Tariq Gibran wrote:
Did you miss the part where it's not a true 1.4?
Yes, I only saw someone here claiming it without proving it (haven't read the whole thread). I'm sure it's about the T-stop, not the F-stop if it's not "true".
wayne seltzer wrote:
The bokeh of the 24G and the ZE25/2 are much smoother and better than this Samyang 24/1.4.
Have a link to that comparison, or are you just guessing?
Makten wrote:
Yes, I only saw someone here claiming it without proving it (haven't read the whole thread). I'm sure it's about the T-stop, not the F-stop if it's not "true".
Have a link to that comparison, or are you just guessing?
Not side by side with the Samyang but just looking at these test shots with bad bokeh like the one I included in this thread earlier, it looks a lot worse than what I know the 24G and ZF 25/2 render. I just rented the 25/2 and was comparing it with my 24G which I own and have been using since they first came out a couple of years ago. you can see a 24G vs. 25/2 bokeh comparison here:
The bokeh shot of the Samyang with the owl carved /painted on the tree looks like a undercorrected SA lens with nervous bokeh. Anyway, bokeh is high subjective and needs to really be done side by side in the same conditions but I doubt that will change the results.
Makten wrote:
Yes, I only saw someone here claiming it without proving it (haven't read the whole thread). I'm sure it's about the T-stop, not the F-stop if it's not "true".
It's in the linked to review of the lens on the previous page:
"Either the Samyang 1.4/24 has f/1.4 aperture only and solely on its casing and in the specifications, its real aperture being much closer the value of f/1.8 than f/1.4, or the aperture is set defectively and it doesn’t influence the path of light in the f/1.4-1.8 range"
wayne seltzer wrote:
Not side by side with the Samyang but just looking at these test shots with bad bokeh like the one I included in this thread earlier, it looks a lot worse than what I know the 24G and ZF 25/2 render. I just rented the 25/2 and was comparing it with my 24G which I own and have been using since they first came out a couple of years ago. you can see a 24G vs. 25/2 bokeh comparison here:
The bokeh shot of the Samyang with the owl carved /painted on the tree looks like a undercorrected SA lens with nervous bokeh. Anyway, bokeh is high subjective and needs to really be done side by side in the same conditions but I doubt that will change the results. ...Show more →
That's funny, because I thought it was very smooth for such a scene. The ones you posted are completely different and can of course not be compared straight away.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
It's in the linked to review of the lens on the previous page:
"Either the Samyang 1.4/24 has f/1.4 aperture only and solely on its casing and in the specifications, its real aperture being much closer the value of f/1.8 than f/1.4, or the aperture is set defectively and it doesn’t influence the path of light in the f/1.4-1.8 range"
Still just a claim, without proof. You know that DOF and OOF COF:s differ with the correction of spherical aberration, right? And that light transmission isn't the same as aperture size?
Edit: You mean this?
"When taking photos in the aperture-priority mode I noticed that exposure times by f/1.4 and f/2.0 are very similar; the difference between them is not greater than 1/3 EV. Although it gave me something to think about it was nothing unusual because a different vignetting layout by different apertures can effectively cheat the light measurement system in a camera."
Ah, so the noob uses the light meter to conclude that the lens does something wrong. Since it was tested on a Canon camera, it didn't report anything about the aperture to the camera (no CPU, no nothing). And since the matte screen of the viewfinder, which the meter uses for metering on, doesn't get linearly brighter past ~f/4 on a modern camera (the micro prisms don't allow such angles of infalling light to pass), the metering will be off for any fast lens without a CPU, when using it at f/1.4 or thereabout. With a CPU, the camera can correct for the nonlinear metering properties of fast lenses.
Edit 2: This is the same reason you cannot accurately focus manually with the stock screen. You just won't see a DOF shallower than ~f/4.
Well with fast wides "huge coma" and "monstrous vignetting" are to be expected! Having said that in view of the Lenstip review I suspect that the price of the Samyang 24mm will have to come down.
