David Baldwin wrote:
Is the moustache distortion visible on horizontal lines passing exactly through the middle of the frame please?
Only if you have some kind of regular pattern on that line, say a ruler - then the distance between the etchings will hint at the distortion. For horizons with trees or grass I doubt anyone could tell...
I just got mine, and I find it an amazing lens. High build quality, super sharp, very little distortion, and just overall an insane value for money. Just wished I was more into super wide photography, as I expect it will wear off its novelty in a few days. But great fun for now!
GREAT images guys! I'm really tempted to pick this lens up!
dbehrens wrote:
Wow - you have a problem. I mounted mine on my 1DMk4 (using live view at 10X) and checked infinity, 7 feet, 3 feet and 2 feet (measured with tape from the subject to where the glass is on the protruding lens) and in all 4 measurements it was spot on to what was marked on the focusing ring.
I checked where the mount screws are screwed into the lens barrel and yes there are 3 screws but as far as I can determine by tapping and examining under strong light and magnify glass they seem to be screwed into a metal barrel - not plastic.
Not sure what to say - but it sounds like our versions are very different. Mine is the Rokinon version for Canon purchased mid December. I'm wondering if they made additional changes to the lens other than just the new UMC multi-coating?
Dave...Show more →
Based upon the other interest shown in the Samyang 14 thread, I thought those interested in this economy ultra wide angle lens would like to see how it compares to the legendary Zeiss 21. The objective was two fold:
Firstly the issue was to see if PT Lens visually diminished the sharpness of the Samyang (Rokinon branded) 14 f2.8 image captured on a 5DII. This distortion correction software for the Rokinon is not embeded into the Breezebrowser RAW conversion, as it is for the Zeiss. Rather it is a tool added as a Photoshop filter in post. The same test was performed with the Zeiss Distagon 21 f2.8, but PT Lens action was done as part of the RAW conversion. By switching back and forth one can readily see the changes in barrel (mustache) distortion correction being applied by PT Lens. While the Zeiss is being used as a control for the Rokinon application of PT Lens, one can contrast the overall sharpness and FOV of the Rokinon Vs the benchmark of wide angle lenses, the Zeiss 21.
These are presented in a larger size than I normally post so that one can see both the full frame effects of distortion inherent in these lenses as well as any changes in the sharpness of detail. Other than final, default sharpening of Topaz InFocus applied uniformly to all 4 images, there is no editing except downsampling to JPEG presentation size; I even left in the sensor dust bunny at the top. The Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco was convenient, well lit target, and has lots of parallel straight lines for this test.
First the Rokinon 14 WITHOUT PT Lens, shot at f8 http://www.fototime.com/E4921D3AEFB27A4/orig.jpg
I include the links in quotes so you can paste them into another window to tab between the images. This will make the changes VERY obvious.
"http://www.fototime.com/E4921D3AEFB27A4/orig.jpg"
Open both images and tab them back and forth. Notice how the edges of the frame come forward and the center of the frame gets further away? This has the overall illusion of making the subject seem a bit smaller (distant). It looks as if there is some vignetting compensation too, but there is no way for the program to know what f stop is being used. I studied this at 100% looking for some obvious decrease in sharpness, and decided if any, it was pretty minimal. Some pixels may be added where the image has to expand a bit at the edges, but it seems as though most of the distortion correction is in taking out extra pixels in the center. The fine detail subjectively has the comparable resolution in both images.
Next we compare the a similar style mustache distortion correction by PT Lens on the output of the Zeiss Distigon 21 f2.8. Shot at f 5.6 (optimum sharpness for this lens) WITHOUT PT lens. http://www.fototime.com/213697195251D53/orig.jpg
"http://www.fototime.com/213697195251D53/orig.jpg"
the distortion is not as accentuated in the center of the frame, but the action carries more towards the edges (see the dust bunny move). My assessment of 100% pixel peeping was that there was no change in image sharpness.
Finally compare the Rokinon Vs the Zeiss: image 1 Vs 3 and image 2 Vs 4. Obviously the 14mm image has a wider fov and smaller details than the 21mm image, don't expect them to be identical. Downsampling of the Zeiss shot could be done with cropping of the Rokinon, but thats another software action affecting IQ. Suffice it to say that the Rokinon does pretty well in comparison, as it is less than $400 at Amazon and the Zeiss more than $1800.
I am in no way affiliated with PT Lens, but its a reasonable $25 program.
Mike K
__________________
Mike - I'm sure in higher rez the Zeiss 21 gives a better margin but for the internet pics you posted the 14 holds its own quite well - and unless mustache distortion is present I see no need to use PT lens.
shoenberg3 - Love the B/W! Interesting how it has almost a polarizer effect.
Here is a recent from me. Although it contains architecture - this is without PT lens correction.
Dave
Edd,
The Mamiya 120 A has a very special place in my bag!
The 14mm is fantastic for inside aircraft shots - and with that I can't resist. Here are three natural light shots (without PT lens correction) inside a DC-6, which is part of the Flying Bulls collection, that was once used as a presidential aircraft for Yugoslavia and Zambia. When I visited Hanger 7 & 8 in Salzburg I went nuts with the 14 and 21!
Dave
Here is something slightly different: a shot of the milky way with the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm.
This is with a crop sensor (canon T2i) on an astronomical mount (Kenko skymemo)
