Rokinon cine lenses arriving!

Looking up the specs on the 8mm Rokinon it says its for the APS-C sensor but it will cover full frame and yield more rounded look.

So if its 8mm APS-C - then in full frame equivalence divide by 1.6 and you get 5mm. For you, 4/3 has a multiplier of 2 compared to full frame so it is a 10mm lens on your AF100 (or other 4/3 camera).

Kapeesh?
 
starcentral said:
Looking up the specs on the 8mm Rokinon it says its for the APS-C sensor but it will cover full frame and yield more rounded look.

So if its 8mm APS-C - then in full frame equivalence divide by 1.6 and you get 5mm. For you, 4/3 has a multiplier of 2 compared to full frame so it is a 10mm lens on your AF100 (or other 4/3 camera).

Kapeesh?
Click to expand...

We're getting there.... haha.
I want to put this on the BMC, 2.3x crop...
So I want to see if the curvature is different with the 2.3x crop compared to the curvature that you would see with a FF
Basically, would it be able to be used on the BMC as a standard lens, or will the curvature still be so severe that you can't.

And with the images of the lens on larger format sensors, it's confusing me as it crops from the center, so would the curvature change considering, what I am seeing on FF is massively curved, where as on the BMC, cropping from the middle out, would it change it drastically?

I think I am starting to understand that it won't make a difference at all, it'll still be curved.
 
BMC is slightly smaller than 4/3rds'. Frankly I don't see the attraction of BMC as it meets no real film standard size, but that's just me.

A_Selection_of_Sensor_Sizes-616x410.png
 
8mm.jpg Here a (bad) quick still from F3 @ F5.6. Lens prob a foot and a half away from wheel. Better lighting or full sun it really looks surprisingly sharp. If used FF you would have to cut off the sunshade, which is part of housing, if you wanted a circle .
 
Last edited:
nothing said:
Are these available with either metric (meters) or imperial (feet) marks? Sorry if this has been mentioned, I couldn't find the answer.

I just bought a used Rokinon 8mm cine and it's marked with meters only. As I am in the USA I would prefer feet, but since it's an 8mm with super-deep DOF it doesn't bother me much. Perhaps that's the whole reason the previous owner wanted to sell ;)
Click to expand...

My 8mm only has meters. My 24mm and 35mm have both meters and feet. The 8mm is so short that I don't see where they'd have room to put markings in feet, but as you say it makes little difference as almost everything is always in focus.
 
LiamR said:
We're getting there.... haha.
I want to put this on the BMC, 2.3x crop...
So I want to see if the curvature is different with the 2.3x crop compared to the curvature that you would see with a FF
Basically, would it be able to be used on the BMC as a standard lens, or will the curvature still be so severe that you can't.

And with the images of the lens on larger format sensors, it's confusing me as it crops from the center, so would the curvature change considering, what I am seeing on FF is massively curved, where as on the BMC, cropping from the middle out, would it change it drastically?

I think I am starting to understand that it won't make a difference at all, it'll still be curved.
Click to expand...

The curve will remain there as an 8mm fisheye is still an 8mm fisheye. The field of view is what will be restricted. You might see a tiny bit of difference but not much.

Why would you want the view of an 18.4mm fisheye?
 
starcentral said:
Frankly I don't see the attraction of BMC as it meets no real film standard size, but that's just me.
Click to expand...
Some people don't care that it's not "real film standard size" and other people care but are willing to make a few concessions for the great image quality.

I don't see how you can't see the attraction for some?
 
Ok, so I received my Rokinon/Samyang cine prime lenses; the 14mm, 24mm & 35mm. I have the 85mm on order.

I am surprised how big and heavy they are (compared to my Nikkor prime lenses).

So far my initial tests have been very satisfactory, and pretty much sum up what has been said about them before: they are fairly soft wide open, but otherwise sharp, build quality is not bad, but the focus markings can be a bit off. Definitely good value for money.

One thing though; I wish the gear teeth protruded further from the lens barrel. I have issues trying to get a follow focus close enough to grip them without part of the follow focus body touching the lens hood. This could be a design flaw with the gini-rig i-focus I have; the 24mm works well enough by chance, the 35mm does does not work very well (there is zero clearance; so a variable nd filter on the end grinds against the follow focus gear box), and the 14mm will not work with any follow focus with that lens hood on the end, unless I am missing something?

I am going to grind a bit off my i-focus to see if I can get a bit more space to work with; a few mm's will actually make a difference.
 
I have the 14, 24, 35 and now the 85. I bought them just out of curiosity and I am very impressed. The quality for the price is outstanding
 
So far I've tested the 35 T1.5 and it is actually surprisingly good. Will probably get the 14 T3.1 and 24 T1.5 today and the 85 T1.5 next week. I wish they get a 50 T1.5 together soon.
 
legrevedotcom said:
How's the line distortion on the 14 and 24?
Click to expand...

The barrel distortion on the 14mm is a bit on the high end. I decided to go with a cinevized Tokina 11-16mm instead. Less distortion (0.95% at 16mm), same speed, more metal, and about the same size and price. (No aperture ring though.)

Samyang makes the lenses for Rokinon and the F1.4 photo lens is identical to the T1.5 cine lens except for the gears.

The 35mm and 85mm lenses are great. The 24mm is okay. But not great:


[TD="bgcolor: #C3C3C3, align: center"][/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #C3C3C3, align: center"] Samyang
1.4/24
 [/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #C3C3C3, align: center"] Nikkor
AF-S 1.4/24
 [/TD]
[TD="bgcolor: #C3C3C3, align: center"] Canon
1.4/24 II
 [/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #C0C0C0, align: center"] APS-C/DX [/TD]
[TD="align: center"]−1.27%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]−0.79%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]−0.82%[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: #C0C0C0, align: center"] FF[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]−2.48%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]−1.27%[/TD]
[TD="align: center"]–2.03%[/TD]

The 85mm cine lenses have just started shipping.
 
Last edited:
Paul Hudson said:
I have the 14, 24, 35 and now the 85. I bought them just out of curiosity and I am very impressed. The quality for the price is outstanding
Click to expand...

Paul can you compare them to fast nikons if you have used them as well? ie. 24 f2, 35 f1.4, 85 f1.4 ?

(or anyone)

Cheers,
 
I have a set RPLens high speed nikons. The image quality is very comparable. The build is not as good as the Nikon. The Nikons are all metal and the Roki's are plastic. That said the plastic build is not cheap in feel or appearance. Additionally they are much cheaper with excellent quality. In fact I have rented a set out for a national bike company commercial next week.
 
starcentral said:
Thanks for the feedback.

Yes they definitely need the 50mm! Surprised it was not the first they cinevised....
Click to expand...

Its not even a question of 'cinevising' - they don't even have a non-cinevised 50mm in their line up. They are working on it though; so hopefully we will see them release both a cinevised / non-cinevised 50mm in 2013.

I am currently filling in the gaps with a 50mm Nikkor and an 85mm Nikkor (both vintage but fast lenses) - but I still need to see how they intercut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top