Looking on the bright side, we are now spoiled for choice with fast wides for Nikon and Canon. Only a few short years ago the only option we had was the Canon 24L mk1 (with is large chromatic aberration issues) and no option from Nikon once they discontinued the 28mm f1.4. Now Zeiss are in the game, and Nikon and Canon have fabulous new era 24mm f1.4s. The Samyang gives us yet another choice, but IMHO price is going to be a big factor here.
Can be true about being more like 1.8 or lets say 1.6.
Got yesterday time to try Samyang, looking at exposure @1.4 1/1600 @2 1/1000 @2.8 1/640 @4 1/340 @5.6 1/160. Same scene Zeiss 25/2 @2 1/800 @2.8 1/400 @4 1/200 @5.6 1/100. EF 24/1.4 II @1.4 1/2000 @2 1/1000 @2.8 1/500...
TS-E 24 as well @4 1/250 @5.6 1/125 @8 1/50
JaanOs wrote:
Can be true about being more like 1.8 or lets say 1.6.
Got yesterday time to try Samyang, looking at exposure @1.4 1/1600 @2 1/1000 @2.8 1/640 @4 1/340 @5.6 1/160. Same scene Zeiss 25/2 @2 1/800 @2.8 1/400 @4 1/200 @5.6 1/100. EF 24/1.4 II @1.4 1/2000 @2 1/1000 @2.8 1/500...
TS-E 24 as well @4 1/250 @5.6 1/125 @8 1/50
If those shutter speeds gave the same exposure in every picture, the Samyang is faster than the Zeiss @ f/2-5.6 and faster than the EF at f/2.8. Or did I miss something? Edit: And faster than the TS-E as well.
Don't trust the metering of your camera. If you want to compare real T-stop (and/or F-stop), use the same aperture and the same shutter speed, and look at the exposure you get in the middle of the image (NOT the histogram!!!).
p.10 #10 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
Makten wrote:
Don't trust the metering of your camera.
) Yes, you are right, not the best way to compare something in changing light conditions. Just like to point out that difference between exposure measured by camera with all the other lenses 1EV quite constantly as well Samyang 24/1.4 up from f2.0.
Next time before making any conclusions will try with constant lightning
p.10 #11 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
wayne seltzer wrote:
The Nikkor 24/1.4G is sharper wide open than the old 28/1.4AFD and is even at a disadvantage of 24 vs. 28.
The center and central 2/3 parts of the frame of the 24/1.4G is much sharper and clearer than this Samyang lens and performs well against the new ZE 25/2. The bokeh of the 24G and the ZE25/2 are much smoother and better than this Samyang 24/1.4. Yes, it is hard to get such a fast wide angle lens to have as smooth a bokeh as a 50 or 85 but this Samyang seems to be quite a bit worse from the limited number of sample shots.
I was worried about its wide open performance when their site only had one wide open shot and the rest were stopped down shots. IMO, you buy a fast 24/1.4 for mostly shooting wide open or at f2 otherwise you might as well use a slower f2.8 lens....Show more →
This reminds me of the criticism on the first samples of the Samyang 35/1.4, which turned out to be great lens.
p.10 #13 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
Makten wrote:
Still just a claim, without proof. You know that DOF and OOF COF:s differ with the correction of spherical aberration, right? And that light transmission isn't the same as aperture size?
Edit: You mean this?
"When taking photos in the aperture-priority mode I noticed that exposure times by f/1.4 and f/2.0 are very similar; the difference between them is not greater than 1/3 EV. Although it gave me something to think about it was nothing unusual because a different vignetting layout by different apertures can effectively cheat the light measurement system in a camera."
Ah, so the noob uses the light meter to conclude that the lens does something wrong. Since it was tested on a Canon camera, it didn't report anything about the aperture to the camera (no CPU, no nothing). And since the matte screen of the viewfinder, which the meter uses for metering on, doesn't get linearly brighter past ~f/4 on a modern camera (the micro prisms don't allow such angles of infalling light to pass), the metering will be off for any fast lens without a CPU, when using it at f/1.4 or thereabout. With a CPU, the camera can correct for the nonlinear metering properties of fast lenses.
