aoluain wrote:
Its funny I actually do find that interesting.
So good glass being produced by the Koreans.
The mind Boggles
The Rokinon is the same lens as the Samyang, of course, and it costs 10x less money than the Summilux.
Despite the minor focus difference in the test, it is easy to see that the Rokinon is at least as sharp (I'd say sharper) and has obviously much smoother (I'd say "better") bokeh.
Indoor shots are one thing, but just looking at the "MC" on the Rokinar's (be it the 85 or the 14), it's not hard to see it would be no match in harsh outdoor light with modern day MC lenses from Japan or Germany. The MC on the Rokinar looks like the old (brown/yellow) SC/MC coatings I have seen on older Pentax, Canon, Olympus OM, and Nikon manual focus lenses. Where are those nice blues, green, reds - and all the other hues of Mc's that are seen on modern day lenses from top manufacturers? MY guess is the 14 in it current state would have a whole lot of ghosting and flare.
I don't care much how the coatings color from above. if said review http://canon-board.info/showthread.php?t=46140 is anything to go by, the coatings seem better than those of the 85/1.2...
aoluain wrote:
I felt from the test that at some apertures the
Rokinon was sharper but I put it down to focusing.
I have 2 Rokinon tele-converters for the FD system
they would be from the same manufacturer?
No. Rokinon is a "brand" not a manufacturer. Those old Rokinon TCs may have been made by Samyang, but more than likely not.
This Rokinon 85/1.4 is made by Samyang Optical of Korea.
They also make the Samyang branded 85/1.4 (of course) as well as the Polar, Falcon, Opteka, Vivitar, etc. They are all the same lens, all made in the same factory.
I have owned the Rokinon for 4 days and I can confirm that it is an absolutely incredible performer.
biotar wrote:
I don't care much how the coatings color from above. if said review http://canon-board.info/showthread.php?t=46140 is anything to go by, the coatings seem better than those of the 85/1.2...
Exactly. In fact, when I look at the coatings on the 85/1.4, I see the typical MC rainbow of colour mentioned by pdmphoto. One can never evaluate coatings visually, and certainly never from a photograph of the coatings.
In the short time that I have owned it, I have subjected it to all sorts of harsh lighting conditions and it has performed flawlessly, even with bright light sources in the frame.
I can't imagine they would put lesser quality coatings on the 14mm. If anything, they would make more of an effort since UWAs are more subject to flare.
cogitech wrote:
No. Rokinon is a "brand" not a manufacturer. Those old Rokinon TCs may have been made by Samyang, but more than likely not.
This Rokinon 85/1.4 is made by Samyang Optical of Korea.
They also make the Samyang branded 85/1.4 (of course) as well as the Polar, Falcon, Opteka, Vivitar, etc. They are all the same lens, all made in the same factory.
I have owned the Rokinon for 4 days and I can confirm that it is an absolutely incredible performer.
sorry ! s thats what i meant it just didnt come out onthe test.
thanksd anyway.
it certainly wouldnt make sense to go to the bother of producing this lens
with all the trick glass and not put a modern multi coating on . . .
A little OT here, but Cogitech/others who own the 85/1.4 - do you find it to be a true 1.4 lens as far as light transmission goes? I remember reading somewhere about it being 1/3-1/2 stop slower than f/1.4, needing some + EC to get similar shutter speeds to another 85/1.4.
Can't remember where I read it, but I haven't heard it anywhere else - most people just talk about how great the lens is. After I get a solid 30-35 I am thinking of picking one of these up.
Booone0 wrote:
A little OT here, but Cogitech/others who own the 85/1.4 - do you find it to be a true 1.4 lens as far as light transmission goes? I remember reading somewhere about it being 1/3-1/2 stop slower than f/1.4, needing some + EC to get similar shutter speeds to another 85/1.4.
Can't remember where I read it, but I haven't heard it anywhere else - most people just talk about how great the lens is. After I get a solid 30-35 I am thinking of picking one of these up.
