Samyang / Rokinon 14mm f2.8 Alternatives

[Better-DY]

When one purchases the XP/SP version of the 14mm f 2.4/f2.8 lens, does one really need the lens station to perform software/chip upgrades? If so, why? Anyone with applied experience?

Also does anyone know what the optical performance differences are (how material) between the Canon EF Rokinon / Samyang 14 AF 2.8 versions, e.g. the RF versus the EF version of the autofocus lens? I see the optical designs are (materially / marginally?) different, but how significant? I have looked around to see if someone has compared them, but havent seen one. Why the question? I have use both a 6D and a Canon R and like the interchangeability between them if it doesn't come at a material trade off.

I have the Canon EF AF f2.8 version and have been "happy" with it for landscapes, but wide open, meh. For astro it seems better than meh but where I have interesting mid-field to far illuminated objects, I can detect some softness. Manual focus is not an issue for me, the lack of the weather sealing gasket is somewhat annoying but not terrible (maybe). Trying to decide if I should try to sell the EF AF 2.8 and upgrade to the SP / XP.

Thank you.

 

[shutterbugnx]

Lens station is required to update the firmware of their lenses, it's just how they do things.

The 14mm f/2.4 has superior optics and could be stopped down to f/2.8 for even better performance. Though, it is a manual-focus lens.

 

[Better-DY]

Lens station is required to update the firmware of their lenses, it's just how they do things.

The 14mm f/2.4 has superior optics and could be stopped down to f/2.8 for even better performance. Though, it is a manual-focus lens.

I also wonder about build quality and longevity on the XP/SP f2.4 lens. I would be interested to hear from folks that have had the lens for a couple of years using it regularly as opposed to leaving it in a camera ag or on the shelf. Does decentering become an issue? Something about shelling out $750 for a premium lens that may also eventually have that problem that gives me pause.

Interesting that in Bryan Carnathan's optical tests (the-digital-picture), that the EF AF 2.8 lens performed marginally better than the XP. Not sure I believe that would be replicated (not critique of his analytics because I like his reviews a lot) but maybe a random lens variation issue. Now that I think of it, another variable introduced (historical issue) that one can only hope has been addressed in the premium level in copy variation compared to the the old manual focus f2.8 lens.

 

[shutterbugnx]

Interesting that in Bryan Carnathan's optical tests (the-digital-picture), that the EF AF 2.8 lens performed marginally better than the XP. Not sure I believe that would be replicated (not critique of his analytics because I like his reviews a lot) but maybe a random lens variation issue.

Shooting a test chart with a wide-angle lens requires it to be very close - the XP is likely not optimized for shooting at such close distances, though it still manages to show fewer aberrations than the Canon.

 

[Better-DY]

To users of Rokinon and Samyang, how worried would you be about buying a used XP/SP lens from a reputable shop like B&H? More likely to be de-decentered on a second-hand lens or given better quality control, not (much less) of a likely issue?