Had mine for a few weeks now and very happy with it so far. Easily recommendable if you're into manually focusing and works very well adapted to Sony bodies.
USD 600 + adapter gets close to the 850 usd where the Sony 90mm macro with AF and Stabilization hovers around... There is also the Sigma 150mm macro with AF and stabilized for around 600...
I have been eyeing this lens and your review on the 15mm helped with my decision to purchase it and pricing was a big part with it coming in at under $ 500.00 and agree the build quality is above par.
The only real limitations are for things other than macro (stabilizing a longer focal length handheld and no autofocus), but I think the lens is a great value.
Thanks for the response, I will use a tripod if I do purchase the lens. I like the focus pull on it compared to the Canon 180mm. Thanks again Tom@@DustinAbbottTWI
Best reviewer on youtube. Really pleased you chose to look at this as its interested me since release. Interested to how it will compare optically with Sigma's offering which has OS.
I haven't used the Sigma, though I would be surprised to find it much stronger than this, as this lens is right up there with some of the better macro lenses I've used.
I would like to have more information for about his technical specs, for about the resolution, (lines/mm by several diafragma) depth of field, distortion, chromatic abberation (specially in the corners) etc.. If the lenshood is made of plastic or wood doesn't matter to me..
Hi there, this video is specifically about build and handling. Other video episodes cover the things you ask for (look for the image quality breakdown)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Using my 3 different macro lenses exclusively as macro lenses (hand-held) I found out that IS is counterproductive: it often screws up the picture by "freezing" it at the wrong distance.
Sir: Video covered almost everything Thanks for doing this review. I subbed. A quick question: Can I use with this lens 2X Telecoverter? Thanks in advance for your answer
Interesting lens - thanks for the introduction. Strange that it wasn't compatible with the MC-11. How about the Metabones adapter (or whatever you used instead) and is EXIF data recorded?
damn.. just bought the Tokina 100mm f/2.8.. half the price of this lens.. but i got to give the irix props.. would have bought this first.. awesome review as usual Dustin..
Have you used your Tokina much for macro, portraits, or anything else yet? Been using mine for over a year and love it and at its price not much can come close for its quality
@@KAR120C69 actually this is my third purchase of this lens.. I keep selling it and regretting it.. so just bought it for the final time.. it's going to be a permanent lens in my bag..
@@br2v Interesting (are we talking about the rather old 150mm sigma -or is there an Art 150 now -I will check). In regards of reproduction purposes I think I cannot justify other than my Voightlande APO! 60mm macro (with A7R3 and pixel-shift exposure). But I can't help wondering how they compare to the Voightlander macro 110mm...
I would be very surprised if it is much better optically, and I suspect the Irix has better bokeh. I don’t think optical performance is what would make the Sigma’s extra cost justified. What could justify it might be the OS and the AF.
@@AR-vf7vg the OS HSM, there is no ART version yet. Coatings on Sigma seems to be better as well. I took some pictures at Photokina with the Irix it has some flare though. Mechanically it was quite good. I use a Tokina ATX 90mm f2.5 (bokeh sharpness and for astro! but some purple fringe wide open) , Sigma OS HSM 105 2.8 great , Nikkor AIS 55 f3.5 (top on micro contrast) and a Sigma 180mm f3.5 APO HSM, flares as well .
I'm debating the Canon 100mm "L" vs. this this 150mm Irix ... from looking at your web page photos, it appeared Canon colors looked better in photos where you noted about bokeh.
Thank you for this first look video, can't wait to see the full review! Do you know if the Nikon version of the lens is fully compatible with the Z6 / Z7 and FTZ mount adapter? I can't find this information…
I don’t know that, but I don’t know why it wouldn’t be. All it is really doing is controlling the aperture iris and transmitting EXIF. Even a basic adapter can do that.
Hi. I’m currently using a Canon 6D for landscape- and street photography. I’m considering switching to a Sony A7RII with a Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and Zeiss 16-35mm f/4 for street- and landscape photography. Would you recommend these lenses and this camera body? I prefer the handling and design of the Canon EOS R, but the Sony A7RII will probably do me better. I’ll probably still keep my 7D Mark II, Sigma 150-600mm C and Canon 400mm f/5.6L for wildlife photography.
That sounds like a reasonable plan, though frankly if you can’t afford the a7R3, I would probably go with the a73. The third Gen of these cameras just got so much better than the first.
Dustin Abbott What’s better about the A7III over the A7RII? I only take pictures, never record. I think that the A7RII is better than the A7III for landscape- and street photography for details. But I’m not sure, as I’ve just started being rested in Sony. I heard about a 100 megapixels feature, where you combine 4 pictures? What does that exactly do, and can the A7III do that? My budget is not big enough yet for the A7RIII, and I think that the A7RII is more than enough. Just an amateur photographer, and I’m sure that you can get professional results with any of them.
