My brick just arrived. As noted in the reviews, it has a Zeiss-like look. Opinions vary, but mine is that it is a nice look. The throw feels nicely long, quite damped and very smooth.
John
John
Rokinon SP 14mm 2.4
- Thread starter chrysoberyl
- Start date
Well then tonight we expect that you will be outside shooting stars at 2.4 and posting on the board so you can show off the coma and vignetting. If possible post a pano with two shots to see how the vignetting affects ability to do so.
No cloudy sky excuses, no busy excuses, I suppose a five to ten page review is also in order.
Being first has its privilege and also responsibility.
Oh yeah a really good review would compare this lens to the sigma 1.8 side by side.
No cloudy sky excuses, no busy excuses, I suppose a five to ten page review is also in order.
Being first has its privilege and also responsibility.
Oh yeah a really good review would compare this lens to the sigma 1.8 side by side.
Upvote
0
applecider said:Well then tonight we expect that you will be outside shooting stars at 2.4 and posting on the board so you can show off the coma and vignetting. If possible post a pano with two shots to see how the vignetting affects ability to do so.
No cloudy sky excuses, no busy excuses, I suppose a five to ten page review is also in order.
Being first has its privilege and also responsibility.
Oh yeah a really good review would compare this lens to the sigma 1.8 side by side.
All noted - I'll wait 'til my Sigma 1.8 arrives to post anything more. Oh, and the font size will be 20 for my 10 page reviews.
I live just south of Atlanta; is light pollution a good excuse? How about the moonset (98% illumination) at 6:22 AM with sunrise at 6:52?
I will post something, though - I can't wait to use it!
Upvote
0
Damn those are pretty good excuses, been cloudy so long in portland that TPE has to tell me the moon phase...
Some impressions would be nice though, even the impression on your toe from gear fall down. Cleardarksky.com says a place called Ford Lake Observatory ( that sounds promising ) has some 40% dark sky.
Some impressions would be nice though, even the impression on your toe from gear fall down. Cleardarksky.com says a place called Ford Lake Observatory ( that sounds promising ) has some 40% dark sky.
Upvote
0
I have never reviewed a lens, but: This shot shows vignette and distortion. It was taken wide open about 7' away from the garage door. Clearly, I didn't have the camera positioned perfectly, but I was in a hurry because the light was fading. The vignette is pretty pronounced in the corners. Considering how close the camera was to the door, the distortion looks pretty low.
Attachments
Upvote
0
applecider said:
Hi applecider. I checked out the Ford Lake Observatory; it's a private lakeside home. Thanks for the lead, though.
John
Upvote
0
I was up in Tromsø a few weekends ago and used this lens to take some aurora pics. Fairly amateurish, but I'll try and find some time to post a few. Is attaching them via the attachment function the best way to attach pics? I don't use any type of quality photo sharing sites (SmugMug, 500px, Flikr, etc.).
Upvote
0
CANONisOK said:
The attachment function works best for me. Thanks in advance for sharing. Where I live, it could be days before I see stars again.
Upvote
0
kphoto99 said:That is some distortion, those squares sure don't look square
Those are all rectangles. Oh, I get it - you're joking! Ha!
Upvote
0
chrysoberyl said:
Do you happen to also own the 14mm 2.8? I'd be interested to see direct comparisons between the two lenses, esp. coma and vignetting shots wide open....
I own the 2.8 (primarily used for astro/nightscapes) and wonder if its worth the extra cost to upgrade...
-J
Upvote
0
Similar threads
