Coming soon: Yongnuo YN 100mm f/2 lens for Nikon F mount

yongnuo-yn-100mm-f2-lens-2
yongnuo-yn-100mm-f2-lens
Yongnuo released a new YN 100mm f/2 lens for Canon mount. The Nikon version should be coming out in the next few months. The price of the lens is around $170. Yongnuo already has two cheap DSLR full frame lenses: 50mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/2 (see review).ย Check PhotoRumors for additional information on the new lens.

Yongnuo lenses are also available for sale at B&H.

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Eno

    If optically is decent, compared to the new Nikon 105mm f/1,4 it will be one stop darker and 13 times cheaper. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • TwoStrayCats

      So true. But does Yongnuo have a U.S. service center for when the front element falls out of it in a year?

      • Eno

        At that price, getting another one after an unfortunate accident it’s like…for free. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • Marc W.

          I’d like to see this lens go against the Nikon Series E 100mm 2.8.

          • MB

            I presume at least AF would be faster on Yongnuo ๐Ÿ™‚ … while it works of course …

            • Marc W.

              AF would be faster…. if it catches. ๐Ÿ˜‰ Focusing in general might be faster on the Series E.

          • fanboy fagz

            or the 105 2.5 AIS

            if it performs like the 105 AFD micro, thats good enough. decent accurate af is key though. I can deal with vignetting ( I add it in pp) and I can deal with stopping down to 3.5 if need be but focus or no focus is critical. I dont expect it to dealw tih low light in wedding dance floors so im not asking much.. lets wait and see.

          • decentrist

            no contest

      • I think it is cheaper to buy a new lens in that case.

        • TwoStrayCats

          You are simply an encyclopedia of good points.

        • Yeah, I’ve never had a repair from Nikon cheaper than this lens.

          Even the free ones cost me more money, with rentals/lost business, while they took several attempts to perform a correct repair.

  • doge

    That price is insane. What’s the glass made out of, plastic?

    • TwoStrayCats

      Chinese flourite… from the teeth of workers at the reeducation camp.

      • doge

        Well, teeth are harder than metal. Maybe this glass is scratch proof.

        • Kostis

          Of course not! Never seen any dentist tool? ๐Ÿ˜€

      • loui

        Have you ever been to China? I don’t think the flourite is enough for mass production. What you call “reeducation camp” maybe the “reform through labour” prisons. “reeducation” in China means the education people can receive when they need more education. Seriously, you can watch some BBC documentaries to refresh your impression. China is not a perfect country, where Internet is controlled but wikileaks is freely accessible and is discussed in mainstream media.

    • Eno

      I have a feeling that this is the real price and what the big guys from the photo industry are asking…. is insane. ๐Ÿ™‚

      • doge

        True that the big 3 over charge for their stuff. Should be interesting to see comparisons when this comes out.

      • T.I.M

        Buying Nikon is like drinking Coca-Cola over Pepsi, it’s more expensive, it taste the same, but it make you fell much more “real American” (this message have been approve by Donald Trump)

        • TwoStrayCats

          Yeah, well Coke cans have a f/1.4 pop top and Pepsi has nothing more than a 2. And when you need a fast drink, that stop makes a difference.

          • T.I.M

            And when you open a Coke, it make less noise than Pepsi !

        • Eno

          I’d say fk both Trump and Hillary, they are different faces of the same coin.

          • T.I.M

            I’m glad I don’t have to make a choice (I’m Alien).

            • decentrist

              there is no choice

          • Nemmondom Meg

            I wanted to ask, one of them is supported by russian money, the other is so idiot that she doesn’t even need to be payed, sends the confidential info to them for free. How Americans can choose between them?

            • loui

              As a foreigner, I can’t believe you guys believe Trump is supported by russian while there’s no documented evidence. I think it’s much wiser for russian to support Hillary (if not both) since she needs more money (to run the campaign team for example) and is more likely to win. Hilarry takes money from foreigners, which is “proved” by emails. As for Yongnuo, I do hope they add VR to lenses with such focal length.

            • T.I.M

              What’s driving me crazy is that there is 320 millions people in USA, the best schools in the world, and we have the choice between bad and worse, that does not make sense.

            • Spy Black

              Not sure about that “best schools in the world” part…

            • T.I.M

              Europe used to have the best schools, not anymore.
              In Europe teachers are not paid enough so they don’t care about the job.
              When I was at school (in France) we would never ever talk back to a teacher, now they get insults all day long (and sometimes even physical abuse).

            • Spy Black

              Right, that doesn’t happen here: http://tinyurl.com/zphqhtn

            • T.I.M

              Ok, the student’s name is Luis Penzo, so maybe “take off your headphone” in Spanish mean “fuck you asshole”, it’s just a communication issue.
              :o)

            • A nephew of mine looked into doing graduate school for a Ph. D. in mathematics in Europe. His advisors here in the US at Washington State said forget it. it would look to employers like he couldn’t get into an American school. I know it’s just one case about one discipline, but it is revealing.

            • Spy Black

              Um, you think maybe it coulda been they said that because they wanted daddy’s money in their pockets?

            • Actually they encouraged him to try for Princeton or MIT. But, yeah, they could have.

          • Trump is an asshole unto himself. Hillary has SOME redeeming qualities. Trump…nada.

      • Marc W.

        When YN does their own R&D for new lenses with new lens formulas I’m sure prices would go up.
        https://photographylife.com/lenses/canon-ef-100mm-f2-usm

      • I agree that the big ones have ridiculous pricing lately, but understand that the pricing reflects R&D( The chinese companies have an advantage there most of the times), QC(that point is a bit in question as far as nikon is concerned lately, but it would still be far better than yongnuo) and service assurance long after the lens has been discontinued. Now it is up to us to weigh these against price advantage and the problems it brings along with it.

      • John Albino

        Maybe after Nikon got into the medical imaging business they looked around, and saw how the pharmaceutical companies price their products, with annual price increases, even for OLD and even GENERIC drugs of 5, 10, 15% or more — Every Year. ๐Ÿ™‚ So some sharp pricing manager took the hint and simply priced at whatever s/he (but most likely He) thought the traffic would bear…

    • Carleton Foxx

      Perhaps because they haven’t had to patiently create a culture of excellence and innovation, invest billions of dollars in equipment and education, and pay the salaries of legions of brilliant engineers over several decades?

      • doge

        You don’t have to defend a multi-billion dollar corporation. They don’t care about you.

        • Member

          Sometimes it’s good to defend those multi-billion dollar corporations. Even if it’s only because at least 25-40% of your dollars spend remains in the US (or your own country if you live elsewhere) and other fellow Americans (maybe one of your or our clients) are dependend on them. And if those multi-billion dollar corporations die, there will be less people who can afford a pro photographer. Maybe those ex workers will start shooting their weddings and aniversaries with huwawei and miss phones and have them printed via Internet somewhere in China and have them mailed via Chinapost.
          Youngnuo on the other hand doesn’t spend a dime in the US. All your dollars spend goes straight to China it’s even mailed through Chinapost.
          I’m not saying that one shouldn’t buy this lens, feel free to.
          But maybe it’s good to realise that there’s more about it than just the price tag.

  • MB

    Canon version, the original ;), is only 500$ (yeah yeah … everything is much cheaper in Canon land) … so this ripoff should be around 250$ … if performance is anywhere near it could be viable option for Nikon shooters, as for Canon people used original would probably be a better deal …

  • I have no need for a 100mm lens but at that price I would get one anyway

    http://www.jrs-photography.co.uk

    • Charles K

      Same. As long as it’s somewhat clear. I dont care about vignetting or chromatic aberration

  • Kris Bodenheimer

    I’ve had the Yongnuo 35mm f/2 in Nikon mount for at least a month. In the situations that I want a very lightweight disposable lens it has performed perfectly. I have had no issues, have shot it in the woods hiking, and properly banged it around. It hasn’t failed me, and I will happily order this 100mm as soon as it is available. 170 is so cheap, it’s almost silly.

