More Rokinon and Nikon comparisons including 24mm...

starcentral said:
Is there really 24mm f1.8 nikon? I have f2 24mm nikon but it hardly makes it out. I prefer 35mm f1.4 nikon but obviously not as wide as 24mm.
Click to expand...

The F2.0 was the fastest Nikon made in 24mm until approx. the '90s. Nikon kind of gave up the market to Canon through the 80's. Before that all professionals had Nikon. Now Nikon has an F1.4, but it costs $2,000 and it has no iris ring.
 
I received the 24 mm Rokinon yesterday and tested it out at late sunset both yesterday and today. At T2.0 it is sharp and at T4.0 is is very very sharp. The mechanics are nice, and it is so much easier to focus than using Nikon lenses with bands on them because of the cine feature. I was mostly using the Nikon 17-35 but expect that this will be my new favorite lens on the F3. I also have the Sony kit lenses which are about double the cost, much larger, and are no sharper at T2.0. In addition, even outdoors, I have not seen any significant CA, flare, or distortion. It is a really nice lens and I am looking forward to it being dark enough to use it at T1.5. Duke introduced me to the Pro-lock adapter, and now this lens, and it is much appreciated.
 
I like the look of these. I have a question; if you were to buy a set of these which would be the best future proof mount?

I'm guessing the Nikon mount would be the most adaptable (it could be used with Nikon cameras, and with Canon via an adapter). However the Nikon mount lens focus turns the other way to most other lenses (but I can live with that). I'm currently mainly shooting on Canon DSLR's, but the way cameras are being turned out it could be a Nikon or a Sony next year.

So which mount is the best one to go with for future adaptability?
 
@simonpwood, I don't think Canon, Nikon or PL mounts are going to change any time soon. They'll all be around in the foreseeable future. As you noted, the Nikon turns the opposite direction of Canon and PL mount cine lenses. I think the answer is going to revolve around what other lenses are you going to use with these lenses. I'm using Nikon zooms so Nikon primes make sense for me. YMMV.

@starcentral, I used the Nikon D5100 for the tests. I wanted higher resolution to see more artifacts if present. I wouldn't have been able to crop that way with a 1080p image. They actually look even better in all situations on the F3.

[T-stops not F-stops.] The 85mm will for sure be T1.5 (f1.4). The 50mm specs haven't been released yet but I'd expect T1.5 or T1.3 (F1.2). Modern coatings are so much better than before it could be even faster than that but still I'd expect T1.5 or T1.3.
 
Has anyone tried using the 35mm on a Full Frame camera? I heard that there was slight vignetting, but I would like to see if its useable or not?
 
@LiamR, yes they do breathe a little, but not as much as most people feared. Here is a link to footage shot by Kwan with an epic and you can judge for yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSFH0bHwyUw&feature=youtu.be

@simonpwood, the lenses are supposed to be for full frame except the 8mm. The 8mm specs are only for S35 size sensors or smaller although I've seen people use it on a full frame when they want that orb with a black boarder look.

Wide open I would expect you have a bit of light fall off, but that's true of most lenses on a full frame camera. Its not generally noticeable. It's not true vignetting.

If you go to any of Ken Rockwell's reviews he usually shows the amount of light fall off about half way down on the reviews. In this case he shows it on a full frame.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/samyang/35mm-f14.htm

Compare it to other lenses like the 35mm F1.4 Nikon manual lens. (Link below)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/35f14ais.htm

Of course with a S35 / DX / APS-C sized sensor even the light fall off isn't an issue because those only use the inner portion of the lens.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Duke M. for your answers.So I'm getting ready to buy the cine versions of the 14mm, the 24mm, and the 35mm on B&H. I need a full set of lenses to replace the vintage Nikkors that I currently use. I will pick up the 50mm and 85mm when they come out. While I like the look of my old Nikkors I find messing around with the focus pull rings (they keep falling of when I put the lenses into a padded lens bag) and the nikon adapters to be a bit of a drag. While I also like the soft image from the Nikkors I am hoping the these Rokinons will be a good deal sharper (I can always soften in post, right)?Are these going to be a good investment (I mean I know I'm not investing in Cookes or Master Primes here, but I would like to get something that could potentially see me through the next few years, possibly on a variety of different cameras)?What are the major cons of buying a complete set of these Rokinons?
 