Edit 2: This is the same reason you cannot accurately focus manually with the stock screen. You just won't see a DOF shallower than ~f/4. ...Show more →
No, I meant the exact quote from the article I posted. I would be surprised and shocked if the meter was all the went by. That's sort of doubtful given how the meter would also be heavily affected by the extreme vignetting the lens has.
p.10 #14 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
JaanOs wrote:
Just like to point out that difference between exposure measured by camera with all the other lenses 1EV quite constantly as well Samyang 24/1.4 up from f2.0.
Yes, but only showing an advantage for the Samyang.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
No, I meant the exact quote from the article I posted.
That quote didn't say anything about how he (?) came to the conclusion. Still people here are "dissapointed". Why?
p.10 #15 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
Makten wrote:
Yes, but only showing an advantage for the Samyang.
That quote didn't say anything about how he (?) came to the conclusion. Still people here are "dissapointed". Why?
Obviously, because the tests at the link show the lens not to be that great. The same site tested the Samyang 35 1.4 and the conclusions perfectly matched with owner experiences as well as other reviews. Perhaps their copy of the 24 is damaged but until further tests and user experiences contradict this, the lens would look to be a major disappointment.
Feb 11, 2012 at 03:11 PM
Guest
Guest
p.10 #16 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Did you miss the part where it's not a true 1.4?
It might have had a defective aperture assembly. I believe Samyang lenses were often reported for various mechanical malfunctions (like the 14mm owned by Gunzorro of Canon board that had a focusing scale that was way off).
Still, I'd rather keep saving for the L.
p.10 #17 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
AhamB wrote:
This reminds me of the criticism on the first samples of the Samyang 35/1.4, which turned out to be great lens.
AhamB, if you noticed earlier in this thread when I commented on the sample shots posted that the owl on the tree shot had busy bokeh but said sharpness is hard to tell, I thought that wide open shot was not that sharp too but I was giving the benefit of the doubt to maybe bad post processing like the 35/1.4 shots. But when the Lenstip test results come back with even center sharpness wide open not being par with CaNikon offerings, coupled with the Samyang website only posting only one or two wide open shots for a fast lens like this, I feel it wasn't coincidence. Maybe,someone can show that they had a bad copy or somethings but for right now this lens doesn't look too good wide open and it is $800, so harder to justify than the previous cheaper Samy lenses. IMHO
Also, with the 35/1.4 I remember comparison shots (of a bicycle handlebar from Cavewalker?)between the C/Y 35/1.4 and Samy 35/1.4 which showed the C/Y was sharper wide open and with less aberrations if I remember correctly.
Yes, the Samy is praised here for its performance across the frame stopped down but I have not seen any comparison shots for larger apertures which show the Samy is better than Zeiss offerings. Coupled with enormous size which I find hilarious for shooting people, for which this type of lens is for, and way too big to carry for landscape. IMHO.
One last thing, when I comment on lenses it usually is in relative way to other lens alternatives and so should not be taken like I think the lens is horrible, just not as good as the leading lenses.
I do not think Samyang is "major disappointment", it is not just what people expected from 35mm or 50mm lens.
It happen to be 24mm and 1.4 lens ~600 EUR
p.10 #20 · Samyang just announced their 24mm f/1.4
Yes, from F1.4/2...11 per lens raw files And not perfect scene by light, probably worst that can occur.
Just in case somebody is better with raw converter (CA correcting and so on) not going to convert to jpg.
Since it was tested on a Canon camera, it didn't report anything about the aperture to the camera (no CPU, no nothing). And since the matte screen of the viewfinder, which the meter uses for metering on, doesn't get linearly brighter past ~f/4 on a modern camera (the micro prisms don't allow such angles of infalling light to pass), the metering will be off for any fast lens without a CPU, when using it at f/1.4 or thereabout. With a CPU, the camera can correct for the nonlinear metering properties of fast lenses.
Edit: And faster than the TS-E as well.
And not perfect scene by light, probably worst that can occur.