    • Zenettii

      thats because it wasnt built by nikon

      • fanboy fagz

        nice! nikons getting hit from every direction. 5 years back there wasnt any other option. sigma tamron and even now yongnuo offer other options. when you wanted gear it was either cough up bucks for oem or pay cheap but get very cheap performance. I started with all sigma ex 2.8 glass. it always lacked the polish pros had in their iq. I got an 85mm 1.4 AIS got my prints back and then was depressed. because I knew why the nikon were twice as much.

        that situation is not today. the 3rd party outperform the oem.

        • Captain Megaton

          hahahahaha

          no.

        • Marc W.

          “that situation is not today. the 3rd party outperform the oem.”

          This might be the case, but those lenses that out perform the OEM aren’t super cheap.

          • Quality doesn’t come “super” cheap.

  • reporteratlarge

    If you’re looking for an inexpensive 100mm lens, check out the Tokina 100mm 2.8. Sure, not as fast, and the autofocus is noisy, but it’s also a macro and is compact and sharp.

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/393446-REG/Tokina_ATXAF100PRON_100mm_f_2_8_AT_X_M100.html

    • fanboy fagz

      when I was looking to upgrade from my 105 afd micro, I did look at the tokina. for me, the flaw was no circular blades. fuck up on their part. makes all the difference.

    • Shutterbug

      Keep in mind, that f/2.8 is a whole stop darker compared to f/2 and that macro lenses even get darker towards the MOD.
      Thus said, a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 or any 105mm f/2.8 are also great for portraits.
      The only big improvemt over these macro lenses is the better background separation.

  • Very much looking forward to an hypothetic 135mm f2 at $200 from yongno!!!

    • Spy Black

      Actually, an AF version of the Samyang 135 would be great. That lens optically blows the doors off the Canon and Nikon counterparts. Wouldn’t be overly inexpensive tho.

      • decentrist

        are you in the “sharpness only” camp…read about Samyang build quality and get back to us.

        • Spy Black

          If you’re so concerned about that, why are you reading this article?

          • decentrist

            I am fascinated by the comments from so many posters considering this shite. It’s like slowing down in an intersection as you pass an accident. I am imagine when the tech stealing vermin bring out a DSLR, many will be considering that as well.

            • Spy Black

              So did you buy the 100mm f/1.4 yet, or are you going to boycott that as well because it’s made in China?

            • decentrist

              don’t have a 100ish, my jump is from 85 to 135, use the DC…I’m considering a 105 DC, but the new 105 has jacked used DC prices

            • Spy Black

              I’ll take that as a “yes”…

            • decentrist

              that’s a no, no $2200 plasticine Maohowitzer, but on second thought I do have a nice 100mm Series E that is incredible

            • Spy Black

              I meant yes, you’ll boycott it as a cheap Chinese lens. That was a yes on your part.

            • decentrist

              I believe Nikon is doing the beancounter death spiral, by switching to China and charging prices that further narrow their market. If you are going to build a premium product in China, and pocket the difference, you’ll alienate a lot of potential buyers. The mid/low I understand. This Youngnuo 1st gen stuff reminds me of Hyundai’s first try in U.S. cars. You had assembly line workers making cars who had never owned/used one. The first wave in were almost all junk.

            • Spy Black

              So just say “yes” and you won’t have to waste so much time typing…

            • decentrist

              said the keyboard jockey

            • Spy Black

              Thanks for your confession.

            • decentrist

              this is one of your favorite sandboxes…fess up…

            • Spy Black

              I love playing here, no problems. Thanks again for your confession.

            • decentrist

              passive aggressive perfection

            • Spy Black

              You need playtime, it’s important, because all work and no play, as everyone can see here, makes decentrist a dull boy…

            • decentrist

              I once bought a 55mm Micro Nikkor from the son of the copy editor for Mad magazine. It’s a more interesting story than…….

      • gamer

        If Samyang starts producing AF lenses, I will buy a copy of all 35, 50, 85 and 135mm. Unfortunately all Samyang lenses for F-mount are MF and I have serious troubles nailing the focus.

    • jojo

      Unlikely just yet. They need something to copy, and perhaps they concentrate on older designs to reduce the chance of any legal repercussions.

      • Well they have the excellent 135 f2 from canon to copy

  • Spy Black

    This lens may turn out to be a lot of fun.

  • Aldo

    You see this gives you a clue of what the cost is to make a modern lens… If we are gonna pay thousands of dollars for a modern glass… it better be something special and this is where I think nikon is lacking a bit. EG 105 1.4 and 24-70 VR

    • You have a point. But reverse engineering something, changing a few things then making one with manufacturing technology that someone basically gave you is a lot less expensive than creating all that from scratch. The expensive glass from Nikon isn’t special? My 35mm f/1.4 is amazing.

      • Aldo

        You are right… reverse engineering is no where the effort and cost to make something from scratch… I wish Chinese laws were toughter here.

        As for nikon glass there is plenty of glass that is special… I just think some of the recent offerings have missed a bit thats all. Im sure the 35mm is special.

        • MB

          Yep … but not 2000$ special … I mean it is just a simple plastic 35mm lens … and not any better than Sigma 35mm …

          • Plastic part is just barrel. Costly parts are the inner glass and the technology behind electronics. Circuits hardware is actually dirt cheap.

      • Spy Black

        Is the lens formula identical to the Canon? 100mm formula’s have been around since time immemorial.

        • Grinding glass is one thing. Sourcing glass is another. AR coatings is an industry unto itself. Then you have to assemble thousands of them all the same, get someone to distribute it. Yada, yada. Something has to be missing for $179.

    • AnotherView

      It may not be that hard to “make” a lens, but to “make” it to a certain quality control spec, that takes $$$. I’m not suggesting Nikon is perfect (well it is for their supertele’s), but if you think you’re going to get consistent performance from ANY third party brand at a way-less-than-average price, think again. Frankly, I’m not that desperate.

      • Aldo

        I’m with yah… but certainly the hassle of trying a couple of copies is well worth the savings. The bottom line is that the lens will exist and at that price… some will be just ok with it… assuming it will perform at least as good as their 35mm.

        • Eledeuh

          ..which the 24-70mm VR and 105mm are ?

    • HF

      How so? Do we know to what tolerances they work? What type of materials? What quality for screws, motor? Quality of glue? Coatings? How many focus operations does it tolerate before dying? What stresses is bears before tearing at the mount? How about aberrations? How much does it cost to reduce them drastically? Before we can’t answer that it makes NO sense to think of knowing what a modern lens costs.

      • Aldo

        Yeah but 100mm isnt an everyday focal length and a lot of enthusiasts dont put many miles on gear… I think what you say is more relevant with a workhorse lens.

        • Eledeuh

          > I think what you say is more relevant with a workhorse lens.

          ..which the 24-70mm VR and 105mm are ?

    • AYWY

      From a conversation with a Zeiss employee in the microscope division commenting on consumer optics – profit of a Zeiss lens is generally estimated at about 60% of its price.

      • Eric Calabros

        so you cant make a Zeiss with total cost lower than 40% of its price. and 40% of Zeiss average price is still in thousand dollars range.

      • Thom Hogan

        Who’s profit?

        People keep forgetting that we buy things on a tiered distribution system. If a product sells for US$100, then:

        US$15-25 goes to the dealer
        US$10-15 goes to the subsidiary
        US$60-75 goes to the maker

        If the maker is getting US$60 with a 60% GPM, then that means they have US$36 to pay SG&A, R&D, and taxes. SG&A expenses tend to run 20-25% of sales these days in the photo industry, R&D 5-10%. Do the math.

        • AYWY

          As far as I can recall – the conversation goes, “They do about 60% on what they sell.” It was a conversation that had totally nothing to do with the photo biz (and we had more important things to talk about), so I didn’t press for details. My impression is that this is a good and reasonable percentage overall – whether or not selected costs are already included. At the end of the day if market demand supports what a business wants to price at, they can do what they want to do.

