Duke M.
Veteran
I shot two video clips at 42" from the sensor. Both wide open. The tripod, camera and chart did not move. If the Nikon is actually 35mm then the Rokinon is actually 33mm or so. This was shot at Cine2, Rec 709. The lighting was not changed so you can compare brightness and contrast.
I used the focus assist on a TV Logic monitor to set focus as closely as possible for each lens. At this distance (42") the Nikon was much softer than the prior test at 18". I saved in PNG format to be lossless.
First the chart titles say it all. The first ones are 1:1 pixels with Nikon on the left.

Next the Nikon blown up 290% and the Rokinon blown up 275% so they are the same size for easier comparison.


Finally the two charts. This was far enough away the charts were just in the center of the picture so this is a crop of each.
When uploaded both of these images were 862 wide, but on the forum they look a different size. I don't know why.
My conclusion is the Rokinon is brighter, has more contrast, and is sharper. It does have a little more CA, but its barely noticable until blown up and even then minimal.
I used the focus assist on a TV Logic monitor to set focus as closely as possible for each lens. At this distance (42") the Nikon was much softer than the prior test at 18". I saved in PNG format to be lossless.
First the chart titles say it all. The first ones are 1:1 pixels with Nikon on the left.
Next the Nikon blown up 290% and the Rokinon blown up 275% so they are the same size for easier comparison.


Finally the two charts. This was far enough away the charts were just in the center of the picture so this is a crop of each.
When uploaded both of these images were 862 wide, but on the forum they look a different size. I don't know why.My conclusion is the Rokinon is brighter, has more contrast, and is sharper. It does have a little more CA, but its barely noticable until blown up and even then minimal.
Last edited: