Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 23 Nov 2012 (Friday) 19:48
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How did Samyang do that ??? Where is the Canon UWA ?

 
vaflower
Senior Member
Avatar
855 posts
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Massachusetts
     
Nov 23, 2012 19:48 |  #1

I just took some first shots with the Rokinon 14 2.8 (Samyang) and just can't believe what I saw. The images are just simply bight, sharp and brilliant. These are like some first images when I looked at Zeiss 21 glass outputs. Astonishing for such a no name, fourth party glass manufacturer.

Okie, I had a real reluctance when I bought it on the Groupon deal the other day since 14mm is such a specialty focal length, but this is amazing. I heard that UWA is avery difficult beast to produce. Really ? if Samyang can manage to do this, why Canon can't ? and even Nikon ?

This beast has a huge distortion and I need some more shooting with it in the field. But if this performance holds,I would highly recommend this Samyang for any serious landscape photographer.


Fuji XE-1, Zeiss ikon, Hasselblad; I love shooting film as a conceptual idea :)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Cesium
Goldmember
1,967 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2009
     
Nov 23, 2012 20:26 |  #2

The lack of distortion correction is probably why it is so sharp. Everything is a compromise.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aroundlsu
Goldmember
Avatar
1,430 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2009
     
Nov 23, 2012 20:48 |  #3

This is interesting since I just traded my seldom used (but very expensive 14L II) for an underwater housing. I was thinking of replacing it with the Samyang but read some less that positive tests with it. Can you post some photos you have made with it? I would love to see something besides focus charts and brick walls.


Teddy Smith, SOC
IATSE Local 600 Cinematographer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,381 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3281
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Nov 23, 2012 20:50 |  #4

canon does have a 14mm f2.8....
nikon has a 14-24mm f2.8...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Nov 23, 2012 20:56 |  #5

vaflower wrote in post #15281249 (external link)
I just took some first shots with the Rokinon 14 2.8 (Samyang) and just can't believe what I saw. The images are just simply bight, sharp and brilliant. These are like some first images when I looked at Zeiss 21 glass outputs. Astonishing for such a no name, fourth party glass manufacturer.

Okie, I had a real reluctance when I bought it on the Groupon deal the other day since 14mm is such a specialty focal length, but this is amazing. I heard that UWA is avery difficult beast to produce. Really ? if Samyang can manage to do this, why Canon can't ? and even Nikon ?

This beast has a huge distortion and I need some more shooting with it in the field. But if this performance holds,I would highly recommend this Samyang for any serious landscape photographer.

Canon and Nikon can do it.

Canon has a similar 14mm prime. Some say it's not quite as sharp as the Samyang. But it has auto focus and less distortion. But it costs much, much more. It costs so much more because Canon thinks they can get away with it.

Nikon has an older 14mm prime but it isn't the best and no one buys it anymore. They do however have a 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom. It's about as good at 14mm as the Samyang prime, and I believe it actually costs slightly less than the Canon prime. Go figure. It's really just Canon who is lacking.

Then again, Canon has that neat 8-15mm fish eye zoom, if you are into such things.

I'd be willing to bet that Canon could sell the 14mm L for well under $1,000 and still make a large profit margin. I could be wrong, though.

Oh, and shhhh, this will probably be disputed, but a good copy of the sigma 12-24mm II at 14mm is very, very, good at f/8. It's not really comparable though it's not 2.8.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SiaoP
Goldmember
Avatar
1,406 posts
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Bay Area
     
Nov 24, 2012 00:03 |  #6

The samyang has horrible mustache distortion around the center which is hard to fix and takes a long time in photoshop. Canon doesnt. The canon is also very sharp as well. Plus it has a motor for AF...


My Flickr (external link) | Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lerroy
Senior Member
Avatar
414 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2010
Location: WA Desert Australia
     
Nov 24, 2012 01:27 |  #7

Auto focus for me on a super wide isnt really a issue (landscapes nightscapes timelapse etc.)

