apsphoto wrote:
The sigma 15-30 will not work on a full frame, the 12-24 will and this Samyang will work on a full frame camera. Also my 15-30 before I sold was really horrible in the corners.
Alan
As PP said, the 15-30 is designed for full frame. I compared mine to the 16-35 mkI and the images were indistinguishable in sharpness. The 15-30 is optimized at the wide end.
What I use now is the Nikon 14-24. It's better than the 15-30, but this thread is not about "the best", it's about ultra wide for $400.
You are the perfect candidate to "graduate" to the MP-E65 then. Most people have not tried going beyond 1:1 (me included) before jumping to the MP-E65 and they find it incredibly difficult to use!
wickerprints wrote:
I already have the 100/2.8L macro IS. And I keep finding extension tubes and TCs on it to get me past 1:1. I can get it up to about 2.75:1 with a full set of tubes + 1.4x TC. It's kinda working, but I lose a fair amount of optical quality for relatively modest increases in magnification. I'm an avid macro shooter. I would love to get up to 5:1.
i didn't read the whole thread, but i had seen actual test photos of this lens from the D3X, and the M-distortion was horrific.
what i really wonder as from the start of this thread, how many people can be impressed by a lenses performance, with the shots seen from it being shots that had already gone through post processing?
you can knock out a whole lotta problems lenses have with a computer and a good amount of work, that doesn't make it a good lens. for me the lens should preform so well i shouldn't have to work with PP alot, and seeing the MD it makes shows why it's so cheap.
---XR--- wrote:
i didn't read the whole thread, but i had seen actual test photos of this lens from the D3X, and the M-distortion was horrific.
what i really wonder as from the start of this thread, how many people can be impressed by a lenses performance, with the shots seen from it being shots that had already gone through post processing?
you can knock out a whole lotta problems lenses have with a computer and a good amount of work, that doesn't make it a good lens. for me the lens should preform so well i shouldn't have to work with PP alot, and seeing the MD it makes shows why it's so cheap....Show more →
Was that the first prototype version of the lens that was later redesigned? Why not relax and let some test the lens before jumping to hysterical conclusions? No need to throw the poor lens under the bus --yet.
Don't forget you get what you pay for, if you want better distortion control, then you have to pay 5x as much. For some(including me), it's worth spending a bit of time PP versus spending a small fortune, especially if it's a lens that's not heavily used.
Of the 6 photos posted in that first link 5 of them say the focal length is 50mm and one of them says it was shot with the 17-40L. If you throw out the 17-40L shot, what is up with the 50mm focal length? Is that just a default focal length stored in the EXIF data on the 5DII?
Tommy there is no chip on the lens so there is nothing reported to the camera, the camera always show f00, so the default in the exif is 50mm. You have to run in complete manual mode. A flash back to my old Canon A-1 days.....
I finally got a chance to run a few test images, nothing interesting, just thought I would do a little comparison to my 16-35 version2(recently optically calibrated). I setup a test subject and moved the tripod to keep magnification ~ the same between the 14mm and the zoom at 16mm, did center sharp tests wide open, and corner sharpness tests closed down 2 stops(the 16-35 is not very good wide open, but improves a lot once closed down). Used live view to verify focus prior to each shot.
Center sharpness wide open, it's a wash, they are both very good. Corner sharpness, once again the same, with no clear winner, so while a bit of an apples and oranges comparison, I'm pleased that it is as sharp as a lens costing 4 x as much.
I haven't looked at distortion much yet, but in a few quick images I have taken, I did see a little of the MD people were commenting on( in long horizontal lines, near frame edges, but I'm not sure how much a problem this will be). I'll post something if I ever learn how to use a lens this wide!
Just as an aside, I downloaded Adobes Lens Profile creator and for fun, I took images of the pattern on my monitor(I realize this is NOT how they recommend doing it), and created a quick profile for the lens and tried it with the image with a bit of MD. It actually did a good job of correcting it! Enough so, I think I will follow the directions from Adobe and do it properly!
I would like to take that thread back to life and get more feedback on the lens now that many copies have been sold.
> apsphoto have you concluded your test ? do you feel the distortion is a heart bracker because difficult to correct, or can you leave with it ?
> Also, I do not have PT lens in my workflow now and would like to avoid to take yet another software in it.
So, anyone knows if there is or will be a Adobes Lens Profile (best option), or amateur/official/unofficial scrip/filter for Photoshop CS or updated ACR, to correct distortion by a clic ?
I plan to use it on 1D mk4 and already have a 16-35 II to do most of the job, plus a 24 1.4 I, I do very few images at this range. So the 14mm has to be very nice so I will sell the 16-35 and use only the primes, otherwise I cannot justify to take the 3 lens around, the bag is already very heavy.
