Irix lenses

Hi

Any good or bad ? I’m looking for 11 mm and my wife for 150 mm macro. Any good or bad experiences ?

Nick

I recently purchased the Firelfly version of the 15/2.4 - I felt the 11/4 would generally be too wide. AFAIK, the 150 isn't available yet. I also like the idea of being able to use conventional filters on the 15mm - even though they are 95mm ones.

One issue I have with my copy of the 15/2.4 is that the focus scale does not match real life distances. There's an option to do that calibration yourself - which I haven't performed yet. Using AF fine tune gets the green dot to light up at approximately correct distances - which at this time suffices for me. I intend to use mine mostly for landscape, and at apertures of f/5.6 or slower, the lens performs very well.

I really liked the sound of the Irix 15mm and 11mm when I was in the market for a WA Astro lens, I ended up buying the Zeiss 15mm because it has a manual aperture ring.

15mm Review https://www.wildlifeinpixels.net/blog/lens-review-irix-blackstone-15mm-f2-4/

11mm Review http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack PDF/Irix 11mm Review.pdf

Make sure you buy from a place that has a good return policy.

I have the IRIX 11mm F/4 (Canon EF Mount). I think it is an exceptional value for money lens. My other consideration was the EF 11 to 24 F/4 L, which I have used. The Canon 11 to 24 generally performs better at 11mm, but there is a premium to pay for that. I am not au fait with Nikon’s Extreme Wide Angle offerings and I make no comment there.

The 11/4 is solidly constructed.

There is vignetting and edge image quality degradation, quite apparent when the lens is used at the wider apertures: I consider these as understandable traits. The Barrel Distortion is regular and easy to correct in Post Production, (interestingly the EF 11~24/4L, at 11mm, appeared to show a slightly more severe Barrel Distortion than the IRIX, my guess being that is a design trade off for any Zoom Lens). The IRIX shows no signs of Moustache Distortion. The Chromatic Aberration can addressed in Post Production for the size of enlargement which I generally make, typically 11 x 14 and 20 x 24 inches, and I would have little hesitation making a wall paper image, for example 4ft~6ft wide, with the IRIX 11/4 lens.

The electronic connectivity to the camera is good, (I use 5D Series Cameras). Considering the Vignette of the lens’s optics, the TTL Meter Readings are predicable and consistent when metering in Evaluative Mode (Evaluative is similar, almost identical, to Nikon’s “Matrix Mode”). There can be a slight uncertainty when using CWA (Centre Weighted Average), but nothing of concern if one is reasonably knowledgeable and proficient in using different TTL Metering Modes in various Lighting Scenarios.

The IRIX 11/4 has a well damped Focus Turret; I like and I use the Focus Lock Mechanism and the raised Finger Guide, offset at about 30°, this is a welcome feature that other manufacturers should think about. The Focus Turret’s Subject Distance Markings appear ‘accurate’. Quirkily using the metric scale, it appears that the accurate reading is designed to correlate to the decimal point; there are only two whole digits, (1 and 2) and the line of the numeral “1” is accurate, so too is the centre of the numeral “2”. The click stop at ∞ Focus is a nice touch, especially as the lens can be set to focus beyond infinity. The Focus Turret also sports an Hyperfocal Distance Scale for the apertures F/4, 8 11 and 16; this seems redundant for those who know how to read the main scale and set the Hyperfocal Distance from it, but, all this attention to detail shows to me that there is quality thinking in design and production.

For a lens that has an huge front element it is well balanced on the Camera; I use Battery Grips, but using the IRIX lens, sans grip, it was quite comfortable, too.

The rear Gel Filter Holder is of no consequence to me, because a lens wider than 14mm was for me more important than being able to use screw on filters, which I agree would be nice: obviously a Matt Box or Filter Holder could be used on the IRIX 11/4 and I think a Medium Format size Filter Holder would be required.

The IRIX 15/2.8 and the IRIX 11/4 are quite different lenses. Although I have only used the 15/2.8 for a short period of time, and that was in a camera store: apart from the obvious, 1 Stop difference of Lens Speed and the 4mm Focal Length Difference (noted ‘a substantial difference at the Extreme Wide Angle’), and that the 15mm allows conventional Filters - the 11mm is heavier, slightly front heavy; and is balanced differently, especially this last mentioned fact can influence the Tripod and Head that one requires.

All in all - if one really wants 11mm, then a 15mm Lens is never going to do the job. Additionally, one might postulate that the (assumed) at least one extra year of R&D for the 11/4, IRIX could have made ‘improvements’.

Your question is quite general, lacking detail of the type of Photography you enjoy and any details of your experience/skill level. Your history here is almost nil. It would bode well for you to provide a broader background if you desire better information which addresses your particular requirements.

WW

Hi,

I just open account on this forum. I'm amateur photographer. I like landscape, nature and architecture.

. . . I like landscape, nature and architecture.

I assume that you'll use an 11mm lens more often for Landscape and Architecture, in which case, if you've not had much experience using Ultra Wide Angle Lenses, you are in for a fun ride.

FL = 11mm is an extremely wide Rectilinear Lens. Very easy to stuff up the photo, but a lot of fun stuffing it up, so long as we learn from the errors.

As basic tenets:

> Architecture, unless for a special effect, usually requires critical Camera Position and Lens Alignment to the (main) Verticals and Horizontals of the Main Subject

> Landscape may utilize the massive DoF available, and although camera position may be less critical, skewing the camera up or down may result in distant edges of the landscape appearing quite odd.

Of course there is an argument that we can ‘just fix it in post’, but if major post production surgery is needed to fix a poor camera position, then it’s likely a waste of pixels as they seem stretch and squish and get lost.

For any lens wider than FL = 16mm, I generally use Live View for Framing; Enlarged Live View for Focussing; and a Tripod and Head for stability.

Additional to utilizing a massive DoF (I think) it is fun to use a what narrow DoF one can attain, for Subject separation and Subject dominance – this is kind of contrary to the norm, and I think this is a good idea for Landscape Photographers to consider:

North Cronulla Beach – looking South, Sydney, AUS (14mm F/2.8; EOS 5DMkII)

Good luck with your choice.

WW

Image © AJ Group Pty Ltd Aust 1996~2018 WMW 1965~1996