I just like the handling so much better on the newer bodies, from the battery life to the focus system to the ergonomics. The a7RII has a great sensor, and maybe that’s enough for you, but the third generation Sony A7 cameras are much more complete
Dustin Abbott That’s good enough for me. Which lenses would you recommend for landscape- and steeet photography? I’m considering the Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and Zeiss 16-35mm f/4. Also considering the Sony 90mm Macro later on. Is this any better than the Canon 100mm f/2.8? And how about the Canon 16-35mm f/4 vs Zeiss 16-35mm f/4?
I asked a lot things to Samyang and a local distributer(in South Korea). Usually answers are not satisfactory, but the distributer says as far as his knowledge, there is only one manufacturer that able to produce Irix lenses. Yeah, Samyang it is. Anyway the 150mm macro is not popular and the distributer says there are only 10 each lenses for different mounts in first batch, and some lenses are still available now. Maybe Irix 150 would not be sharper than Sigma 150 os macro, but its build seems like really good.
Hmmm, that information just doesn’t have the ring of truth to me. There are far too many retailers in North America alone who show listings for this lens for there to have been only 10 produced in each mount.
"@@DustinAbbottTWI Sorry, I meant "imported"(or, how many of them left in Korea.), not produced. I was really tempted to buy this lens, but I grab a Sony 90mm macro in really good price.
IRIX should focus on designing lenses for E, RF and Z mount, these 3 mounts are in need of third party affordable lenses. Sure, this lens can be used on these 3 mounts with an adapter but C'mon, nobody like carrying adapter.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, that's exactly the reason why I want to pick this up. Because the 50mm on a Nikon D7100 is too close and gets in the way when swapping products to shoot.
First of all, my review was not done on Pentax, and Pentax represents a very, very small piece of the market that this lens is built for. Secondly, many would argue that dedicated lens stabilization is useful even when IBIS exists in camera (thus many brand new releases have lens stabilization even when most of the cameras they might be used on have camera based stabilization)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Of course your review was not done on a Pentax body, otherwise you would have known about the in-body stabilisation. I don't blame you, I'm simply pointing out the facts. You clearly refer to Pentax and the suggestion that the lens would be better if it had in built stabilisation. I simply pointed out that it doesn't need it for the Pentax variant. Market share has nothing to do with technolology. None of what you are saying detracts from the fact that you clearly didn't know that the Pentax range have in body IBIS. That's OK, I have corrected the record. The same 'many' you refer to could argue that having both in lens and in body stabilisation would result in a worse, not better outcome, as the two have no method of communication.
That’s a serious liability if you plan to do handheld work. If you want to use it off a tripod to do mostly macro, it makes more sense than the Sigma due to the focal length.
When I look for professional lens reviews I watch this channel.
I’m glad to hear that.
my G.A.S. is spiking right now... looking forward for the next part
That one is unlikely to make the GAS go away.
Add the SR all Pentax bodies come with, this looks like a winner. Nice review.
That's definitely the most interesting application.
Had mine for a few weeks now and very happy with it so far. Easily recommendable if you're into manually focusing and works very well adapted to Sony bodies.
That’s exactly right.
Yes! Wonderfull! Been searching info about this lens for a while now..
Glad to help out.
Thanks for the reviews! Definitely one of the most thorough reviewers on CZcams! Much appreciated Sir!
You're welcome!
USD 600 + adapter gets close to the 850 usd where the Sony 90mm macro with AF and Stabilization hovers around... There is also the Sigma 150mm macro with AF and stabilized for around 600...
All true.
I have been eyeing this lens and your review on the 15mm helped with my decision to purchase it and pricing was a big part with it coming in at under $ 500.00 and agree the build quality is above par.
The only real limitations are for things other than macro (stabilizing a longer focal length handheld and no autofocus), but I think the lens is a great value.
Thanks for the response, I will use a tripod if I do purchase the lens. I like the focus pull on it compared to the Canon 180mm.
Thanks again
Tom@@DustinAbbottTWI
good review～ have you adapted it on the gfx system ？ Can it cover the 4433 sensor？
Thanks! I love Irix. New subscriber.
Thanks for coming on board, Jules.
Pentax DSLR's have image stabilization.
You’re probably right. I’m not at all familiar with Pentax’s current lineup.
Best reviewer on youtube. Really pleased you chose to look at this as its interested me since release. Interested to how it will compare optically with Sigma's offering which has OS.
