check out the sides and here we see that while the Takumar is now sharp right
4:44
out to the edge, the Kamlan edge performance it never really sharpens up and
4:49
there's some kind of a stretching type distortion that takes takes place there, an aberration that is going to really not produce edge sharpness
4:58
And so if you're looking for a lens that's going to give you edge sharpness, even stop
5:02
down, this is not the lens for that. So if we step back to a medium distance here, we see that while there's definitely traces
5:10
of that chromatic aberration, wide open, the Camlan lens is actually held up a little bit
5:15
better here in the center, a little bit better contrast. Out towards the edge of the frame, both lenses are looking pretty soft
5:22
There are not a lot of image quality to speak of at wide open apertures Now stopping down a bit you note that both lenses are stopped down some and yet we still up against the shutter limits and so that is negatively impacting
5:35
image quality and bright conditions. However, we see here that at F2, there's been a significant
5:43
improvement in the Takumar lens, much better sharpness and contrast in the center, less of an
5:50
improvement on the Camlan lens. However, here at medium distance in the corner
5:55
While there is some improvement on the Takumar, neither one of them are really all then impressive
6:00
out towards the edge of the frame, and that's true on either side
6:04
although the Takumar does look a little bit better. Now at F2.8 in the center
6:09
both lenses show a pretty significant improvement there, and both of them, frankly, look pretty good
6:14
here at the center of the frame. That's a nice amount of detail. Here's the very center of the frame
6:19
looks pretty good on the Camlam, but all it takes is a little bit of a shift off center
6:24
And you see image quality really to erode, whereas the Takimar lens is holding onto it a little bit further out
6:30
And so here you see, you know, towards edge of the frame, it's quite soft, while the
6:35
Takumar is looking better here for sure. And so edge sharpness, once again, is not a
6:42
strength at all for the Kamlan lens. Now stop down to the F4 range. You can see that once
6:50
again, center looks really, really good on both these lenses, and that's particularly true
6:55
here on the Takumar lens. Corner sharpness is finally starting to improve
7:01
a little bit on the Camlan, but definitely here towards the edge of the frame
7:06
you can see that the Takumar is the by far the strongest
7:10
So if we move off center a little bit, moving this direction, we see the image quality here
7:14
is breaking down on the Camlan lens, whereas the Takumar is looking pretty strong
7:21
by comparison out towards the edge. So we can see even at FMA
7:25
the extreme corners never actually sharpen up on the Cam Land lens and so that's just not
7:31
where its strength lies. You know the Takumar at this stage looks really good, edge to edge, but extreme edges just never
7:40
fully sharpened up on the Camlan lens. That's just not what it's designed for
7:46
And so we'll take a little closer look now what it is designed for. So left we have the Camlan lens on the right we have the Takumar
7:53
And so first thing you can see of course is that. because of that larger maximum aperture
7:58
boca circles are much bigger, which means that it's able to produce more boca
8:04
due to the wider maximum aperture than the Takumar lens. Looking towards the circles themselves
8:11
we see I've always been impressed by the performance here from the Takumar
8:14
It has a very, very clean inner circle, and it has very good real-world boca as a result of that
8:21
Yes, there are a few bits of dust in there. The lens is 40 years old, give it a break
8:25
But as we look at the Cam Land, this is a really impressive performance here
8:30
That's a huge Boka circle and it's really soft. Not a lot of busyness there
8:35
Inner line is not strongly defined. And looking at the image as a whole, while yes, there is some, you know
8:41
kind of deforming of boca circles and a little bit of that cat eye shape
8:45
it's actually really, you know, minute compared to what a lot of lenses do in the situation
8:52
So if we can compare both lenses at F1. point or excuse me F2 here what we're going to find is that we have a much more even performance
9:02
here from the the Camlan lens and it has three more aperture blades but the result of that is that
9:10
the aperture stays really nice and circular compared to that of the Takumar if we stop down further
9:16
that becomes even more obvious here and we still have a nice circular shape on the aperture blades
9:23
from the Camlan and compare that to the that of the tachymar which you know definitely has the the shape starting at octagonal shape that's
9:32
starting to become quite strong whereas here we have a nice even performance there across the frame
9:37
even stop down here to f4 you note that the boca circles are still you know nice and circular
9:43
no hesitation about those whereas on the when it comes to the actual tachymar we see that the
9:49
shape is very strongly octagonal at this point and and so just not nearly as
9:55
kind of desirable a look. If we look at our point of focus here on this pretty little
10:01
Milvis lens, we do find that actually in this case I would say that there's more sharpness
10:08
also coming from the Camlan lens and a little bit better contrast. And that does illustrate
10:13
a point that I want to make next. Now put in the wrong situation, the Camland lens really
10:19
struggles in real world images. You know, for example, here where we have a brighter scene, we're
10:25