Anyone, more feedback (no trolling) welcomed ! Thanks in advance
I stand by my statement, which is you need to use manual mode, using Av will not work with this lens. I have one and I know. There is no chip on the lens to tell the camera that it even has an aperture and what the range is, so when you connect to the camera you get an aperture of 00. On my 3 camera bodies, the 40d and 5D mark II will show 00 all the time for the aperture unless you are in manual mode. If you put it in Av it will not allow you to set anything to get a meter reading. On the 1D MarkIV you can put it in Av and it will let you dial in aperture but it will let you set any aperture including 1.0 which will lead to problems.
The only way to reliably meter and get a decent exposure is manual mode, set the aperture on the lens and set the camera to match the setting and then meter and adjust the shutter as necessary. This is what works.
Alan
cogitech wrote:
This is not true. Any of these (manual focus, manual aperture) lenses will work in Av mode, with a little EC as necessary.
I have not done any more testing other than some shots for fun. I did post the initial results which show the moustach distortion quite well, and they are here: http://www.pbase.com/snowlep/samyang
Is there is reason you want to replace the 16-35mm? I would think that is better quality lens, the distortion is easier to fix and Adobe already has profiles for it. As for the Samyang I think you will probably have to do your own Adobe profile. There is also some vignetting wide open but that is common with ultra wide angles and full frame cameras. The Sigma 12-24mm is a much better lens and has very little distortion, not as fast but if you do not need the speed and want better correction than that might be a solution.
I bought the Samyang because I wanted a manual lens for doing really wide astronomical shots for a project, the distortion will not be a problem for me and have the nice manual lens will be what I want. As a general purpose lens there are much better lenses out there, like the Sigma 12-24 and on a crop camera the Tokina 11-16mm. I wish the Canon lenses like the 17-40, the 16-35mm and the 24-105 had less distortion but that is something that can be dealt with and for the most part you do not notice.
I will probably still run some more tests soon, I have not had time since I had emergency surgery just over a month ago and have been recovering, getting to the point where I want to go back and look at it closely. I will probably try and make an Adobe profile for fun.
apsphoto wrote:
I stand by my statement, which is you need to use manual mode, using Av will not work with this lens.
Many, many users, using hundreds of fully manual lenses, on many different Canon bodies, would agree that you are incorrect.
Av mode works. I've been doing it this way for many years.
There is no need to set the aperture on the camera body, it just does TTL metering and sets a shutter speed. Some EC may be needed, as I said. Dead simple.
Manual mode will work, but it is not necessary.
Ask the same question over in the Alt forum and you'll get the same reply from everyone.
Just to clarify, it does not work because more than 2 stops of ec would be required, that has been my experience with this lens. I do have a lot of experience with photography and not just trying to argue with you, it does not work for whatever reason in Av mode with the 3 bodies that I have, other lenses do, but for me manual mode works reliably. I shoot mostly manual mode anyways so it is not a big deal, only when needed will I use the other modes if the circumstances warrant it.
apsphoto wrote:
Well I have tried it with this lens and I stand by my statement. With other lenses like the Zeiss your statement stands.
Alan
You are misunderstanding something, if you continue to stand by your statement.
I am not talking about Zeiss ZE (native EOS mount) I am talking about completely manual lenses that have no electronics at all, just like the one in question.
It is referred to as "stop-down metering" and it is what the vast majority of Alt users use for exposure.
Do yourself a favour and try it. Put the camera in Av mode and push the button. The camera will meter the light through the lens and choose an appropriate shutter speed.
You're saying it doesn't work, but practically everyone does it this way with these fully manual lenses...
apsphoto wrote:
Just to clarify, it does not work because more than 2 stops of ec would be required, that has been my experience with this lens. I do have a lot of experience with photography and not just trying to argue with you, it does not work for whatever reason in Av mode with the 3 bodies that I have, other lenses do, but for me manual mode works reliably. I shoot mostly manual mode anyways so it is not a big deal, only when needed will I use the other modes if the circumstances warrant it.
Alan
I am glad you found something that works, and you are comfortable with manual exposure, but to say that Av mode doesn't work is simply incorrect. I stand by that statement, because I use Av mode all the time and the EC range on my cameras is always more than enough.
apsphoto wrote:
I stand by my statement, which is you need to use manual mode, using Av will not work with this lens. I have one and I know. There is no chip on the lens to tell the camera that it even has an aperture and what the range is, so when you connect to the camera you get an aperture of 00. On my 3 camera bodies, the 40d and 5D mark II will show 00 all the time for the aperture unless you are in manual mode. If you put it in Av it will not allow you to set anything to get a meter reading. On the 1D MarkIV you can put it in Av and it will let you dial in aperture but it will let you set any aperture including 1.0 which will lead to problems.
The only way to reliably meter and get a decent exposure is manual mode, set the aperture on the lens and set the camera to match the setting and then meter and adjust the shutter as necessary. This is what works.
I don't understand. My old C\Y Zeiss 85 f/1.4, has no chip at all, it has a simple adapter to mount to the camera and I only use Av mode and it's works perfectly. Select the aperture and the camera sets the exposure. Why doesn't this work on the Samyang?