          If the question is how YN sells their stuff so cheap – it is probably down to efficient automation, minus marketing and support costs, plus other stuff. Manual inspection and adjustments push costs up, so we can expect less of that. There is the question of the AF system’s mechanical quality – stuff that people can’t see.

          The Canon 100mm f/2 is a 25 year old design. Even if YN didn’t copy it exactly, I don’t find it amazing that someone has found a process to manufacture a similar product while perhaps using the original design as reference. I won’t comment about final quality and longevity of the product.

    • Thom Hogan

      No, it gives you a clue as to what it costs to be a global, mature company with high standards, vertical integration, and a deep R&D budget, and one that makes a profit doing so.

      In any of the products you buy these days the actual materials costs are low. Even when you see figures for the chip costs in something like the iPhone, the material costs are likely insignificant to the IP costs (e.g. the Qualcom modem chips, the ARM licensing within the iPhone A9 CPU, etc.).

      If you don’t have true R&D costs, no IP costs, no global support and distribution costs, no advertising and marketing costs, and can source the parts at or near actual physical costs, yes, you can make something pretty cheap. It’s always been that way.

    • CBJ

      105 1.4 is not special? What other company makes it?

  • MonkeySpanner

    Awesome! Take my money!

  • A-Sign

    Wow. That leads me to the question why do we pay so much for Nikkor lenses? Is this because of the high quality assurance / quality control?

    • Carleton Foxx

      Yes. It’s because you can pretty much shoot any subject, in any weather, at any temperature, and have the confidence that as long as the camera or lens is not smashed into three or more pieces, you’ll be able to get a publishable photo (fingers crossed). Same with Canon. The others? Who wants to gamble….

      • MonkeySpanner

        You could buy two youngnuo lenses and still be well under what you would pay for any red ring prime from canon. I don’t buy the toughness argument – sure the canons might be built a little better. But drop either on the front element from any significant height and you will be staring at an open hole.

        • Member

          The front element often is the strongest part of the lens. Yes with modern lenses they are even more scratch resistant than most plasticky or aluminum barrels.

          • MonkeySpanner

            Well, strong is qualitative, not quantitative. The front lens may be the hardest, bit certainly not the toughest part of the lens, just as an example.

            • Member

              When I called the front element strong I did so in the sense of being tough. What usually fails after a drop or bump are the alignment, helicoid gearing and attachment and filterthread. Chips and scratches indeed but broken front elements seldom to never.

  • Eric Calabros

    does Youngnou mean “optics charity” in Chinese?

    • Jim Huang

      Haha~ I guess when company spends little money on advertising, physical stores…etc then price can go down a bit.
      By the way, it roughly translate to “forever promised”.

      • Eric Calabros

        Its way lower than not having ad spendings or physical store and after sale service costs can explain. Even in many third world countries its simply not possible, unless with some labor abusing.

        • Jim Huang

          While I’m not 100% sure how YN work, but as a Chinese myself I’d say it is possible. I mean they have done it.
          There are also many other areas they can cut costs,such as little waste management, low standard on health and safety, worker rights, mass production, sell them near at cost, long working hours(look at FOXX for example), where they get their materials from, low company tax, low wages…etc. They all adds up.
          Another thing is the land in China is stupidly expensive, so not having physical stores may actually help a lot.

        • Jim Huang

          Another thing is a lot of time, they don’t actually need to make a profit. There is currently a lot of investors and supports from the governments that their goal can just be “live longer than the competitors and gather as much market share as possible”. Apple for example, only has about 30% cellphone’s market share in China.

          Currently, I’ve found with these Chinese companies, such as Mi, One Plus is that they are really great at specs game. Their products looks great on paper. However, there is always a “but” hidden in their somewhere.

          For example: YN622N triggers are great on paper, but the there is no way to turn off preflash even on manual mode (set on the commander), short range and can be easily interfered.

          However, you don’t know what they will make in 5 years time.

          • Eric Calabros

            Its another Japan again, they also started with copying and work for ridiculously low wages, but at some point they had to change. I think sooner or later, China will face that point too.

      • Huh, I thought it translated as “happy ending”. Who knew.

        • Jim Huang

          Haha, where did you get that from?

          • Just a joke that went around here. Glad you found it funny.

  • Carleton Foxx

    I yearn for the old days of cheap paper and chemicals from Freestyle Photo Supply and lenses like the awesome Spiratone 400 Sharpshooter… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ae6302e23f33855ede4048a16f8e19b79d650d58569b6aa49318823502add048.jpg

    • Spy Black

      You can still get these and the 500mm f/8 for pretty much the same price: http://tinyurl.com/zuyg73g

    • I still buy chemicals from Freestyle. They still have some interesting stuff.

  • Carleton Foxx

    And the equally awesome Mirrotach that magically caused women in bikinis to appear https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/744167275d196a9819a956e70ccdc9b0c71b158fe3662b644e5e3c3879dd801d.jpg

    • Spy Black

      The price doubled in less than 10 years, must have been very popular…

  • Max

    170 bucks!

  • TheInconvenientRuth
    • Wow I wonder if Canon are tempted with a copyright claim. Surely sooner or later their patience will relent?

      • Eledeuh

        I find it amusing that they even replicated the Canon ultrasonic silver markings.

      • nwcs

        Canon would likely lose any copyright or trademark claims on a lens.

        • Thom Hogan

          Difficult to say, and it would be highly regional, too. But “trade dress” is something that is protectable.

          • nwcs

            Trade dress is but I’m not sure how much of this lens would fall into it. Is it enough different visually? I think it probably meets the just enough difference threshold.

            • Thom Hogan

              I don’t know. I haven’t tried to look to see what Canon patented/trademarked here. One of the parameters that gets looked at in court though is whether or not an average person can distinguish the difference. Short of the company name, I’m not sure that anyone could, even some seasoned folk, so there’s definitely an issue that’s going to have Canon’s attention at some point. What they do about it is another story.

            • nwcs

              I think Apple and Samsung have provided us an idea of what it takes to get any renumeration. And even all these years later it’s still debatable and I’d say Samsung changed a lot more to duplicate Apple and had more evidence of intentional copying.

            • Thom Hogan

              I always had problems with some of Apple’s suit. The thing that I felt was clearly IP violation was in the UI (icons, positions, slide-to-unlock, etc.). That was clearly and almost certainly copied, and it was also clearly Apple IP. The whole rounded corners, one button thing was far less defensible. The rounded corners thing because there are only a finite number of ways to make corners ;~). Even the single button at bottom thing had defensible arguments for using. But identical icons in identical rows/columns with identical favorite bar with…well you get the idea.

              I don’t the think the issue is monetary in nature, either. The real reason to pursue punitive damages against a big player like Samsung is to make them think more carefully before doing a knock-off in the future. It seems to have worked some, too.

              In this case, though, one thing that is distressing is the same font use, the same stylistic touches (the ultrasonic ring), etc. There is absolutely no reason to use those things other than to imply that “it’s just like the Canon.” Intent becomes an issue in some of these cases. The intent here seems clear.

            • It’s like a photographer with a particular image/viewpoint that gets copied by another photographer. Either Canon take this as a compliment in some way or it irritates them beyond belief. Given there is money at stake, I’d bet their lawyers are already taking a long look at this. One lens they might turn a blind eye, but this is now turning into a collection. I know one thing, I’m glad they didn’t decide to rip off Nikon designs – that would irritate me as an owner because it is indeed suggesting in this case that the $170 lens is VERY comparable, indeed it might even devalue certain Canon lenses or force them to act on prices. You can be sure that as soon as there is any sign of of a financial impact they will probably be all over it…

          • TheInconvenientRuth

            Good luck having a Chinese court rule in your favour…

            • Thom Hogan

              Good luck importing into a country with a judgment against you.

              Sure, if you don’t want to cross borders and only sell to the Chinese market, anything goes. Things get far trickier when you try to sell globally.

