Full, proper review. Looks MUCH better than the copy reviewed in the German review, especially regarding edge sharpness....looks like the other guy may have gotten a damaged lens.
Distortion still looks bad, though...wonder how difficult it would be to correct.
wickerprints wrote:
Looks really nice in the corners, but with some small caveats of course:
1. We are looking at a resize to something like 30% of the original image resolution.
2. With the exception of the final image, the other subjects are not ideal for looking at corner performance.
I'd also like to know what f-numbers these samples were shot at--some look stopped down, others maybe not, but I can't tell, since it's missing from the EXIF.
But yes, this appears to be very, very nice performance indeed. And at a very competitive price! In many ways, one would not miss not having AF on such a lens. Based on image samples I am tentatively claiming that this lens outperforms the Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6 @ 14mm. Canon better watch out. My fondest wish is for upstarts like Samyang to shake up the 35mm lens retail market, because competition leads to innovation and downward price pressure. ...Show more → jamesf99 wrote:
AF? Why AF? Set to infinity, release shutter, enjoy.
Seriously, if the lens is decent, I wouldn't care too much about AF for what's probably more a landscape lens than anything else.
Did you not read my post carefully? This is what I said:
"In many ways, one would not miss not having AF on such a lens."
In other words, no AF = no big deal. Maybe there's an extra "not" in there but I think the meaning was clear.
Full, proper review. Looks MUCH better than the copy reviewed in the German review, especially regarding edge sharpness....looks like the other guy may have gotten a damaged lens.
Distortion still looks bad, though...wonder how difficult it would be to correct.
Be interested in seeing someone do a ptlens profile on the lens and seeing how it corrects it.
jamesf99 wrote:
Oh... that's bad...if there isn't a severe problem with that lens (and I hope there is), then it would be over priced at $40, let alone $400.
I didn't say it was overpriced. On the contrary. It is cheaper than better lenses. Hence, TANSTAAFL.
Many actual owners have been posting on other forums and the results seem favourable so far - as are mine.
Perhaps the so-called 'test' lenses haven't been representative - wouldn't be the first time!
PTLens latest update includes a setting for the Samyang 14/2.8 and works very well indeed.
OK, we will be awaiting your comments, testing & experience with this lens.
I am getting to the point where I need a good/wide prime, but don't want a clunker.
A bargain, yes, but not something I have to PP just to get an image out of the work
Yakim Peled wrote:
I didn't say it was overpriced. On the contrary. It is cheaper than better lenses. Hence, TANSTAAFL.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
No, it was my suggestion that it would be overpriced. I wouldn't pay $40 for a lens that produced that kind of distortion.
That's why I was hoping that the lens used/tested was an anomaly, or at least had been dropped, was malformed at birth, or suffered some other catastrophic event.
No, it was my suggestion that it would be overpriced. I wouldn't pay $40 for a lens that produced that kind of distortion.
That's why I was hoping that the lens used/tested was an anomaly, or at least had been dropped, was malformed at birth, or suffered some other catastrophic event.
I think it probably isn't representative of the results others have been getting.
And I'm not sure what level of distortion you would find acceptable from any 14mm on FF - yes the Canon 14mm has less (and so it should at the price - but still has some), the Canon 17 TS-E has less again (and again should at the price, but it isn't a 14mm).
The mustache distortion and overall levels are pretty high, which makes it too bad for some uses, but it isn't too troublesome for other applications. For me, a 14mm lens is not something I'd use a great deal, and for the money it is an easy decision. If I expected to use that focal length a lot, then maybe paying 5x as much for Canon's would make it worthwhile. I'll probably wait for a few more samples or reviews to come out and then decide.
Wonder why Sigma doesn't bring it back in their lineup, especially with the price of Canon.s. I have a pristine copy of the 14mm 2.8 EX HSM that I cherish, sharpness and contrast even wide open are astounding. I personally think it's the best lens they ever produced...
PaulB wrote:
No, it was my suggestion that it would be overpriced. I wouldn't pay $40 for a lens that produced that kind of distortion.
That's why I was hoping that the lens used/tested was an anomaly, or at least had been dropped, was malformed at birth, or suffered some other catastrophic event.
I think it probably isn't representative of the results others have been getting.
And I'm not sure what level of distortion you would find acceptable from any 14mm on FF - yes the Canon 14mm has less (and so it should at the price - but still has some), the Canon 17 TS-E has less again (and again should at the price, but it isn't a 14mm).
Valid comments. I'm fine shooting at 16mm and the distortion doesn't bother me (as long as I manage it) so I'm not ignoring the possibility of it happening. I also know that no lens is perfect nor do I expect it. The problem I saw in the last example - the mustache distortion on the steps - would render it unusable for me, so I wouldn't buy it.
I try to think of lenses in the whole, or gestalt, if you will. A lens doesn't have to be perfect, but if it can't do what I need it to do, then it's not the right tool. Sadly, I found Canon's 50L unusable as well - for my intended purposes - but that's a different kettle of fish.
]jamesf99 wrote,
"Valid comments. I'm fine shooting at 16mm and the distortion doesn't bother me (as long as I manage it) so I'm not ignoring the possibility of it happening. I also know that no lens is perfect nor do I expect it. The problem I saw in the last example - the mustache distortion on the steps - would render it unusable for me, so I wouldn't buy it.
I try to think of lenses in the whole, or gestalt, if you will. A lens doesn't have to be perfect, but if it can't do what I need it to do, then it's not the right tool. Sadly, I found Canon's 50L unusable as well - for my intended purposes - but that's a different kettle of fish. "
I keep saying this; but my example doesn't exhibit the type of distortion - mustache, wave, call it what you will - that some other samples show.
Good ones, bad ones, representative or what? Who knows until enough lenses get out into use?
I find the 16mm end of the 16-35/2.8L much more difficult to deal with for many things I photograph - however I try to correct, or ignore, it - and the few days I have used the Samyang 14mm leads me to believe that with the PTLens correction this is a very usable lens.
PaulB wrote:
]jamesf99 wrote,
"Valid comments. I'm fine shooting at 16mm and the distortion doesn't bother me (as long as I manage it) so I'm not ignoring the possibility of it happening. I also know that no lens is perfect nor do I expect it. The problem I saw in the last example - the mustache distortion on the steps - would render it unusable for me, so I wouldn't buy it.
I try to think of lenses in the whole, or gestalt, if you will. A lens doesn't have to be perfect, but if it can't do what I need it to do, then it's not the right tool. Sadly, I found Canon's 50L unusable as well - for my intended purposes - but that's a different kettle of fish. "
I keep saying this; but my example doesn't exhibit the type of distortion - mustache, wave, call it what you will - that some other samples show.
Good ones, bad ones, representative or what? Who knows until enough lenses get out into use?
I find the 16mm end of the 16-35/2.8L much more difficult to deal with for many things I photograph - however I try to correct, or ignore, it - and the few days I have used the Samyang 14mm leads me to believe that with the PTLens correction this is a very usable lens....Show more →
That's great. If you're having good luck with it, I'm sure others are too and I'd like to see their work.
I don't want my comments to be interpreted as if I don't want to *like* this lens. I DO want to like, and I would like to try/buy it if I can see enough good examples.