In Europe we can get them from Foto-Walser under the brand Walimex.

Already got the 35mm which is really nice and the 24mm is scheduled for november 11.

What's nice is that you can order them in a wide variety of mounts. Got mine in a native e-mount for my FS700 and it spared me an adapter.

Cheers.
 
simonpwood said:
Thanks Duke M. for your answers.So I'm getting ready to buy the cine versions of the 14mm, the 24mm, and the 35mm on B&H. I need a full set of lenses to replace the vintage Nikkors that I currently use. I will pick up the 50mm and 85mm when they come out. While I like the look of my old Nikkors I find messing around with the focus pull rings (they keep falling of when I put the lenses into a padded lens bag) and the nikon adapters to be a bit of a drag. While I also like the soft image from the Nikkors I am hoping the these Rokinons will be a good deal sharper (I can always soften in post, right)?Are these going to be a good investment (I mean I know I'm not investing in Cookes or Master Primes here, but I would like to get something that could potentially see me through the next few years, possibly on a variety of different cameras)?What are the major cons of buying a complete set of these Rokinons?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, the reason to get primes is the increased speed and its easier to get the optics correct so that there is little barrel distortion, etc. Otherwise zooms are more versatile. For that reason I skipped the 14mm (even though I considered getting just to have a complete set.)

My reasoning is based on a comparison with the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8. The 14mm is T3.1, which is the same as the Tokina's F2.8. The 14mm has some barrel distortion while the Tokina has virtually none (okay a tiny bit around 11mm but not at 14mm.) And the zoom is just more versatile since you don't have to move the camera to reframe.

The drawback is the Tokina doesn't have gears and doesn't have an aperture ring. If you have a Prolock the aperture ring is less relevant to irrelevant depending on how you work. Send it off to Duclos and for $105 plus shipping you'll have a firm focus gear.

I do see that many on Reduser are snapping the Rokinon/Samyang lenses up because they have the resolution to handle an Epic or Scarlet. Also, they are light weight.

Yes, both blur, color and lack of edge sharpness can be added in post if you want to match an old lens. From sharp and contrasty you can always blur and fade. However, the reverse is a lot more difficult.

If you compare the build to Sony's $5,000 3 PL mount prime lens set, the Rokinon's are faster, lighter, smaller and much cheaper. IMO a little sharper too. That sells me right there.
 
Duke M. said:
In my opinion, the reason to get primes is the increased speed and its easier to get the optics correct so that there is little barrel distortion, etc. Otherwise zooms are more versatile. For that reason I skipped the 14mm (even though I considered getting just to have a complete set.)

My reasoning is based on a comparison with the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8. The 14mm is T3.1, which is the same as the Tokina's F2.8. The 14mm has some barrel distortion while the Tokina has virtually none (okay a tiny bit around 11mm but not at 14mm.) And the zoom is just more versatile since you don't have to move the camera to reframe.

The drawback is the Tokina doesn't have gears and doesn't have an aperture ring. If you have a Prolock the aperture ring is less relevant to irrelevant depending on how you work. Send it off to Duclos and for $105 plus shipping you'll have a firm focus gear.

I do see that many on Reduser are snapping the Rokinon/Samyang lenses up because they have the resolution to handle an Epic or Scarlet. Also, they are light weight.

Yes, both blur, color and lack of edge sharpness can be added in post if you want to match an old lens. From sharp and contrasty you can always blur and fade. However, the reverse is a lot more difficult.

If you compare the build to Sony's $5,000 3 PL mount prime lens set, the Rokinon's are faster, lighter, smaller and much cheaper. IMO a little sharper too. That sells me right there.
Click to expand...


Thanks. Ok, you sold me too. Going to pick up the full set. The Tokina 11-16mm sounds nice, but I prefer to have full manual control, so I guess I will just live with the distortion on the Rokinon 14mm. Cheers for all the info.
 
I thought the Tokina 11-16mm was just going to be a novelty lens, but its not. It's such a hit that many of the higher end guys are spending the $3,500 for a full Duclos PL mount Tokina conversion with the manual aperture. Nice. If I were going to choose between one or the other I'd choose the Tokina, but I'll probably get both just to have the full set in case I ever need full frame. But no need for me to decide yet.
 
