Samyang/Rokinon 35mm and 85mm lens test

[Robert Berger]

Totally agree on the value.
I meant new 16mm lens will not cover 5K. 14mm is too dark to fit in the row. So as many of you, I am really interested in "super speed" 14 or 16mm and especially 50mm-essential.

Bob, thanks for the news about 50/1.2 been developed. That would be great! It's gonna be an outstanding set
EDIT: About colour shifts: First I got myself 85mm to play with. The very next day I gave a call to sales rep and told that I want them all. The answer was basically two options: (a) to come to the shop with my 85mm and choose the matches from the stock, or (b) to make a "blind date" - shipping them to my workshop instantly, get all the tests and swap the ones that do not match. I got option B and luckily it all went fine from the first attempt. But they told me that it was a 50/50 chance of success. I think the most challenging one to match is 14mm...

My Samyang 16mm covers Epic-x full 5k!!!

 

[Patrick Tresch]

24mm rok is Soft up to t4

The 35 and 85 are good for the price!

Pat

 

[Matthew Scott]

24mm rok is Soft up to t4

The 35 and 85 are good for the price!

Pat

Dude, statements like the make me cringe! My 24 is softish at T1.5 but sharp by T2.8.....Are you just saying what everyone else is saying, because that's what everybody else is saying? Soft compared to what? And speaking of comparisons, have you done any? Can you show us any?

That's like saying "RED has bad skin tones". Statements that get thrown around and once they bounce enough, they seem to become gospel. I'll stop ranting now, but I would hate to think that people might make decisions based on posts like yours, as if it's a fact.

 

[Liam Hall]

Hm I just got done with a gig using the Canon 70-200 and the Rok 35. I'll keep an eye out once I start editing to see if I see the same thing with the 35.

You wont match lenses from different manufacturers, they use different coatings. It's hard enough to find a set that match from the same manufacturer. As long as the contrast is similar it's not too difficult to sort out though.

 

[Liam Hall]

the only reason I find to sale them is to the need of having PL glass.

Why? As in, why do you have a NEED for PL mount? I understand why it's a good choice for rental houses or large production companies, but for owner operators, EF or Nikon mount offer far more versatility and better bang for the buck.

 

[sam karr]

Why? As in, why do you have a NEED for PL mount? I understand why it's a good choice for rental houses or large production companies, but for owner operators, EF or Nikon mount offer far more versatility and better bang for the buck.

http://www.lightstalking.com/lets-talk-about-gear-lust
http://www.peachpit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=2120857&seqNum=7
http://petapixel.com/2013/04/22/the-story-of-how-i-acquired-and-defeated-gear-acquisition-syndrome/

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Dude, statements like the make me cringe! My 24 is softish at T1.5 but sharp by T2.8.....Are you just saying what everyone else is saying, because that's what everybody else is saying? Soft compared to what? And speaking of comparisons, have you done any? Can you show us any?

That's like saying "RED has bad skin tones". Statements that get thrown around and once they bounce enough, they seem to become gospel. I'll stop ranting now, but I would hate to think that people might make decisions based on posts like yours, as if it's a fact.

Hello Matthew,

I understand your point, and perhaps I've been a bit harsh with the 24mm but it´s definitly softer than the 35mm/85mm.

I would say the 24 at 4 is as soft as the 35 at 2 1/2 Perhaps yours is especillay good?

Here is a picture of mine.

[/URL]

Ps: I never speak about something I've not tested, but I should perhaps shoot a chart to be more scientific.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Why? As in, why do you have a NEED for PL mount? I understand why it's a good choice for rental houses or large production companies, but for owner operators, EF or Nikon mount offer far more versatility and better bang for the buck.

I have loved my Still Canon Glass, as well as my Leica still glass in their respective mounts, but this new series of projects I have embarked in, require me to do some precise Focal framing, and that to the best I have experienced, can only be achieved via using the very lens you'll end up shooting with, set on DVF, and I have only found them in PL mount.

And it will not be worth having two different mounts, so I went PL only.

For this reason, some of my favor glass like the 70-200 will end up been a Cine Modified one in PL mount as well, as currently the so called true cine versions are far too expensive, for now at list.

There are several other reasons of course, which have to do with working with a Pro crew, and no longer just alone which requires of Pro gear to which they are accustom to, like lenses that are more precise in their focus markings etc.

 

[Leroy Jackson]

true.

I'm with ya on that one.

 

[Serge Tsipis]

My Samyang 16mm covers Epic-x full 5k!!!

Wow! Did I get it wrong from the specs? It must have been a DX or something tag that fooled me
Do you have a VDSLR version?

Reading previous posts in this thread, I think there is a bit of confusion rolling out a Samyang set in front of a client used to MPs or Panchros. But I guess it will pass, if the manufacturer will keep and improve the specs, performance and build quality. Personally in my case, I would love to have this lenses with a PL-mount...

 

[Liam Hall]

I have loved my Still Canon Glass, as well as my Leica still glass in their respective mounts, but this new series of projects I have embarked in, require me to do some precise Focal framing, and that to the best I have experienced, can only be achieved via using the very lens you'll end up shooting with, set on DVF, and I have only found them in PL mount.

And it will not be worth having two different mounts, so I went PL only.

For this reason, some of my favor glass like the 70-200 will end up been a Cine Modified one in PL mount as well, as currently the so called true cine versions are far too expensive, for now at list.

There are several other reasons of course, which have to do with working with a Pro crew

Not sure what you mean by "precise focal framing" or "Pro Crew"?? I'm a professional and I happily work with all kinds of gear. It doesn't define me.

One of the best features of Cameras like Epic, Sony f5/55 and the soon to be released Arri Amira is their ability to swap lens mounts. On the Sony, and I'm sure on the Arri too, this is ridiculously easy. I can rent the expensive glass when I need it, for everything else I can use EF mount. This is happiness.

 

[Matt W.]

Not sure what you mean by "precise focal framing" or "Pro Crew"?? I'm a professional and I happily work with all kinds of gear. It doesn't define me.

One of the best features of Cameras like Epic, Sony f5/55 and the soon to be released Arri Amira is their ability to swap lens mounts. On the Sony, and I'm sure on the Arri too, this is ridiculously easy. I can rent the expensive glass when I need it, for everything else I can use EF mount. This is happiness.

The more experienced ACs I've worked with will all use dSLR lenses in a pinch (and find them great optically), but 9/10 would rather be using proper cinema lenses for their superior ergonomics. When setting up a wireless follow focus, for instance, the lack of hard stops and short throw on a still lens can be a nightmare. Zooms not being parfocal screws up marks, and the precision isn't there. They aren't ideal to work with.

I think this is a totally fair statement to make. Good ACs will work with anything but are accustomed to proper lenses.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Not sure what you mean by "precise focal framing" or "Pro Crew"?? I'm a professional and I happily work with all kinds of gear. It doesn't define me.

One of the best features of Cameras like Epic, Sony f5/55 and the soon to be released Arri Amira is their ability to swap lens mounts. On the Sony, and I'm sure on the Arri too, this is ridiculously easy. I can rent the expensive glass when I need it, for everything else I can use EF mount. This is happiness.

The more experienced ACs I've worked with will all use dSLR lenses in a pinch (and find them great optically), but 9/10 would rather be using proper cinema lenses for their superior ergonomics. When setting up a wireless follow focus, for instance, the lack of hard stops and short throw on a still lens can be a nightmare. Zooms not being parfocal screws up marks, and the precision isn't there. They aren't ideal to work with.

I think this is a totally fair statement to make. Good ACs will work with anything but are accustomed to proper lenses.

Matt, pretty much said it for me.

I on my own, have and continue to work with what ever gear I like, but since now I am actually starting to hire out and working with others, I must listen to what they also need.

But to elaborate to what Matt said, this is more a matter of been able to measure the distance, either by a hand tape, or electronically with a Cinetape, and take the focus marking of the lens to that mark, and while some rehoused still glass does a good job, with none rehoused still glass is near impossible to get it right.


As far as "Precise Focal Framing" goes, this means that when you need to have a precise framing to fill the frame in order to take full advantage of 6k, you want to have the exact lens to do that, and when you have restrictions in the distance and position in which you can mount the camera, you then take a DVF with your set of PL glass, and frame for it, out of each to the camera locations.

This is also of use when wanting a particular shot, even so not bound by distance, yet is faster to mount the lens on a DVF and move about instead of mounting on the camera and move the wall camera rig about.

That is what I mean.

 

[Liam Hall]

The more experienced ACs I've worked with will all use dSLR lenses in a pinch (and find them great optically), but 9/10 would rather be using proper cinema lenses for their superior ergonomics. When setting up a wireless follow focus, for instance, the lack of hard stops and short throw on a still lens can be a nightmare. Zooms not being parfocal screws up marks, and the precision isn't there. They aren't ideal to work with.

I think this is a totally fair statement to make. Good ACs will work with anything but are accustomed to proper lenses.

Matt, If you read what I wrote earlier, I stated that when I NEED PL glass I rent it. Few jobs I do require it. In fact, only three this year. EF mount is way more versatile and cost effective.

 

[sam karr]

That is what I mean.

So basically you came on this thread about some rokinon video test to tell people that these lenses are not professional and spam it with your sale ad. As constructive as the "dragon rent" thread where a guy was looking for a dragon to rent and you kept telling people why they should not rent their camera to anybody.

 

[Liam Hall]

Matt, pretty much said it for me.

I on my own, have and continue to work with what ever gear I like, but since now I am actually starting to hire out and working with others, I must listen to what they also need.

You said in another recent thread, you don't hire out your gear, which is why I was intrigued as to why you need PL mount.

Still not sure what you mean by "precise focal framing" it's not a term I'm familiar with. Maybe this is losing something in translation. Each job I do may have different requirements and may need a different approach, but I always need precise focus no matter what type of lens mount I am using or whatever the sensor size or whatever the framing. Renting is an easy option for the big ticket items like PL mount lenses.

 

[Matt W.]

You said in another recent thread, you don't hire out your gear, which is why I was intrigued as to why you need PL mount.

Still not sure what you mean by "precise focal framing" it's not a term I'm familiar with. Maybe this is losing something in translation. Each job I do may have different requirements and may need a different approach, but I always need precise focus no matter what type of lens mount I am using or whatever the sensor size or whatever the framing. Renting is an easy option for the big ticket items like PL mount lenses.

I think he means that there's a big jump between 35mm and 85mm focal lengths. Deakins was going on about how, despite using primes, he would always want a full set (21mm, 24mm, 27mm, 32mm, 35mm, etc.), whereas for me usually 18, 25, 35, 50, 85 is enough as my eye is not that well-trained. And generally I just use zooms.

But if you're using these lenses (which perform great!) it's obvious you're not a super demanding or high end AC or DP anyway, so while I see the complaint, I don't get it. These guys are still very awesome for the money.

 

[Liam Hall]

I think he means that there's a big jump between 35mm and 85mm focal lengths. Deakins was going on about how, despite using primes, he would always want a full set (21mm, 24mm, 27mm, 32mm, 35mm, etc.), whereas for me usually 18, 25, 35, 50, 85 is enough as my eye is not that well-trained. And generally I just use zooms.

Could be... ...at least I understand it!

But if you're using these lenses (which perform great!) it's obvious you're not a super demanding or high end AC or DP anyway, so while I see the complaint, I don't get it. These guys are still very awesome for the money.

Yep. True that.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

You said in another recent thread, you don't hire out your gear, which is why I was intrigued as to why you need PL mount.

Still not sure what you mean by "precise focal framing" it's not a term I'm familiar with. Maybe this is losing something in translation. Each job I do may have different requirements and may need a different approach, but I always need precise focus no matter what type of lens mount I am using or whatever the sensor size or whatever the framing. Renting is an easy option for the big ticket items like PL mount lenses.

I think he means that there's a big jump between 35mm and 85mm focal lengths. Deakins was going on about how, despite using primes, he would always want a full set (21mm, 24mm, 27mm, 32mm, 35mm, etc.), whereas for me usually 18, 25, 35, 50, 85 is enough as my eye is not that well-trained. And generally I just use zooms.

But if you're using these lenses (which perform great!) it's obvious you're not a super demanding or high end AC or DP anyway, so while I see the complaint, I don't get it. These guys are still very awesome for the money.

Thanks again for jumping in correctly Matt!


Liam, I do not "RENT" my gear, I however Hire out the gear if I or some of my trusted fellow Reduser go with it.

Fact is that I have seen a huge attitude change form when I used to show up with a set of Master Primes, and recently for economic reasons, scaled down to lesser of lenses, including several other PL mount lenses, and lately Still glass, in both it's original form, and or rehoused.

So I had to re-evaluate my gear and act accordingly to the new needs for the projects I am involved in, which will take me, on and off, well in to the end of 2014, so this changes are worth.

Reason I decided not to keep any Still glass on Canon or Leica M mounts, and remain only with PL, are the ones stated, and additionally to the fact that by selling off those lenses as well as their respective Mounts, I have more funds to buy other things, as well as carrying less gear, during the many planned long travels.

 

[Robert Berger]

Wow! Did I get it wrong from the specs? It must have been a DX or something tag that fooled me
Do you have a VDSLR version?

Reading previous posts in this thread, I think there is a bit of confusion rolling out a Samyang set in front of a client used to MPs or Panchros. But I guess it will pass, if the manufacturer will keep and improve the specs, performance and build quality. Personally in my case, I would love to have this lenses with a PL-mount...

Yes, i have the vdslr version. Canon EF mount.