I haven't used the Sigma, though I would be surprised to find it much stronger than this, as this lens is right up there with some of the better macro lenses I've used.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you
I would like to have more information for about his technical specs, for about the resolution, (lines/mm by several diafragma) depth of field, distortion, chromatic abberation (specially in the corners) etc.. If the lenshood is made of plastic or wood doesn't matter to me..
Hi there, this video is specifically about build and handling. Other video episodes cover the things you ask for (look for the image quality breakdown)
That's one very nicely thought out lens..Shame It doesn't have image stabilization.
I am sure It's will produce very good photos. Thank you Dustin.
It does produce lovely photos, and I completely agree about the lack of IS.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Using my 3 different macro lenses exclusively as macro lenses (hand-held) I found out that IS is counterproductive: it often screws up the picture by "freezing" it at the wrong distance.
@@hanswi336 That's not been my experience with those that I own or have tested, but people have different experiences.
Sir: Video covered almost everything Thanks for doing this review. I subbed. A quick question: Can I use with this lens 2X Telecoverter? Thanks in advance for your answer
Hi Daniel, thanks for the sub. Irix makes no mention of TC's, and my Canon 1.4x doesn't fit. There's not enough depth in the back of the lens.
Ineresting/surprising to see a manual focus macro lens made primarily for DSLR brands. (with no focus peaking).
That’s true, and unfortunately it is really the only true Achilles heel for the lens.
Hey, take the D850 :)
@@JuVPower if you pay it for me....
Interesting lens - thanks for the introduction. Strange that it wasn't compatible with the MC-11. How about the Metabones adapter (or whatever you used instead) and is EXIF data recorded?
I used the Vello adapter, and yes, EXIF data is recorded
damn.. just bought the Tokina 100mm f/2.8.. half the price of this lens.. but i got to give the irix props.. would have bought this first.. awesome review as usual Dustin..
Have you used your Tokina much for macro, portraits, or anything else yet? Been using mine for over a year and love it and at its price not much can come close for its quality
@@KAR120C69 actually this is my third purchase of this lens.. I keep selling it and regretting it.. so just bought it for the final time.. it's going to be a permanent lens in my bag..
Yes, this is really quite a beautiful lens for a very reasonable price. It’s limitations are for non-macro work (non-tripod work).
Thanks for the great video ! Was considering this and the Sigma 150mm APO OS HSM. Looks like this lens is value for money....
Lenstip tested both, and considers the Sigma the better option, not only specs like AF and OS but also optically
@@br2v Interesting (are we talking about the rather old 150mm sigma -or is there an Art 150 now -I will check).
In regards of reproduction purposes I think I cannot justify other than my Voightlande APO! 60mm macro (with A7R3 and pixel-shift exposure). But I can't help wondering how they compare to the Voightlander macro 110mm...
I would be very surprised if it is much better optically, and I suspect the Irix has better bokeh. I don’t think optical performance is what would make the Sigma’s extra cost justified. What could justify it might be the OS and the AF.
@@AR-vf7vg the OS HSM, there is no ART version yet. Coatings on Sigma seems to be better as well. I took some pictures at Photokina with the Irix it has some flare though. Mechanically it was quite good. I use a Tokina ATX 90mm f2.5 (bokeh sharpness and for astro! but some purple fringe wide open) , Sigma OS HSM 105 2.8 great , Nikkor AIS 55 f3.5 (top on micro contrast) and a Sigma 180mm f3.5 APO HSM, flares as well
.
I'm debating the Canon 100mm "L" vs. this this 150mm Irix ... from looking at your web page photos, it appeared Canon colors looked better in photos where you noted about bokeh.
Both lenses are sound optically. I would look at focal length as a big factor, along with your needs for autofocus and image stabilization.
Thank you for this first look video, can't wait to see the full review!
Do you know if the Nikon version of the lens is fully compatible with the Z6 / Z7 and FTZ mount adapter?
I can't find this information…
I don’t know that, but I don’t know why it wouldn’t be. All it is really doing is controlling the aperture iris and transmitting EXIF. Even a basic adapter can do that.
Thank you!
You were right, I finally find a confirmation from Iris: instagram.com/p/BotA4cQn0s2/
Hi.
I’m currently using a Canon 6D for landscape- and street photography. I’m considering switching to a Sony A7RII with a Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and Zeiss 16-35mm f/4 for street- and landscape photography. Would you recommend these lenses and this camera body? I prefer the handling and design of the Canon EOS R, but the Sony A7RII will probably do me better. I’ll probably still keep my 7D Mark II, Sigma 150-600mm C and Canon 400mm f/5.6L for wildlife photography.