going to see that the issues with chromatic aberration and while there's you know there's some
10:31
sharpness here in the center enough to see that you know it's accurately focused we can see that
10:36
it just does not handle you know this this scene right here very well at all unless you see some
10:43
artistic you know kind of painterly value to that it's you know it has very little image quality
10:48
to speak of around the edges of the frame and you know definitely a struggle with contrast in this kind of
10:54
brighter higher contrast situation Likewise here even stopped down a bit the fact that it stopped down to I think around F4 In the center of the frame a sharpness is pretty decent here However if we look
11:10
towards the edge of the frame, we can definitely see an erosion of the image quality, and definitely
11:14
we can see the extreme corners are smeared, just like we saw in our kind of staged test there
11:21
And you can definitely see some fringing that becomes more pronounced towards the edge of the frame
11:26
And so it's probably never a fantastic landscape lens as a result
11:31
Another issue in brighter sunlight is the fact that the lens definitely is flare prone
11:36
which of course is not at all unusual for a really wide aperture lens
11:41
And so here we can see that it doesn't necessarily like these high contrast areas
11:47
between the chromatic aberration and the flare. Boca quality of course is nice here, but the flare pattern is pretty pronounced
11:55
Once again, conversely, if you use the lens to kind of to its benefit, here I've stopped down to around F11
12:02
and while there is a little bit of a ghosting pattern here, we can see that actually, although the 11-bladed
12:10
aperture produces a somewhat, maybe odd sun star, it looks okay there, and contrast is held up okay in the scene
12:18
And so just be careful the way that you actually position the sun in the frame
12:22
knowing that number one, the lens doesn't like very high contrast situations at wide aperture
12:27
and then secondly, it is flare prone if you're not careful. Now, if you use the lens to its strength, here even at F1.1
12:34
and this is more of an interior shot, as you can tell, that while, you know, at a pixel level
12:41
it's still not super sharp. But if you look at the image as a whole, and this may also appeal to those that are interested
12:47
and maybe using it for some video work. The actual look in terms of the color rendition
12:52
and the general aesthetic of the image itself is actually quite good
12:58
And I like the image. I like what it's done here. And without the super high contrast areas of outdoors
13:04
in the middle of the day, it's able to render this scene a lot better. And likewise, if I change the point of focus
13:11
towards infinity, yes, there is some, you know, there's some softness that is here
13:16
However, you can see that there is detail that's there and towards the edge of the frame
13:22
you know, it does start to drop off. But once again, at the same time, there's a look to the image that I think will appeal to some people
13:30
Now here on a kind of a dimmer, less bright day, I was able to produce a stop down a more decent landscape image
13:38
right towards the edge of the frame. It goes a little bit soft, but not too bad here in the center
13:43
and then in the actual center of the frame, you know, it looks fine, not like amazing
13:50
but it looks fine. And the look of the image as a whole is nice
13:54
Here is another. And here, again, without, you know, too contrasty a scene, it allows the lens to produce better contrast
14:02
And as a result, it looks sharper. There's more apparent resolution. And the image itself, I think, looks good
14:09
Here, of course, is where the real strength of the lens is. If you're going to use it at wide apertures, use it to produce Boka
14:16
And it really shines doing that. So once again, if you're a pixel peeper, this lens is not necessarily for you
14:24
At a pixel level, as you can see, there's some chromatic aberration, there's some general haze from a lack of contrast
14:31
But if you look at the image collectively, it looks fantastic, particularly that beautiful transition to a complete defocus
14:39
Beyond here is a driveway. I just shot this leaf on a concrete driveway
14:44
So all of that is just more driveway, but it completely blurs away with this kind of shot
14:49
And so it produces a great looking result. Likewise here, I'm shooting, and again, at a pixel level
14:57
this isn't terrible. It's not fantastic, but there's enough detail there to make it credible
15:02
and to give it a little bit of three-dimensional quality. But as you can see, the actual defocused area
15:08
which could be busy on a, you know, know a lesser lens in terms of a boca producer, it actually looks really soft and nice. And so
15:16
remembering that this is a lens that cost $169, that is some gorgeous boca to be produced from such
15:24
an inexpensive optic. And again here, if I'm using the lens in a lower contrast situation
15:31
shooting indoors, this result is really not bad here. And if you look at it globally
15:37
you can see that nice melting away to defocus, which is really really
15:40
nice. Likewise here it's more about kind of the feel of the image and you can see that the
15:46
the defocused area is really quite beautiful. Now I've noted that the lens doesn't have great
15:52
contrast but if you shoot it in lower contrast scenes it actually produces some you know
15:58
nicer looking color and contrast and so here that looks quite good and you've got you
16:04
know a little bit of busyness in this defocused area at a certain range the boca can get a
16:09
