Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
If these lenses had a decent price they would sell buck loads of the Xeen lenses. Right now they are way overpriced.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I recently saw a side by side comparison of the Rok Cine's to the Veydras. At Fstop 2.2 the Rokinons were visibly softer across the range of lenses.
http://noamkroll.com/veydra-mft-cinema-lens-kit-review-rokinon-cine-lens-comparison/
If these lenses had a decent price they would sell buck loads of the Xeen lenses. Right now they are way overpriced.
The Rokinons were always cheap subpar lenses. But this side by side really shows it. Rokinons looked out of focus so soft they look.
I'm not sure new coatings can make miracles. But it better get rid of the horrible softness, chromatic aberrations and overall poor optical quality of the current Rokinons.
If you follow the lens rehousing market they are not overpriced at all. Compare what a Sigma 18-35 or Tokina 11-16 costs and how much companies like Duclos and GL Optics charge for the rehoused versions.
These are lenses for more serious shooters. If you need cheaper Rokinon already offer the current cine DS line. What else do you want?
I recently saw a side by side comparison of the Rok Cine's to the Veydras. At Fstop 2.2 the Rokinons were visibly softer across the range of lenses.
http://noamkroll.com/veydra-mft-cinema-lens-kit-review-rokinon-cine-lens-comparison/
If these were outfitted with all new glass; then maybe they would be a good deal,
But, when you get down to it, these basically have stills lens' DNA...
The Veydras are 2 to 3 times the price of the Rokinons - they had BETTER be superior.
Comparisons really do need to be done with a sense of CONTEXT.
But this does hint that the Xeens will really need to be a step up from the Rok's.
I'm not knocking the Rokinon Cine Series. I own a set! You get a lotta lens for the money.
The optics are good, but they ain't 'cinema' good.
I can tell you from experience, the 24mm does more breathing than a Lamaze class.
That's exactly what have to be done. MFT charts says that they're essentially the same though.BwaaHaaHaa!
I think the test that needs to be done is a nice thorough examination of the IQ of a Rok vs. a Xeen of the same focal length.
That will put that issue to rest.
An MTF chart is certainly not the only measure of the optical performance of a lens.That's exactly what have to be done. MFT charts says that they're essentially the same though.
Absolutely! That's why would be nice if someone would do the tests. But it might be hint that they're the sameAn MTF chart is certainly not the only measure of the optical performance of a lens.
... I've read somewhere that anti-flare coatings are improved.
Those coatings were already applied to Rokinon's 2nd generation of Cine lenses; the "DS" lineup.
Are they only allowed to improve coatings once?
Those coatings were already applied to Rokinon's 2nd generation of Cine lenses; the "DS" lineup. They're supposed to reduce flare and color mis-match between lenses.
The newer DS Cine lenses already reflect that change in their pricing. They're more expensive than the original Cine series. (I think that started when 50mm debuted)
Even tho' I already own a set of Rok Cine's, I still wouldn't mind seeing some tests or comparisons done with the Roks/Xeens and other cinema lenses.
Ah-HAH!
I did not know that.
But now that I do I think I will add their 35mm and 85mm to my lost somewhere in slow shipping 16mm.
Thanks!
I have the 16mm and I like it. I probabaly would have gone for the 14mm, but it has a non-removable lens hood.
That was a deal breaker for me. So, when I want wider than 16mm, I slap on a speed-booster and then it's equivalent to a 12mm.