Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Curious as to Samyang lenses  (Read 3926 times)
Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1937


Editing Allowed


« on: September 23, 2013, 09:17:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Has anyone used them and are they any good, or just cheap knock-offs?
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6782


« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2013, 10:56:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Has anyone used them and are they any good, or just cheap knock-offs?

Erik Kaffehr had (or has) a 14mm as you can read here.
Logged

Francois
Vladimirovich
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1320


« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2013, 11:16:27 AM »
ReplyReply

some of them reviewed @ = http://www.lenstip.com/index.html?producent=96&obiektyw=all&typ=0&moc=0&szukaj=Search
Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 403



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2013, 11:41:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I have several. The 14mm is a really nice lens and even wide open it is a decent lens. It does have a distinct mustache type distortion that can show up on flat horizons like seascapes. The are fully manual and there is no electrical connection so no exif information, at least for Canon and other lenses, I believe there is with Nikon but I do not have that version. The build quality for me has been good and I have not had any problems, other people have had mixed results. I also have the 8mm fisheye which is also a nice lens on the Canon if you need a circular fisheye, I also have one of those for my Fuji X-Pro 1.  Optically they are quite good. The are also rebranded as Rokinon, and a couple of other brands.

Photozone also has lots of reviews of the Samyang lenses
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews

Alan
Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
Paul2660
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1685


WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2013, 12:34:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Samyang, Bower, and Rokinon, are all the same.  Not sure why they choose to break out into 3 different brands.  There may be slight cosmetic differences between the brands, but the elements, groupings are the same.

As already mentioned the 14mm was a huge surprise when it came out, being a very very sharp lens even wide open.  I have used the Bower version on Canon's 6D and Nikon's D800e, you will see just a bit of corner fall off on the D800, but on the Canon sharp full frame.  There are some distortion issues but most can be easily corrected.  The 14mm is not filter friendly and I don't know of any 3rd party solution for it.

The 24mm 1.4 is another wonder lens, and from my outdoor and night work, it far exceeds the highly vaunted Nikon 24mm 1.4, the later have huge coma distortion issues until around F2.8 or 3.2.  The 24 is an excellent lens on my  D800 or Canon 6D, remember you can easily adapt the Nikkor version to Canon but not vise versa as you will loose infinity focus due to focal flange distance. 

The 24mm TS-E did not get the same great reception as the others.  I have not used it after what I read about it's performance.  However it's still on my long term list as it seems to still outperform the Nikon 24mm TS-E by F11.  I tried 3 of the Nikon's and never found one that was that good shifted.  Many love the Nikon 24mm TS-E and I am sure there are sample variations.

One thing, the warranty on the Samyang, Rokinon, Bower lenses is nothing like the Nikon or Canon, Sigma etc.  They have a U.S. number, and you have a 1 year warranty, policy is not however to repair, but instead you send in yours, they verify it's not working and send you a factory refurbished lens.  This has happened to 2 separate photographers I work with on the 14mm. 

Also, they are all Manual focus lenses.

Paul Caldwell
Logged

Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
Photography > http://photosofarkansas.com
Blog> http://paulcaldwellphotography.com
t6b9p
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2013, 02:35:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I purchased the Rokinon 24/1.4 for night sky work (Rokinon part of the Samyang, Bower family). However, some quick tests revealed beautiful pinpoint stars in three corners and elongated stars in the fourth corner (no it wasn't star trails). Unfortunately the internal box packaging is flimsy formed plastic and appears that one size fits all lens versions! This allowed the lens to move around during shipping and it arrived with both front and rear cap floating loose in the box. It is uncertain whether rough handling and poor packaging, or QC may have contributed to the image issues. I returned the lens but will probably try again.
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7309


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2013, 02:55:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Here is an image I shot in the Dolimites using the 14/2.8

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/Samyang/

http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/Samyang/20130821-_DSC2705.jpg

Best regards
Erik


Erik Kaffehr had (or has) a 14mm as you can read here.
Logged

Chris Calohan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1937


Editing Allowed


« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2013, 03:47:07 PM »
ReplyReply


Not bad at all. From what I've read on this lens, the sweet spot is f/5.6, f/8. and f/11. Does this hold true to what you're shooting?
Logged

What! Me Worry?

Life is about a little kid driving a Mini...
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7309


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2013, 03:51:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

Yes, I would say so, but 2.8 is also quite OK.

The lens has a bad "moustache" distortion, needs a profile to correct. There is probably some sample variation.