      • TheInconvenientRuth

        Tempted? No. They know they have no chance in hell. They can only get a ruling they can enforce if they go to a Chinese court and any they are notorious for ruling in favour of their own companies, no matter how glaringly obvious the similarities. Cases with much closer resemblance than this have been routinely thrown out by Chinese courts.Just look at the case where BMW sued Shuanghuan for their “CEO” car which is near identical to the X5. Chinese courts decided there was no case.

  • gamer

    Amazing! I want this lens.

  • pjpo

    Part of me says YES!! Then the other side questions how much different this would be to an 85mm f/1.8. It’s still far cheaper than any 85mm especially for autofocus. My Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 fringes so badly I am hesitant to use it any more, but a full stop faster will give more background separation than the extra focal length. For portraits, I can see using a 35 and 85 combo or a 50 and 100. For less than 2x zoom between lenses, I can crop or zoom with my feet. For $170, I’ll get it just to try out or have a portrait lens backup.

  • To me this lens represents a race to the bottom. I’d be interested to see what this forum will look like in 5 years after the Chinese start putting together D800 clones from the parts bin and selling them for $300, when the only thing left of Nikon is the name. If I were Canon and Nikon I’d start pulling my manufacturing from China now. How do you compete with companies blatantly copying your IP and undercutting you for pennies?

    • Interesting points. There are no secrets in China – I imagine these sort of designs are relatively easily bought.

  • ArkadiiShapoval

    There is New 85 1.8/1.4, see here http://www.hkyongnuo.com/bigphotos/jt.jpg

    • Good find! Thanks. Will post this online.

    • I this itโ€™s a f/1.8, the front element is too small for a f/1.4.

  • zzzxtreme

    Would be nice if it works with ft1

    For me the jump from f2.8 to f2 is significant in low light. This is the kind of lens I’ve been waiting for

  • EnPassant

    Except for price I didn’t see the point of Yongno’s 50 and 35mm lenses.

    This 100mm f/2 lens could however be much more interesting for Nikon photograpers as the only 105 lenses with AF are the new 105/1.4 which seem be great but is huge, heavy and very expensive, and 105/2 which use the old screw-AF and is bigger than Canon’s EF 100/2 lens.

    Hopefully this lens could push Nikon extending the 1.8 Genesis series with an AF-S 105/1.8 lens! Price propably $1000,-.

    • John Albino

      There also is the 105/2.8 Micro-Nikkor with AF-S and VR and Nano coating. I have one, and it’s a pretty nice lens and is under $900.

      Nikon did have a 105/1.8 manual lens back in the dark ages, but I believe it was pretty rare to find one.(At least I never could.)

      I’ve always liked the 105 focal length and have had several over the years, going back to the mid-1960s when it was the second Nikkor I got. The MF AIS version was small and light but I never cared for the pull-out lens hood — it never wanted to stay in place.

      I like the reviews of the new f/1.4 version, but at my age would have an *very* hard time justifying the cost. An f/1.8 version for around $1,000 could be doable, though.

      • EnPassant

        Although I have it I didn’t think about the AF-S 105mm Micro-Nikkor lens as it is another type of lens and a stop slower. But thanks for reminding me.

        The Yongnuo having the same size as the Canon EF 100/2 lens is however much smaller and I rather have such a lens for general photography.

        Back in the manual days there were ussually three choices for 100-105mm lenses. A fast f/2 (f/1.8 for Nikon) and a normal speed, ussually f/2.8, and a macro.

        The 105/1.4 is just too big for general use. Maybe Nikon think most photographers will use a zoom. But they are also slower and bigger, especially modern zooms.

  • Manuel Ferreira

    Weeks ago I got a Yongnu 50 f/1.8 for 92 euros for my D7200 and… it works and is fine…

  • Kim

    You can get a Nikkor 85/1.8 used for the same price. Or a Nikon Series E 100/2.8 for a third. Both will be at least as good I think, and you don’t have to be seen around with this “Canon-lens” on your camera…

  • jonebize

    The Canon version is actually pretty good.

  • Back to top