Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED

[hamlet]

Does anyone own the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED? How good is this lens?

 

[astroNikon]

I've looked at that before but found the quality (in everything) of Samyang lacking.
If you have no financial constraints just go for the nikon 14-24 when you get your FF.

 

[hamlet]

OK, thanks.

 

[jsecordphoto]

I owned one, but ended up selling it. I know a lot of people that absolutely love this lens, but I didn't really like it. It has some pretty significant distortion, which is somewhat correctable in LR. Their quality control is pretty bad and tons of people get soft copies, and have to return them (sometimes multiple times) until they get a sharp copy. The distance scale on my focus ring was way off (another common problem). I bought it mostly for shooting at night, and figuring out where "true" infinity was for the stars wasn't too hard, but for daytime use or focus stacking at night, I had a really hard time focusing even in live view.

I sold mine and bought the Tokina 16-28 which I love. If you can afford it, definitely go for the nikon 14-24- it's an amazing piece of glass.

 

[hamlet]

I never thought about consistently well made lenses. Good point.

 

[astroNikon]

I never thought about consistently well made lenses. Good point.

Every manufacturer in the past and current has quality problems. Some more than others. Lenses are normally priced accordingly.

Such as 50mm lenses. You have the NIkon 50D at $100, 50G at $200 and the Sigma Art 50 at $950.
even though the 50s are all great due to the makers
Samyang is not even in the same league from what I've read. I looked at their WAs and Reflexes early on and was not impressed and never bought one.

 

[480sparky]

It's sharp for the price, but the compound distortion really turned me off of it. I can correct it in post, but I end up with the FOV of a 16mm lens. When I already own two 17mms, why bother?

I opted for the Sigma 12-24 instead. Wider, sharper... and far less mustache.

 

[Scatterbrained]

I don't shoot Nikon, but I know that right now it's the sharpest 14mm option available for FF Canon cameras. Of course, if you have the budget then the Nikon 14-24 would be the way to go. If you don't have the budget, and are shooting a full frame camera then I'd say it's quite a sharp lens. Just don't buy it if you plan on shooting primarily architecture.

 

[jsecordphoto]

I know I plug Tokina pretty often on here, but I couldn't be happier with my 16-28 f2.8. It's plenty wide enough for the astrophotography I do, and using it during the day- this thing is SHARP. Another option if you're considering buying a UWA for a FF camera

 

[a_auger]

I have a Samyang 14mm for Canon and it's SHARP! Pretty awesome for the price. The downsides are the weird distortion (correctable in LR if you can find a lens profile for it) and the fact that it's a manual lens.

 

[hamlet]

DXO seems to think that it is the sharpest lens too for nikon. But the poor manufacturing and large distortion kills my desire for this lens.

 

[Scatterbrained]

DXO seems to think that it is the sharpest lens too for nikon. But the poor manufacturing and large distortion kills my desire for this lens.

What are you planning on shooting with it? The distortion is correctable in Lr (for the most part) and oftentimes isn't even visible depending on what you are shooting.

These shots are all uncorrected and not cropped:



Catching the LightShip by tltichy, on Flickr


Parked at the Sci-Fi Dine-In by tltichy, on Flickr


Imperial Relic by tltichy, on Flickr
​

 

[Derrel]

What scare me away from Samyang are the articles I have read on Lensrentals.com's blog pages...some of the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower AKA SamyRokiBow stuff has broken down on them within 90 days, and has been some of the absolute LEAST-reliable stuff they have ever offered for rent. Really horrible quality control issues, on lenses that are basically, built to be used as disposables, rather than repaired when they crap out. I do not get it: design a lens that CAN be one of the very best, sharpest wide-angles, but with buggerish complex distortion, annnnnd, built to a bubblegum and baling wire standard, just baaaaaarely held together....WTF??? It's one thing for a specific lens model and one, single owner/user, who luckily has a decent copy, but when a rental house buys 20 or 30 examples, and they break down in less than 10 weeks, there's seriously a problem...a systemic one.

 

[Patrice]

Just save your pennies for bit and get yourself a Zeiss 15mm 2.8 or wait for an 'otus' version and don't ever worry again if you've got a good lens.

Of course it's going to take a real big pile of pennies!

(somewhat tongue in cheek)