Not that i have used the 14mm canon but the 14mm samyung destroys the 17-40 an the 16-35 on the corners..

distortion is a problem however i have a good workflow in light room / ps for images that looks worse than other


JLB Photography Website (external link)
5D MKII / 5D MKIII - 17-40L - 85 1.2 L - 50 1.2 L - 70-200 F2.8 L - 100 L 2.8 Macro - 24-70 2.8L - Samyung 14mm 2.8 - 300mm F4 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,381 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3281
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Nov 24, 2012 02:50 |  #8

the canon seems to do ok against the samyang...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

i'm still not sure if the op had no clue that a canon lens existed, or just thinks it is too much...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZoneV
Goldmember
1,644 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 238
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Germany
     
Nov 24, 2012 11:31 |  #9

The extreme distortion makes the lens easier to design and probably less expensive to build.
The cheap mechanics (plastic instead of metal and such) makes the lens much cheaper. No AF and nor automatic iris makes the lens cheaper too.
No or minimal quality control is cheap too.
Most likely bigger production numbers than the Canon 14 makes the lens even cheaper.

The Samyang 14mm is a true for DSLR optimized lens - no one would like to use this lens with film with that distortion :-)

I own the Samyang 14 f/2.8 (external link) - and it is defective because of its bad mechanical quality / quality control.


DIY-Homepage (external link) - Image Gallery (external link) - Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,317 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 532
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Nov 24, 2012 11:54 |  #10

DreDaze wrote in post #15282293 (external link)
the canon seems to do ok against the samyang...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)

i'm still not sure if the op had no clue that a canon lens existed, or just thinks it is too much...

he probably thinks canon should make a $300 14mm prime, which ain't gonna happen.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vaflower
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
855 posts
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Massachusetts
     
Nov 24, 2012 11:56 |  #11

SiaoP wrote in post #15282000 (external link)
The samyang has horrible mustache distortion around the center which is hard to fix and takes a long time in photoshop. Canon doesnt. The canon is also very sharp as well. Plus it has a motor for AF...

I could hardly pay more than 300$ for such a specialty lens, but I could see someone using this focal range extensively pay a half of the Canon price and feel like he got a bargain.


Fuji XE-1, Zeiss ikon, Hasselblad; I love shooting film as a conceptual idea :)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,317 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 532
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Nov 24, 2012 11:58 |  #12

vaflower wrote in post #15283340 (external link)
I could hardly pay more than 300$ for such a specialty lens, but I could see someone using this focal range extensively pay a half of the Canon price and feel like he got a bargain.

i agree, especially if that guy is in the budget phase of his hobby.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vaflower
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
855 posts
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Massachusetts
     
Nov 24, 2012 16:10 |  #13

ZoneV wrote in post #15283273 (external link)
The extreme distortion makes the lens easier to design and probably less expensive to build.
The cheap mechanics (plastic instead of metal and such) makes the lens much cheaper. No AF and nor automatic iris makes the lens cheaper too.
No or minimal quality control is cheap too.
Most likely bigger production numbers than the Canon 14 makes the lens even cheaper.

The Samyang 14mm is a true for DSLR optimized lens - no one would like to use this lens with film with that distortion :-)

I own the Samyang 14 f/2.8 (external link) - and it is defective because of its bad mechanical quality / quality control.

But do you agree that when it works, it is as good as Canon version or even Zeiss lens ? The reliability of the lens do have me concerned, even though the outer build looks quite solid, comparable to Canon L lenses.

I found a lens correction and it worked quite well for architectural shoots but honestly distortion is a non issue shooting landscape.

Before

IMAGE: http://i49.tinypic.com/df8zm8.jpg


After
IMAGE: http://i47.tinypic.com/2iw0ebd.jpg

Fuji XE-1, Zeiss ikon, Hasselblad; I love shooting film as a conceptual idea :)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aroundlsu
Goldmember
Avatar
1,430 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 9
Joined Mar 2009
     
Nov 24, 2012 16:28 |  #14

The lens correction looks good but what's up with that extreme vignetting on the right side of the frame? My 14L didn't do that.


Teddy Smith, SOC
IATSE Local 600 Cinematographer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vaflower
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
855 posts
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Massachusetts
     
Nov 24, 2012 16:33 |  #15

aroundlsu wrote in post #15284138 (external link)
The lens correction looks good but what's up with that extreme vignetting on the right side of the frame? My 14L didn't do that.

There was a tree on the right side blocking some of the light. It was quite cold outside so I just choose the closest place to my apartment. The non-corrected picture was at f2.8 and the corrected one was at f4.
And I found out that the Samyang is quite bright, perhaps a half stop more than my Zeiss 21 2.8. That makes it very useful for low light shooting.


Fuji XE-1, Zeiss ikon, Hasselblad; I love shooting film as a conceptual idea :)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,277 views & 0 likes for this thread
How did Samyang do that ??? Where is the Canon UWA ?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Robert1011
868 guests, 256 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.