Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Rokinon vs Nikkor Ai/AiS

Matthew Scott

Matthew Scott

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2008
Messages
1,313
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Melbourne, Australia
If you've ever wondered about the new Rokinon/Samyang Cine lenses that are now available, check out my latest blog post where I talk about my recent purchase of the 16mm, 24mm, 35mm and 85mm primes. I know there's plenty of posts on here (a great one from Dom) but this is a little more info and a direct comparison to my Nikkors, which I found valuable. All images available for download, check it out, cheers :)

clet.jpg


http://mattscottvisuals.com/blog/2014/1/19/lens-up-my-nikkors-vs-the-rockinonsamyang-cine
 
I love the Samyang 16mm. My copy is incredibly sharp - enough so that I actually sold my Tokina (very noticeable difference in my comparison).
 
Very interesting Post,
Thanks Matthew
 
Jason Ano said:
I love the Samyang 16mm. My copy is incredibly sharp - enough so that I actually sold my Tokina (very noticeable difference in my comparison).
Click to expand...


The 16 is amazing! I'm guessing you had a bad Tokina though man, they are also very sharp (but not as sharp as the Rokinon Cine). I would sell mine but find myself needing wider than 16 on occasion.
 
wicked review. man, if they could make these babies with metal housings.....sweet baby jesus !
unfortunately I had to send my 35mm back to rokinon this morning, the aperture is stuck and wont change anymore, great customer service though, received an answer within 24 hours to my email.
 
Makes me wonder how the Rokinon's would have fared vs the premium Nikkors? Ie the 24 f2, 35 1.4, etc. As you noted, your budget primes (ie 24 2.8 and 35 2.8) are wide open at 2.8, whereas the Rokinon's are stopped down and entering their "sweet" spot.

Also, being budget primes, your 24 and 35 presumably don't have the engineering "muscle" of their bigger, more expensive brothers.

That said, I have to imagine Rokinon's are designed with computers, whereas the Nikkor's were likely designed with more classical mehods: I wonder if this is perceptible in footage? (I don't mean in sharpness, I mean in other less tangible ways like bokeh, fall off, etc).
 
Dominik Muench said:
wicked review. man, if they could make these babies with metal housings.....sweet baby jesus !
unfortunately I had to send my 35mm back to rokinon this morning, the aperture is stuck and wont change anymore, great customer service though, received an answer within 24 hours to my email.
Click to expand...
Thanks Dom, and yeah I've heard good things about their customer service. Glad they're helping you out :) I haven't had any problems yet, but i am handling them with care, much more care than I ever did the nikkors hehe
 
Nick Morrison said:
Makes me wonder how the Rokinon's would have fared vs the premium Nikkors? Ie the 24 f2, 35 1.4, etc. As you noted, your budget primes (ie 24 2.8 and 35 2.8) are wide open at 2.8, whereas the Rokinon's are stopped down and entering their "sweet" spot.

Also, being budget primes, your 24 and 35 presumably don't have the engineering "muscle" of their bigger, more expensive brothers.

That said, I have to imagine Rokinon's are designed with computers, whereas the Nikkor's were likely designed with more classical mehods: I wonder if this is perceptible in footage? (I don't mean in sharpness, I mean in other less tangible ways like bokeh, fall off, etc).
Click to expand...

Hey Nick, I think the super speed nikkors would do well in terms of sharpness and probably have a nicer overall look, but for me it was about cost vs performance. The nikkors (even my standard set) have some beautiful bokeh... I might compare that and flairs next time with some human subject matter :)
 
Matthew Scott said:
Hey Nick, I think the super speed nikkors would do well in terms of sharpness and probably have a nicer overall look, but for me it was about cost vs performance. The nikkors (even my standard set) have some beautiful bokeh... I might compare that and flairs next time with some human subject matter :)
Click to expand...

Looking forward to it!!
 
Nice tests, but as we've all said (including yourself) not the fairest to the Nikkors. 24mm f/2 would have been better, and a good "budget" lens is the 35mm f/2 ais (I own both), skip the 1.4 and save the dollars. Both of these stopped down to f/2.8 would have performed much better without the "super speed" cost factor. Even the mighty 50mm f/1.2 has a very veiled/dreamy look wide open (I actually hate it wfo, it's much better even by 1.8). The 85, a classic, was fortunate to pick up a mint copy for $300 from a friend. Back when I bought my 105 2.5 (early 90's) I seem to recall that it was a better performer than it's 1.8 brother...but memory may be failing me on that point.

But it's hard to argue about the Samyang ergonomics and price...tough decision. I do think you had a defective Tokina 11-16 though. That lens is brilliant as far as sharpness goes. I tested the Samyang 14mm and didn't like it at all for the same reason that Matthew Duclos didn't, you could never tell if you had nailed focus as you turned and turned the focus ring and nothing seemed to be happening. I've got to test the 16mm someday soon.
 
def a good indie set in either case!
 
Ron Steinberg said:
I do think you had a defective Tokina 11-16 though. That lens is brilliant as far as sharpness goes.
Click to expand...
Why would you assume it's defective? It's sharp! But the 16mm is sharper. And yeah, remember the comparison wasn't about which lens is better, it's about which lens is a better choice when cost and build is a factor. I know the faster nikkors are great value (the f2 range) but they still have backwards focus, no gears, clicking aperture. So yeah...I hear ya, but you see where I'm going?
 
Totally agree about the superior mechanics of the Samyang's!! The Nikkors are good glass, and have hard stops, but that's where it ends without modification. Was only suggesting that you'd get a better showing from the f/2 range of Nikkors without spending crazy amounts on the 1.4 range.

Will have to try that 16mm, the Tokina 11-16 is nice, very low distortion, but not often that I'd need wider than 16mm, and better mechanics would be great.

Matthew Scott said:
Why would you assume it's defective? It's sharp! But the 16mm is sharper. And yeah, remember the comparison wasn't about which lens is better, it's about which lens is a better choice when cost and build is a factor. I know the faster nikkors are great value (the f2 range) but they still have backwards focus, no gears, clicking aperture. So yeah...I hear ya, but you see where I'm going?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top