Best regards
Erik


Not bad at all. From what I've read on this lens, the sweet spot is f/5.6, f/8. and f/11. Does this hold true to what you're shooting?
« Last Edit: September 23, 2013, 08:36:07 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1908


WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2013, 04:43:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I've got one the Samyang 14mm f2.8 in a Canon EF mount.

Build quality is OK, focussing action is nice and smooth.
Optical quality is very good, not perfect, but excellent value for money. The Canon lens cost six times as much and a lot of the time you wouldn't see any difference in the final image. It's surprisingly free from flare.
In use one needs to remember that you need to set everything correctly to meter correctly. The lack of EXIF data can be worked round by sticking one of the cheap focus confirmation chips on the back. Not very difficult and a very low cost addition.

Yes, the lens has some distortion, but if you process in Lightroom/ACR you can either download a lens profile to correct it or fairly easily build a lens profile yourself with Adobe's utility.

Overall it's a great value lens I usually carry in my bag now.

Logged
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814


« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2013, 05:23:42 PM »
ReplyReply

These lenses have a following among astrophotography practitioners, who don't need autofocus but do need freedom from significant coma. I am quite happy with my 14mm f/2.8, used at f/3.5 to f/4.0 as a compromise between light gathering and corner sharpness full frame. Yes, it does have the mustache distortion and an impressive vignetting at f/2.8. Profiles exist for the distortion, and for astro purposes, I make my own illumination profiles for use in astro-imaging programs.
Logged
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1065


« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2013, 07:41:18 PM »
ReplyReply

I tried two copies of the 14 in hopes that the reported focus scale inaccuracies had been fixed - not.  decided the requirement to focus with magnified liveview was too limiting for my use and was not willing to mess around trying to fix or work around the focus scale. 

I agree that it's best from f4-f8, but without comparison I don't know if it's all that much worse than Canon or Nikon
Logged
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1677


« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2013, 10:42:27 AM »
ReplyReply

IQ notwithstanding, the best thing about the 14 is its  cost/fun factor.  It's a totally unique perspective on the world. 

The Nikon-chipped version offers WFO viewing and focusing and provides EXIF data.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3930



« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2013, 02:50:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I've got one the Samyang 14mm f2.8 in a Canon EF mount.

The lack of EXIF data can be worked round by sticking one of the cheap focus confirmation chips on the back.

Can you elaborate on that?

Jeremy
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1908


WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2013, 03:19:10 AM »
ReplyReply

You can get after market focus confirmation ships from, eBay eg:-
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AF-Confirm-Chip-for-Canon-EOS-EF-Mount-Adapter-/320553069755?pt=UK_Photography_CameraLenses_Lens_caps_hoods_adaptors_ET&hash=item4aa273acbb

A bit of a faff to fit, and might not be a recommended procedure for the clumsy, but once they're fitted you can program the chip to the focal length and maximum aperture. That allows focus confirmation in the viewfinder, aperture priority metering to work(as long as you remember to set it correctly) and software that relies on EXIF data to apply lens correction data etc to recognise the lens.

No, it's not the full EXIF data set you'd get from a proper AF Canon lens, but just that small data set greatly improves the utility of the lens.
When the lens costs one sixth of the price of the Canon equivalent and gives IQ that gets close and sometimes exceeds the OEM product, manual operation and lack of full EXIF data is just a small inconvenience.
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3930



« Reply #15 on: September 25, 2013, 01:14:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Very interesting. Thanks.

Jeremy
Logged
stamper
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2626


« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2013, 02:50:33 AM »
ReplyReply

I have the 24mm 1.5 version which is for movies as well as stills. A nice looking lens. The images I get are as good as the ones from my nikkor and sigma lenses. Best used with live view but you need the patience to manually focus and expose. I recommend this lens. Opteka 6.5 is the fisheye I have for full frame that gives you a 180 degree field of view. Fully manual but no need to focus because of the extreme wide angle. For some reason the fitting to my d600 is a little loose but works perfectly. Small and cheap but worth it if you want a fisheye. You can see the effects of the fisheye in my link to the Flickr photostream below.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2013, 02:52:16 AM by stamper » Logged

robdickinson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


« Reply #17 on: September 26, 2013, 07:58:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I have a samyang 14/2.8 (canon) . Love it , flares a fair bit but so sharp, distortion can be an issue but is fixable in post. According to lensrental.com they are not the best build quality making them too expensive to repair but I have to say it feels solid in your hands.

I've played with the SY 24 tse and it looks good to me. I have the canon 24mm tse mkII already but it would have been a tough decision based on cost (1/3rd the canon!). If I was a nikon user I would be onto it in a shot as it is a super rotating design and superior to the nikon with similar optics.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad