Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anyone test the FF Rokinon/Samyang 35mm f/1.2?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NorBro
    replied
    You're bored again, lol.

    Leave a comment:


  • James0b57
    replied
    Originally posted by NorBro View Post
    haha - well, we do still obsess, but you've broken/restructured that quote out of this particular context.
    The joke wouldn't have worked otherwise.

    But in all the same, you're not so jaded as you try to sound. Cheers!

    Leave a comment:


  • NorBro
    replied
    haha - well, we do still obsess, but you've broken/restructured that quote out of this particular context.

    Leave a comment:


  • James0b57
    replied
    Originally posted by NorBro View Post
    I used to... ...obsess and waste money constantly for years.
    used to? what do you think talking gear most days of the week is? Haha, we still obsess, bro.

    Leave a comment:


  • NorBro
    replied
    Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
    One last thing to mention is that the SP at 1.2 might be as sharp as the DS at 1.8 or 2. So, if you'd rather not open the DS past 2, we might be talking about a bigger effective brightness difference. Just thinking about options. Whether or not it's worth it would depend on its actual transmission and its cost.

    They don't have the Rokinon DS 50 in this database, but here's a tool showing how much sharper the SP 50 is at 1.2 than the much more expensive Canon L 50 1.2:
    https://www.the-digital-picture.com/...mp=0&APIComp=0
    Canon's 50mm f/1.2 is from a different world in 2007 (part of what I mentioned the other day about lenses improving).

    A lot of the high end glass from back then is now noticeably softer when compared to newer, cheaper options.

    I used to use that same tool and obsess and waste money constantly for years. Not saying it would be a waste for you, but it was for me because it was unnecessary, wasn't as useful or practical the way I imagined it, and no one would ever notice a difference, quite frankly.

    Leave a comment:


  • James0b57
    replied
    Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
    Yes, the Sigmas are just a different coating AFAIK. Seems hard to argue that the coating doesn't impact the sharpness...
    What I meant, is that beyond the flaring and lower contrast, the lens elements aren't further adding aberrations or softening. It is still the same sharp precise Sigma look through all that haze. Whereas the Canon's seem more diffused wide open, some good amount of chromatic aberration, and then snap into sharpness stopping down and adding a matte box and eyebrow. The Canon's are a little like Zeiss Super Speeds in a way, but I felt, and I can't confirm this based on such limited interaction, but I felt that the transition from the crazy soft wide open to the sharp stopped down look was more abrupt than the Zeiss Super Speed transition between stops. The Canon felt like two different lenses. Whereas the Zeiss SS feel like one on a gradient, or maybe 3 different looks: crazy, soft, and sharp. Canon was 2 : crazy and sharp.

    Leave a comment:


  • ahalpert
    replied
    Originally posted by James0b57 View Post
    Also, the Sigmas are just a different coating, but they retain some of the same character of the standard set, no? That is what a rep told me at a show, anyway. And from what I could tell, the Sigma alternate coating set seemed to have modern sharpness with a lot of flare. Whereas the Canon's actually seemed softer and more visual aberrations than just reduced flare control. I could be misguided by marketing BS, but in my brief interactions, that was the sense I got as well.
    Yes, the Sigmas are just a different coating AFAIK. Seems hard to argue that the coating doesn't impact the sharpness... but yeah same optics.

    Canon claims the Sumires have a different optical design than the CN-E. But they have the same focal lengths, t-stops and weights. I wonder if they just do the same thing there that they do with the RF 85mm "Defocus Smoothing" lens...dunno

    I haven't played with either set, so I just know what I've read online

    Leave a comment:


  • ahalpert
    replied
    Originally posted by James0b57 View Post
    Wow, shows how important the details are in manufacturing. The DS line has always been hit or miss for many. But cool to think one could have two different variations of the same optical design. Not to mention, the DS line is cheap enough on the used market to even do a couple DIY mods to further make a versatile set of looks.
    Right. If you were handy you could break down the lenses and strip the coatings for that saving private ryan look.

    Leave a comment:


  • James0b57
    replied
    Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
    They sort of have a vintage-y softness but still resolve 4K and don't fall to pieces with veiling glare like old lenses because they have newer coatings. And actually I see a lot of manufacturers running away from that sharp clinical look, like Sigma with the Classic Primes.
    Also, the Sigmas are just a different coating, but they retain some of the same character of the standard set, no? That is what a rep told me at a show, anyway. And from what I could tell, the Sigma alternate coating set seemed to have modern sharpness with a lot of flare. Whereas the Canon's actually seemed softer and more visual aberrations than just reduced flare control. I could be misguided by marketing BS, but in my brief interactions, that was the sense I got as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • James0b57
    replied
    Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
    Well, AFAIK, the optical design is the same but everything else is updated. This, from cinema5D:

    "Aren’t these just rehoused Samyangs?
    Not really. The new XEEN’s may share the same internal optical design, but new coatings have stepped it all up a notch. You’ll see noticeably less flaring and better contrast. Everything else has been built from scratch."
    https://www.cinema5d.com/xeen-cinema-lenses-impression/
    Wow, shows how important the details are in manufacturing. The DS line has always been hit or miss for many. But cool to think one could have two different variations of the same optical design. Not to mention, the DS line is cheap enough on the used market to even do a couple DIY mods to further make a versatile set of looks.

    Leave a comment:


  • ahalpert
    replied
    Originally posted by NorBro View Post
    But the difference is like... |___|


    It's not like f/1.2 to f/2.8 which is like... |____________________|


    We are still talking about a f/1.2 and f/1.4 difference, right?
    One last thing to mention is that the SP at 1.2 might be as sharp as the DS at 1.8 or 2. So, if you'd rather not open the DS past 2, we might be talking about a bigger effective brightness difference. Just thinking about options. Whether or not it's worth it would depend on its actual transmission and its cost.

    They don't have the Rokinon DS 50 in this database, but here's a tool showing how much sharper the SP 50 is at 1.2 than the much more expensive Canon L 50 1.2:
    https://www.the-digital-picture.com/...mp=0&APIComp=0

    Leave a comment:


  • ahalpert
    replied
    Originally posted by James0b57 View Post
    Really?I trust you over me on that. I'm just trying to recall why I thought they were different designs.
    Well, AFAIK, the optical design is the same but everything else is updated. This, from cinema5D:

    "Aren’t these just rehoused Samyangs?
    Not really. The new XEEN’s may share the same internal optical design, but new coatings have stepped it all up a notch. You’ll see noticeably less flaring and better contrast. Everything else has been built from scratch."
    https://www.cinema5d.com/xeen-cinema-lenses-impression/

    That's part of the reason I like the DS so much. They're plastic and they won't last forever and I wouldn't impress a client with the look of the lens itself, but I actually like the flaring etc. Sort of a poor man's Sigma Classic prime. And having a matching T1.5 maximum aperture on the 24/35/50/85 is the way to go.

    I put together a set of those 4 plus the 16 and the 135 for less than $2k
    Last edited by ahalpert; 05-07-2020, 07:55 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • James0b57
    replied
    Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
    I think the Xeens are rehoused DS lenses, probably with different coatings.
    Really?I trust you over me on that. I'm just trying to recall why I thought they were different designs.

    Leave a comment:


  • ahalpert
    replied
    Yes, but let's say you'll die if you crank your ISO one more notch.

    Also, we don't know if the difference is 1.2 to 1.4 because no one has verified the transmission of the 1.2. We could be talking about nothing. Or maybe we're talking about 1.2 and 1.6 because supposedly the 1.4 transmits a 1.6.

    Leave a comment:


  • NorBro
    replied
    But the difference is like... |___|


    It's not like f/1.2 to f/2.8 which is like... |____________________|


    We are still talking about a f/1.2 and f/1.4 difference, right?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X