Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/1.8 UMC (New)

olsenn

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
383
Solutions
2
Reaction score
98
Since I don't currently own any lenses wider than 35mm, I am considering the purchase of a cheap ultra-wide prime, specifically the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 manual-focus lens.

I have heard numerous reports of people receiving bad copies of this lens, and I was wondering if anyone here has some experience with this lens and can advise me on what to look out for? Some have claimed images are sharper on one side than another, others have implied images are not sharp anywhere in the frame at certain apertures, others have said it doesn't focus properly at infinity? Are any of these issues more common than others?

Thanks!
 
Since I don't currently own any lenses wider than 35mm, I am considering the purchase of a cheap ultra-wide prime, specifically the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 manual-focus lens.

I have heard numerous reports of people receiving bad copies of this lens, and I was wondering if anyone here has some experience with this lens and can advise me on what to look out for? Some have claimed images are sharper on one side than another, others have implied images are not sharp anywhere in the frame at certain apertures, others have said it doesn't focus properly at infinity? Are any of these issues more common than others?

Thanks!
I have the Samyang version, same lens. Mine is very good for the price. Very sharp at the center from 2.8 on. The edges are pretty good, but the lens does have some field curvature. My lens focuses a bit close at the edges when the center is set to infinity. To get the best overall results for landscapes I have to focus a bit past infinity ( 3 meters on the scale.) My focusing scale is off, but easy to compensate for. I am using the lens on a Nikon D800. On a 1/2 frame sensor, the field curvature should be less of a problem.

Now as far as quality control, I am unable to comment. You may have to go through several samples to get a good lens. Also, I've read that the construction is not very good if you ever need to have the lens repaired.
 
I love this lens. I use it on a Nikon D3200. (Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Nikon mount & chip)
Three samples:



1033a0f6131148248c698d8334a7b1d8.jpg



0f29f603f8014c19a1c0caca333ee977.jpg



a78c518a66ef4541882c019355573f0b.jpg



--
David Thornburg
Pleasanton, NM, USA
 
Bought this lens from Amazon. The UMC version is the updated one. Since it is all manual, no AF on the Canon, I had some doubts, but being so wide you can keep nearly everything in focus by using the hypofocal distance at an aperture of F/8. I use it mainly for interior shots and it is indeed a very sharp lens, even at F/2.8. I put the Canon on AV mode, set the aperture on the lens, and the Canon chooses the shutter speed. Everything works just great. The only thing is that with no communication between lens and camera the aperture appears as a zero in the Exif info, and you have to make a note ahead of time of the aperture you used for the shot if that is important to you. All the reviews of this lens that I have read praise the IQ and build of the lens, and they are right. Buy it! It's a bargain.
 
IMHO the "chipped" Samyang 14 F2.8 is a great lens and the low price makes it an absolute bargain.

Samyang 14 F2.8 cropped downsized SOOC JPG in tough testing conditions
Samyang 14 F2.8 cropped downsized SOOC JPG in tough testing conditions

I have used it successfully in a wide range of applications from architecture to astro :-) with no unexpected issues on both FX (best) and DX Nikons.

This lens does "suffer" from a wavy mustache-like field curvature (which can be corrected in PP) as evident in the test image below.

Samyang 14 F2.8 cropped downsized SOOC JPG of obligatory brick wall
Samyang 14 F2.8 cropped downsized SOOC JPG of obligatory brick wall

Must mow that weed patch for the Holidays! ;-)

Both Lens Tip: http://www.lenstip.com/239.1-Lens_review-Samyang_14_mm_f_2.8_ED_AS_IF_UMC_Introduction.html

and PhotoZone DE: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/532-samyang14f28eosff

have very comprehensive and reviews.

Happy Holidays to all!
 
Can anybody describe what the most common/troublesome sample variation for this lens is? I mean, if I only have 14 days to figure out if I want to switch it out for another, what should I focus on looking for? Sharpness (overall, or just edge), mechanical problems, poor exposures, etc?

I don't want to find out later that I have a lens that performs badly at f/2.8 - f/4, just because I hadn't taken enough shots of that criterion early on to notice.
 
I just received my new lens today. I haven't had much chance to play with it yet, but just to get some early feedback in terms of whether or not it is up to par with a good-copy of the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 lens, I have posted some sample images taken with a Nikon D810.

Note that all of these samples have been corrected for distortion and vignetting, and compressed (JPEG) for upload; however, no additional post-processing as been applied.

Taken at f/2.8
Taken at f/2.8



Taken at f/4
Taken at f/4



Taken at f/11
Taken at f/11
 
Just wondering how you focused the lens. It is possible that the problem is less than accurate focus. Even the center of the field does not seem as sharp as it should be. Did you use live view? Also you might try focus bracketing to achieve the best results. Finally the lens does have some field curvature so with focus bracketing you might see that the edges are better when you focus for a point further than the center of the field.

--
bmw
 
Last edited:


Great lens
 
Doesn't look quite as sharp as what it should be. Probably focus. As suggested, live view and digital zoom to get the best focus.

I don't find the dot focus works all that well with these lenses.
 
I've noticed that many image posts (such as the example from Cirrus888) don't appear sharp. However, going to the gallery page and viewing the "large" version shows quite an improvement. I think his image file has enough sharpness, but on my screen (maybe yours too?) the posted version is a bit soft.
 
f495077f8a1c40fea5962fd8b9473442.jpg

Here's another. I think it's a sharp lens. Taken thousands of photos with it.
 
f495077f8a1c40fea5962fd8b9473442.jpg

Here's another. I think it's a sharp lens. Taken thousands of photos with it.
Nice photo. What camera was this taken with? Also could you post a full resolution image?

Thanks

--
bmw
 
When focused correctly, this lens is very sharp. Have a look at the corners and borders of the image with the loupe-tool.

This is my second copy. The first one could be focussed beyond infinity and the distance scale was off.

fc101887d7d7432ab28f6d0e678846f6.jpg
 
Last edited:
I received the second copy of the Rokinon 14mm F2.8 prime for Nikon mount today. My first was decentered and really soft in the lower right.

I took it out to the same brick wall (to test it again), just as light was fading. It looks nice in the central and right zones, but to me, the entire left side of the frame, up and down, is soft when viewed 1:1.

I have no experience with ultra-wide lenses and testing. I will include my test photo, which is taken at F8 and ISO 800 to avoid camera shake (light was almost gone, late in day). I need to know if I am being too picky, or if I have a second bad copy. In forums on DPR here, people are calling this an amazing lens, "sharp corner to corner". That's not what I am seeing when viewed full screen. Opinion? Advice?



d628d188590943b3af7f6d3cfd0d9b9b.jpg

Thanks,

Neal
 
When viewed with the loupe-tool, the left side definitely looks softer then the right. At f8 I would expect it to be more even, so it looks like a decentered copy. I would return it and (if you have the patience) try another one ...

Good look!
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top