a little bit funky, get it compared to this side, where it's softer here compared to here
16:16
But, you know, overall, that's a nice looking image and shot very close to a, you know
16:22
it a very wide aperture there but producing a nice result This image here I think is you know one of my favorites in terms of demonstrating what the lens can do in the best kind of situation This is somewhere around 1 just the slightest bit of closing the aperture But look at
16:38
there's four pumpkins beyond this. Look how completely they have melted away. Very nice
16:44
very great quality of boca there. And the color rendition here is good. And in a low contrast situation
16:51
kind of an overcast day, this is just shot on kind of our doorstep area. You can
16:56
see that it's actually produced very nice contrast, bite, and an excellent rendering to this
17:02
image as a whole. And, you know, in the plane of focus, the detail is not too shabby, not exceptional
17:09
but not bad. And if you look at the image globally, it actually looks quite excellent. So word to the
17:15
wise, use this lens to its strength, learn how to use it, and you will get better images out of it
17:20
So as you can see, this lens, it definitely has some weaknesses along with some strengths
17:27
in terms of its weaknesses. It really is not critically sharp. I wouldn't call it critically
17:33
sharp at any aperture, but that's particularly true in the corners. And at wider apertures
17:39
there's kind of a sweet spot of sharpness towards the center of the frame. But as you move
17:43
away from the center, the sharpness quickly deteriorates. And so because of that, you're going to be
17:49
want to be careful in the way that you compose using this lens. In other words, if you put your
17:53
subject towards the edge of the frame, don't look for a lot of sharpness there at wide apertures
17:59
The upside, of course, is that at wide apertures, really at most apertures, the boca quality is quite
18:05
good. There are a few distances in ratios between your subject and the background, where the
18:11
background quality of the boca can get a little bit busy, perhaps, but for the most part, it
18:18
produces a lot of very soft, very cream of boca. And so if you're more interested in images that kind of
18:26
you're looking at the look of the images, maybe the story that the image might tell more so than
18:32
trying to shoot test charts or trying to demonstrate how sharp your equipment is, if you're wanting
18:39
to show off sharpness, this is not the lens for you. But if you're more of a creative type
18:44
who wants images that are a little bit more of storytelling. Maybe you kind of like the more dreamy quality
18:50
that less contrast, a little bit more haze produces. This could be a lens for you
18:57
Be careful, as we noted, in the kind of light conditions that you use. If you're wanting it to have, you know
19:03
good color saturation and contrast, because it's best used indoors or in kind of more muted lighting conditions
19:13
overcast, that kind of thing. You're going to get a more diffused light that it does better with
19:19
In high contrast situations, it's not going to perform all that fantastic for you
19:24
So just kind of be aware of the limitations. The thing is, is that there's really no other lens that you can get this kind of aperture in
19:32
at such a low price. And so you're going to have to kind of live with some of the compromises that come with it
19:37
And so, again, if you'll use it to its strengths, it can produce some beautiful images
19:41
And here are a few that I've taken with the lens. And of course, you can look in the description down below
19:49
You can see even more images at the image gallery that I've been producing there
19:54
And so bottom line is that this lens is a budget lens
19:58
And, you know, you're reminded of that as you look at its absolute sharpness
20:04
At the same time, I've shot a lens that is very similar to this, that is not at all a budget lens
20:10
and that is Canon's own EF 50mm F1.0 L-Series lens. That's an auto-focusing lens
20:18
It's not manufactured anymore. It's rare and it's very expensive. Most used copies are going for north of $4,000 U.S. dollars
20:27
But, you know, of all the lenses that I have used, this lens actually reminded me of that lens the most
20:34
in that it has the ability to produce really huge amounts of background blur, used in the right kind of lighting conditions, say, you know, restaurant
20:45
lighting conditions, it produces really nice looking images. But if you try to use it kind of as a
20:51
general purpose, traditional lens, you're probably not going to be all that satisfied with it
20:56
because the image quality is not all that fantastic, a lot like this lens right here
21:01
But for producing unique images, the 1.0 from Canon, it certainly could do that. And at a much
21:08
cheaper price if you've got a mirrorless body either from Sony or a Canon M system or a Fuji X mount or
21:17
even a micro four-thirds this lens is going to provide a lot of fun of playing around with it at a
21:23
pretty low entry price you can find some links at some places to purchase it when I launched my
21:31
image gallery to begin with almost everywhere we're sold out at that point fortunately it is back in
21:36
stock right now. And so if you want to order one for yourself, you can jump into those links
21:41
and order one there. I'm Dustin Abbott, and if you haven't already, you can follow me on social
21:46
media. You can become one of my patrons. And of course, if you haven't already, please click
21:50
that subscribe button. Thanks for watching. Have a great day
#Camera & Photo Equipment
#Online Media
#Photographic & Digital Arts