Samyang Announces Premium 14mm f/2.4 & 85mm f/1.2 Lenses
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
dilbert said:
Uh, no. The Japanese company Cosina has been making the Zeiss lenses for an age now. Zeiss may be making the Otus line themselves, but Cosina does the rest. They make _great_ lenses. I have their (pre-Milvus) Zeiss 21/2.8 and Voightlander 40/2.0 pancake, and they are superb. They also make a 10mm full-frame (rectilinear) lens for Sony.
Speaking of which, selecting an AF point and then manual focusing works great. Way better than any focus screen with or without split image, microprisms, or whatever ever did.
Also, the idea that you can see or judge DoF in a viewfinder is, and always has been, nuts. DoF depends on print size and viewing distance, so is completely different for folks printing big landscape prints where the viewers walk up and look at the details vs. medium-size wedding shots, vs. magazine double-page layout, vs. smaller sizes. And the DoF markings on lenses are, and always have been, quite wrong for anything other than 3" x 5" prints, which is what they were designed for back in the day.
Sorry about the rant, but MF lenses, as long as the AF and auto-aperture work, are quite usable on a modern full-frame dSLR. For anything other than sports (and even there, a lot of time you are better off predicting where the action will be and prefocusing), they're fine.
Upvote
0
AE-1Burnham said:
Just as an update: less than 24 hrs later (timezones helped), Samyang marketing team has written a nice response to my outreach to them regarding the website image error. I am impressed. Also, the website has been udpated. ;D
Upvote
0
cayenne said:
Some models had interchangeable screens, and the 1DX still has, AFAIK - it's technically feasible. Just as with any business it need to be economically feasible - and bring enough revenues.
Removing features may make manufacturing simpler and cheaper, also making and stocking screens has a cost - if too few customers buy them a company may prefer to remove the feature altogether even if some customers will complain.
Maybe now is also a way to counter the availability of third party MF lenses like Zeiss and Samyang - make them harder to use compared to Canon ones...
Sad, but that's what often happens. You please the user as long as it brings money to you, not when you start to lose them.
I was a bit surprised 6D had interchangeable screens, but maybe Canon reused some 5DII designs so it came as a "side effect".
Upvote
0
photojoern.de
See more in http://photojoern.de
We should really wait for some third party testing of these lenses before being too excited. The Manhattan from above image they showcase on their website is not really the sample image that tells too much.
Upvote
0
I'm interested in the 14mm for astrophotography. If it is indeed much sharper and allows for a slightly shorter shutter time or lower iso I think it will be great. Of course we still don't even know the price or how it handles coma. Please be priced reasonably.
Upvote
0
I'm really keen to see how the Samyang 14mm 2.4 compares to the Laowa 15mm f/2 for astro work. My Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 might be up for sale soon!
Upvote
0
candyman said:
Thanks, candyman. Looks like I have the acquisition syndrome. At this point, I am considering the Sigma 20mm 1.4, the Samyang 14mm 2.4 and the Rockinon 20mm 1.8. Assuming that they are more or less equal in all other important regards, it will likely come down to which has the best coma performance.
Upvote
0
This.chrysoberyl said:
And I am also considering the
Upvote
0
Duckman said:
Sadly, only for Sony E mount. But I'm considering making the switch.
I think there's a battle of the UWA going on here. Samyang 14mm 2.4, Samyang 20mm 1.8, and Laowa 15mm f/2. I really want to see how the coma is on all of them. I currently use the Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 for astro and while I love the lens, it's just so big and heavy. It'd be nice to have something smaller and lightly for such a niche genre. I'm really glad I got my Tamron before the prices went up due to a dip in the Canadian dollar; saved myself a good $200.
Upvote
0
Those are some nice looking lenses! I just picked up a full manual roki 35mm f1.4 on eBay. 1/2 for astro and 1/2 just to play with.
Im glad I held off on getting the 14mm f2.8, this 14mm 2.4 looks epic. 1/2 stop advantage over the old one, I'm sure some of the distortion is fixed, and sharper. Very interested now that we know 16-35iii produces too much vignetting for astro work.
Im glad I held off on getting the 14mm f2.8, this 14mm 2.4 looks epic. 1/2 stop advantage over the old one, I'm sure some of the distortion is fixed, and sharper. Very interested now that we know 16-35iii produces too much vignetting for astro work.
Upvote
0
I'm in the same boat, keeping an eye on this lens for astro. Do we have any info on price and availability? Haven't heard a peep since the announcement ... :-\j-nord said:
As for vignetting, I'll point out that the original Samyang 14mm f/2.8 was no rock star in that category, in fact, according to the TDP tests, it was very similar to the much maligned Canon 16-35L III (if anything, slightly worse):
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=1073&Camera=979&LensComp=1059
We'll see what Samyang did with the new Premium lens, but considering that the lens kept the same build and form factor, I wouldn't hold my breath for a great performance at an even wider aperture of 2.4. Hope I'm wrong, of course.
Upvote
0
You are right the 14mm f2.8 is slightly worse for vignetting but does have a wider field of view which makes it a little easier to crop off those corners. I'm interested to see a detailed coma comparison between the 16-35iii and 14 f2.8. Even if the 16-35iii slightly out performs the 14 f2.8, it costs nearly 7x as much. Interesting to see what this 14mm f2.4 costs and how it performs.NorbR said:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Locked