That sounds like a reasonable plan, though frankly if you can’t afford the a7R3, I would probably go with the a73. The third Gen of these cameras just got so much better than the first.
Dustin Abbott What’s better about the A7III over the A7RII? I only take pictures, never record. I think that the A7RII is better than the A7III for landscape- and street photography for details. But I’m not sure, as I’ve just started being rested in Sony. I heard about a 100 megapixels feature, where you combine 4 pictures? What does that exactly do, and can the A7III do that? My budget is not big enough yet for the A7RIII, and I think that the A7RII is more than enough. Just an amateur photographer, and I’m sure that you can get professional results with any of them.
I just like the handling so much better on the newer bodies, from the battery life to the focus system to the ergonomics. The a7RII has a great sensor, and maybe that’s enough for you, but the third generation Sony A7 cameras are much more complete
Dustin Abbott
That’s good enough for me. Which lenses would you recommend for landscape- and steeet photography? I’m considering the Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and Zeiss 16-35mm f/4. Also considering the Sony 90mm Macro later on. Is this any better than the Canon 100mm f/2.8? And how about the Canon 16-35mm f/4 vs Zeiss 16-35mm f/4?
The Zeiss 55 is a great choice for street and landscape. As for the zoom - I haven’t compared it the Canon or used it.
I asked a lot things to Samyang and a local distributer(in South Korea). Usually answers are not satisfactory, but the distributer says as far as his knowledge, there is only one manufacturer that able to produce Irix lenses. Yeah, Samyang it is.
Anyway the 150mm macro is not popular and the distributer says there are only 10 each lenses for different mounts in first batch, and some lenses are still available now. Maybe Irix 150 would not be sharper than Sigma 150 os macro, but its build seems like really good.
Hmmm, that information just doesn’t have the ring of truth to me. There are far too many retailers in North America alone who show listings for this lens for there to have been only 10 produced in each mount.
"@@DustinAbbottTWI Sorry, I meant "imported"(or, how many of them left in Korea.), not produced. I was really tempted to buy this lens, but I grab a Sony 90mm macro in really good price.
pair it with Z6!
That would be a great pairing.
IRIX should focus on designing lenses for E, RF and Z mount, these 3 mounts are in need of third party affordable lenses. Sure, this lens can be used on these 3 mounts with an adapter but C'mon, nobody like carrying adapter.
I agree. Those are all logical platforms to move to for Irix where manual focus is much less of a liability.
do they support fuji ?
Not so far, unfortunately.
Pentax has IBIS, just to let you know.
So I’ve heard - I’m not very familiar with Pentax
That focus lock is so easy to be damaged
I don’t really think that is true, unless you are really a person that would force something like that.
This lens looks too good, inside and out. Can't wait to replace my Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro with this lens for product photography.
It would be a nice replacement so long as the longer focal range works okay with your shooting environment (you’ve got enough room to back up).
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, that's exactly the reason why I want to pick this up. Because the 50mm on a Nikon D7100 is too close and gets in the way when swapping products to shoot.
err... you do realise that ALL modern Pentax bodies have built in stabilisation? No need for it in the lens
First of all, my review was not done on Pentax, and Pentax represents a very, very small piece of the market that this lens is built for. Secondly, many would argue that dedicated lens stabilization is useful even when IBIS exists in camera (thus many brand new releases have lens stabilization even when most of the cameras they might be used on have camera based stabilization)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Of course your review was not done on a Pentax body, otherwise you would have known about the in-body stabilisation. I don't blame you, I'm simply pointing out the facts.
You clearly refer to Pentax and the suggestion that the lens would be better if it had in built stabilisation. I simply pointed out that it doesn't need it for the Pentax variant.
Market share has nothing to do with technolology.
None of what you are saying detracts from the fact that you clearly didn't know that the Pentax range have in body IBIS. That's OK, I have corrected the record.
The same 'many' you refer to could argue that having both in lens and in body stabilisation would result in a worse, not better outcome, as the two have no method of communication.
Macro without AF is hard to use
You're a moron, most good macro is shot using manual focus
I would agree if you listed any other style of photography, but most macro photographers prefer manual focus
sigh its like another sigma 70mm Art lens with no IS
That’s a serious liability if you plan to do handheld work. If you want to use it off a tripod to do mostly macro, it makes more sense than the Sigma due to the focal length.
@@DustinAbbottTWI true true
sharedfacebook.com/uhdworld.essecifilmpro/
sponsored reviews should be nosed dustin.
I’m not sure what you’re implying here. I’ve never done any sponsored reviews, and I don’t know what you mean by “nosed” either.