Duke M. said:
The 24mm Rokinon cine arrived so I thought I'd give it some stress tests and compare it side by side with the Nikon. Also, the 35mm Rokinon Cine with the Nikon 35mm.

Like the 35mm the 24mm Rokinon focus and iris rings turn smoothly. The fronts are the same size.

The pictures were uploaded as lossless PNG files at pixel for pixel crops. (They weren't made bigger or smaller.) All the lenses were set wide open. All were at the same distance and used focus assist.

Please keep in mind that I'm trying to do stress tests and I try not to change the settings. You can argue that its unfair since the Rokinon is definitely brighter than the Nikon and over exsposing both to try to get CA or flare is even harder on the Rokinon for that reason. Also, the Nikon 24mm is F2.0 while the Rokinon is T1.5.

First, a general size comparison. In order from left to right they are the Rokinon 35mm, Nikon 35mm, Rokinon 24mm and Nikon 24mm. The Rokinon 24mm is almost exactly the same size as the Tokina 11-16mm, and those two are about 3/4" shorter than the Rokinon 35mm.


View attachment 60181

Then pictures through the Rokinon 24mm (top) and Nikon 24mm.
View attachment 60183
View attachment 60184

Then pictures through the Rokinon 35mm (top) and Nikon 35mm.
View attachment 60185
View attachment 60186

My conclusions: The Rokinon 35mm is much sharper wide open than the Nikon. This is a valid comparison since they are at the same aperture. The FOV on the Rokinon 35mm is definitely wider.

The Rokinon 24mm seems ready to flare or thow some CA, but the Rokinon is set for T1.5 while the Nikon is set for F2.0 (its widest setting.) This would reduce if set for T2.2 or the light turned down. Even with that the Rokinon 24mm seems a little sharper. There the Nikon is tending to flare.
Click to expand...

You're joking right? These shots are the test you use to evaluate the relative quality of these lenses. Stop me, I MUST be missing something. Horrible lighting conditions, ridiculous subject matter. By the way did you drop your 35mm Nikon? or inherit from your uncle? Please enlighten me otherwise.
 
boghav said:
You're joking right? These shots are the test you use to evaluate the relative quality of these lenses. Stop me, I MUST be missing something. Horrible lighting conditions, ridiculous subject matter. By the way did you drop your 35mm Nikon? or inherit from your uncle? Please enlighten me otherwise.
Click to expand...

Whats to miss; side by side shots using the same lighting. Those are cropped images by the way.

I think you're right; I think you are missing something - a sense of common politeness to begin with.
 
simonpwood said:
Whats to miss; side by side shots using the same lighting. Those are cropped images by the way.

I think you're right; I think you are missing something - a sense of common politeness to begin with.
Click to expand...

There does seem to be a sense of common politeness missing from many forms these days. What leaves me wondering is why do folks have to feel they need to ridicule or mock what most often is a serious well thought-out post on a piece of new technology. Constructive criticism, debate and educate, keep it congenial among professionals.
 
This is exactly why we don't get more people doing comparisons or reviews for us. Everyone is a critic and often a rude one at that. Who needs that?

If you see some sort of shortcoming in a product test or review, then kindly contribute your own test and show us how its done.
 
scocklin said:
There does seem to be a sense of common politeness missing from many forms these days. What leaves me wondering is why do folks have to feel they need to ridicule or mock what most often is a serious well thought-out post on a piece of new technology. Constructive criticism, debate and educate, keep it congenial among professionals.
Click to expand...
Apologies to Duke M and to anyone else offended by my snide tone. But to trash a manufacturer's product while making subjective tests is unprofessional as well. Still no excuse for my post today.
 
scocklin said:
There does seem to be a sense of common politeness missing from many forms these days. What leaves me wondering is why do folks have to feel they need to ridicule or mock what most often is a serious well thought-out post on a piece of new technology. Constructive criticism, debate and educate, keep it congenial among professionals.
Click to expand...

It tends to go hand in hand with posters with low post counts. Ignore it and move on. They tend to come into line sooner or later. This is one of the better moderated and constructive sites on the internet. Don't get upset by the trickle of new comers that take a little while to settle in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top