I've read the same thing, and I was not sure if people simply meant the light transmission or the actual aperture and resulting DoF.
So with all this in mind I decided to compare its exposure directly to my FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical. With the FD set at f1.4 and the Rokinon wide open, my 5D meters and sets identical shutter speeds under various lighting conditions. Comparing the RAW histograms indicates only a tiny difference in exposure. Maybe 1/15th of a stop? Insignificant to me, anyway. Also, the DoF and resulting bokeh and blur discs show the Rokinon to truly be f1.4. The results are nearly indistinguishable. If the Rokinon was truly an f1.6 lens, there would be a visible difference in DoF, amount of blur, size of blur discs...
It could very possibly be that the Canon versions of this lens have a truer transmission value than some of the others. This is a total stab in the dark, but I wonder if the rear element is bigger on the Canon version. I do know that the 35mm lens that Samyang is planning will be available as f1.2 in Canon mount only. All the rest will be f1.4. Maybe the same design factors came to play in the 85 as well?
carpelux wrote:
I measured the rear glass on my nikon mount samyang and found it to be 33mm.
I just measured my EF mount version and it is also 33mm. So it seems the reports of exposure differences (ie. the Samyang requiring EC) are likely due to camera metering issues with manual lenses.
Just for shits n' giggles I also measured the rear element of my EF 85/1.8 (35.5mm) and my FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical (33mm).
So it seems rear element size is not such a deciding factor in light transmission. It seems Nikon's excuse (or is it simply a Nikonian excuse?) for not having an 85/1.2 is a red herring.
cogitech wrote:
I just measured my EF mount version and it is also 33mm. So it seems the reports of exposure differences (ie. the Samyang requiring EC) are likely due to camera metering issues with manual lenses.
Just for shits n' giggles I also measured the rear element of my EF 85/1.8 (35.5mm) and my FD 85/1.2 SSC Aspherical (33mm).
So it seems rear element size is not such a deciding factor in light transmission. It seems Nikon's excuse (or is it simply a Nikonian excuse?) for not having an 85/1.2 is a red herring.
Note that the Nikon F mount in its CPU form (AF or AI-P) has a smaller limit on rear element size than a pure F mount does, the fin with the CPU contacts infringes on the rear element clearance. This is one reason why there are no AF versions of the 58/1.2, 50/1.2 or 35/1.4, all of which have large (by Nikon standards) rear elements.
Nikon could do an 85/1.2 if they really wanted to. But it would be a lot harder to do as an AF lens.
Silentlight wrote:
Nikon lens sits further from the film plane than the Canon's does. Could that also be a factor in the light loss?
I guess. Since the image circle likely gets larger as the lens moves away from the media, the concentration of the light would be slightly less. Sort of like how you lose some light when you use tubes.
"Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical is about finished
Cracow, 4th February 2010: We bring good news for all those who have impatiently waited for introducing new Samyang 14mm f/2.8 lens. The improved model has been just produced and is subject to the final tests. The optics was changed by redesigning the aspherical lens. The first lens is made of the optical glass, while the second is of the hybrid construction.
The aforementioned developments allowed us to improve picture resolution at the edges of a photo by 15%, without affecting the chromatic aberration. The second change was redesigning antireflective coatings and limiting internal reflections, which made the lens more resistant to the flare. The lens will be available in Poland and entire Europe at the end of March. The retail price has been established at 329 Euro. The product will be compatible with the following systems:
I just know this will be a good lens and many who have been on the fence with the $2k Canon EF L may jump on this one.
I myself will be looking into getting one for the Nikon F mount. Gotta wonder.... if Samyang can make an ultra wide angle for around $500, why is Canon charging $2k or Nikon 14mm selling at $1300
I like this new spree of Samyang lenses. They concentrate on the optics and get them pretty damn good, and save money on manual focus & manual aperture. Build quality is decent too. It's a great alternative as I know a lot don't care for autofocus or certainly don't need it all the time.
The 8/3.5 has incredible flare resistance, I wonder how this one stacks up. Might be an interesting lens to try one day...
