Just got this lens today and played with it on my 1DS-mk3. Sort of disappointed that focus confirm does not work as it does on my Ziess lens. The little brochure that came with it sort of made me think it would but no luck.
But the sharpness and DOF are terrific. Looks like the beginning of the infinity mark at f8 is the sharpest setting at distance and slightly better than the 10 foot mark. 7 Feet is best at very near subject like at your feet and not bad at distant stuff. I was also favorably impressed at distortion for landscape work. Not bad at all.
8 feet is hyperfocal at f5.6 and .015 CoC but I always find hyperfocal a bit of a disappointment.
I tried various settings with f5.6 and it is very good, but slightly sharper on the edges at f8.
The focusing scale was off adjustment on mine, so I made my own scale. You can download a distortion correction for photoshop for it on Samyang's facebook site I believe. It corrects the moustache distortion. I really enjoy the lens and really like how close it focuses. I guess I don't have any more tips though. I've never considered getting a focus chip, just have the alternate focusing screen in my 5d2 or us live view if I need to.
The 1DS-mk3 LCD is crummy for UWA. The grainy display of detail at infinity is so small at 14mm that live view is not much good for distant focusing. Even using a Hoodman is not much use.
I think I will go by the scale. Once I know how it performs, I will have something to trust.
I never worry about the absolute value of the focus scale. As soon as I figure out where it needs to be at f8 I am good. Focus of close stuff in live view is easy just the distant stuff.
The focus chip is really not worth it, other than having some EXIF info tagged to each image. The DoF is so large that the AF sensor will not give you consistant confirm. I pulled it off the 14mm and re-mounted it on the 85mm f1.4, where it actually helps out quite a bit.
Another point about the lens (besides the focus scale being way off infinity), there is a sizable focus shift going from f2.8 to a working aperture like f5.6-f8, so use LiveView to confirm. I agree with the software corrections, as they do work great. The lens is a bargain, along with the 35mm, and 85mm. You just need to work slower and smarter...
ben egbert wrote:
Did not know about the chip, any ordering info?
They’re available from several sellers on eBay, typically under $10, and often user-programmable.
I purchased mine from seller ‘weakpotoman’ paying $4.15 plus $3 extra to have 14mm f/2.8 pre-programmed. There’s also an inexpensive ($3) plastic jig available to assist in mounting.
Here is my test drive from tonight. The wind and low light forced me to go to f5.6 ISO200 to freeze the wheat. I decided the wheat was more important than the horizon so I focused at 7 feet.
I have a bunch at other settings like 7 feet, 10 feet and infinity at F8, but will save for later.
Ben,
I'm glad you got a good copy. Mine never worked out for me as I wanted to use it for night shots at the wider apertures. The focus calibration was off a mile on the Samyang, but that didn't phase me at all. I simply could not get sharp results at f2.8-4.0, where I wanted to use it. I always found myself gravitating back to the Zeiss 21/2.8 ZE and simply dealing with a smaller view. The Zeiss is sharp in the corners, even wide open, and had that great micro contrast. My recent alternative is the Canon 17 TSE , but its rather slow at f4 max aperture. Also stars woudl begin tracking with 2 longer exposures, making a wide angle flat stitch pano impractical. As the others posters note, the moustache distortion could be readily dealt with with PT Lens, but couldn't make soft corners become sharp.
I'm glad yours is working out, show us some examples.
MIke K
see above, taken at f5.6. I did some 17TSE at this place to get some comparison but have not checked them yet. I can already see it is going to be hard to see the difference. I would also like to use this for star scapes where the 17 is too slow.
I am watching the Ziess 15mm but hear it won't be shipping until December.
Ben -- I had the same focusing issues as John, and handled the same way -- piece of white tape with my own focus distances (way different than the lens markings!).
I sent my first one back over focusing scale issues. The second one was better, but infinity is around the 10' marking, 12' is around the 7', and 6' is around 4'. 3' is at 2' mark, and after that it is a better approximation at closer distances. I spent several days getting the exact focus for infinity, 12', 6', 3'. At closer distances, objects are big enough to visually focus accurately.
Not sure why I need to mark focus distance. I have never trusted these markings even back in film days. I generally shoot at one or two aperatures, for this lens it will be f5.6 and f8 unless I need to slow down shutter, in which case DOF just gets better at the cost of diffraction.
So I have determined that the 7 foot mark is sharp for stuff at my feet by f5.6 and the 10 foot mark is sharp everywhere at f8.
This is basically all I need to know. I don't like selective focus, but on the off chance I did it, live view would be the means.
All of my lenses focus a bit past infinity. I always thought this was on purpose and a safeguard against thermal expansion.
ben egbert wrote:
Here is my test drive from tonight. The wind and low light forced me to go to f5.6 ISO200 to freeze the wheat. I decided the wheat was more important than the horizon so I focused at 7 feet.
I have a bunch at other settings like 7 feet, 10 feet and infinity at F8, but will save for later.
Wow, that image makes me want this lens! Fantastic work!
Thanks for the links. I would never use this lens for critical work where distortion is a factor when I have the 17TSE. I have to see how much I care for landscape use.
Question for those who fixed the infinity focus. Having never used the focus distance marks on lenses since I started in 1980, I am wondering how you use them.
I mean obviously they are there for a reason, but I am stumped with the reason on a UWA. The lens tends to have total dof from close to infinity from f5.6 on, you only need to know what to set it. This does not seem to be a lens that could even do much selective focus.
I could see if using for star scapes at f2.8. So in that case you need to get a good infinity.
Last night I was comparing my 17TSE a very sharp lens with the SamYang. I used focus confirm on the TSE and when I got home, I found it was front focused and thus soft at infinity, a problem I get occasionally. The SamYang was much sharper at infinity and just as good close.
The TSE is really sharp when I nail focus, but now I suspect I rely too much on focus confirm and the details at infinity are not good enough to be reliable.
Infinty focus on an UWA with the crummy 1DS-mk3 live view is not possible for me. Now I am considering using the focus scale. But I don't need them to be accurate in terms of distance, just repeatable in terms of focus after I figure out what value to use for infnity.
I found on mine that if I made a mark basically by the "E" on the red EOS on the top of the lens that you can see on gunzorro's image that the lens scale was then quite accurate. I started to make a scale like gunzorro's first but then discovered that the scale was just shifted so used this other method. extra room at infinity is also to allow for infrared photgraphy I believe and changes due to temperture as already noted. I've used the 17 tilt/shift a couple times also and have found the samyang is very close if not sharper to the 17. It is lacking the corrections thow so it wouldn't be a replacement and you can do a very wide stitch with the tilt/shift without registry problems.
