Englischdude
Senior Member
downloaded. many thanks
Calling all wide anglers :o)
- Thread starter Englischdude
- Start date
downloaded. many thanks
Englischdude
Senior Member
go for it, you've got nothing to lose! Be prepared for a steep learning curve though, in many ways this program has been compared to LR!
Back to topic, ive not got a reason now not to try the samyang. Findings do far:
- only the 3.5 sigma 10-20 is suitable for IR, is however 100 euro more expensive and is not FX compatible
- tamron 10-24, all i could find were average reviews at best
- samyang 14mm, FX/IR compatible, good quality (although most complain about the focus scale being way off), nikon version is chipped and can be used in Aperture priority mode, camera controls the aperture, leaving only the focusing to be done manually. price performance is good.
looks like ill pull the trigger on this one. shame i dont live in the USA, they are 100 euro cheaper over the other side of the pond.
i appreciate everyones feedback. Many thanks to you all.
I have never used a euro in me life! 
A buddy rolls a 14mm Samyang...she freaking never misses a chance to rub it in either. I believe she has a bunch of Samyang lenses. She loves manual and finds the throw of the Samyang very satisfying over say a Nikon G lens in manual. She tends to go all jelly and has a far off look in her eyes when she starts talking about her manual lenses....
A buddy rolls a 14mm Samyang...she freaking never misses a chance to rub it in either. I believe she has a bunch of Samyang lenses. She loves manual and finds the throw of the Samyang very satisfying over say a Nikon G lens in manual. She tends to go all jelly and has a far off look in her eyes when she starts talking about her manual lenses....
I'd recommend them to anyone too; they're great. The 24mm 1.4 is fantastic too. They're indeed a bit more expensive here in Euro-land but still very cheap compared to other primes. Especially at night they're a very good choice since AF functions poorly anyways, if at all. During the day, my cam still shows the "in focus" dot so the discomfort of these lenses for Nikon is minimal.
I read they have released a 135mm f/2.0. I'm waiting on reviews to see if that one is worth adding.
I read they have released a 135mm f/2.0. I'm waiting on reviews to see if that one is worth adding.
Last edited:
Englischdude
Senior Member
hmm, as I travel regularly to korea, and samyang is a korean brand I was hoping that during my coming visit at the end of Jan I would be able to pick up the 14mm cheap. I asked a colleague to check the prices and they are the same as in europe, higher than in the USA!
Oh well, just pulled the trigger on the Samyang.
Oh well, just pulled the trigger on the Samyang.
Honestly just dragging the image into Darktable then not knowing how to correct is annoying enough. I can use LR and go to Edit in PT and it will do the adjustments. Is it worth the $25??? Yes I think so as it is a very sharp lens BUT it does not offer much more field of view over the 16-35 VR but that lens is shit at milky way shots
Which lens isn't good for milky way shots? The 16-35? If so, just wondering why 16mm wouldn't be good? By the time the 14mm has its distortion corrected, part of the outside edges might get cropped anyway. Or is it because f/4 is more difficult to focus than f/2.8 in low light? Or is it for some other reason? Trying to wrap my head around the reason why.
The duration of the shutter is limited by the focal length else the stars start to trail during one exposure. The better lens is thus a combination of focal length, how wide it opens (wider = more light during the same time period), sharpness and coma. The 14mm 2.8 will generally do better because it gathers a lot more light during the same exposure length.
Say what??? :eyetwitch: What does the focal length have to do with the duration of the shutter? Can you elaborate more as I don't understand what you mean. Did you mean aperture?
The longer your focal length, the shorter the duration of the shutter has to be before the stars start to trail. I can shoot my 200mm less than 2 seconds before the stars are no longer sharp while my 14mm can easily go over ten seconds or more. The stars slowly move and the closer I zoom in at them, the faster they travel in comparison.
It's not different from normal photography. I can shoot someone running in the distance at a rather slow shutter with my wide while I need to be much faster when I zoom in on him.
Last edited:
They use a fixed number to calculate the shutter limit but that number seems to differ between 400 and 600 depending where you read.
Let's take 600. If you divide that number by the focal length, that's about the max shutter speed (in seconds) one can use with that lens. For me 600 doesn't work and I'm closer to 400. It depends on many factors including where you live.
Let's take 600. If you divide that number by the focal length, that's about the max shutter speed (in seconds) one can use with that lens. For me 600 doesn't work and I'm closer to 400. It depends on many factors including where you live.
Scott Murray
Senior Member
The reason why I would prefer the 14mm f2.8 over the 16mm f4 is those extra stops, at 2.8 the Rokinon is very sharp and I can get good exposures without increasing my ISO too much which reduces noise. My normal settings for Milky way shots is 14mm, f/2.8, ISO 3200, 20 Sec. If I used the 16mm it would be 16mm, f/4, ISO 5000 (roughly), 20 sec. So as you can see the only thing that really changes is the ISO.
It has nothing to do with the focal length in this case as the difference between 14-16mm is not much at all.
Englischdude
Senior Member
today i read a report about a tamron 10-24 dx user who claims the lens works just as well on fx in fx mode from 14mm! anyone have any experience of WA dx lenses being used in FX mode on FF bodies?
I tried it with the Nikon 10-24mm DX but it wasn't that great. In FX mode below 15mm it didn't fill the sensor and even at longer lengths, there was too much stretch at the corners. I had hope I could keep using it on the D750 but had to switch to an FX lens.
The limit could have been 14mm too, I can't remember but I still have it so I could take some shots tomorrow and show exactly what happens.
Last edited:
I remember posting some shots I took when trying it.
http://nikonites.com/wide-angle/26872-question-fx-nikon-users-3.html?highlight=Dx+10-24mm
At first I was convinced I could use it but at some point when shooting something structured, I noticed the stretching and after that, I could not NOT see it. It could work for landscape if you cut those shots to 16:9.
I assume the Tamron DX not to behave much different. Maybe there is less distortion on an FX compared to the Nikon.
http://nikonites.com/wide-angle/26872-question-fx-nikon-users-3.html?highlight=Dx+10-24mm
At first I was convinced I could use it but at some point when shooting something structured, I noticed the stretching and after that, I could not NOT see it. It could work for landscape if you cut those shots to 16:9.
I assume the Tamron DX not to behave much different. Maybe there is less distortion on an FX compared to the Nikon.
Englischdude
Senior Member
[MENTION=9753]Scott Murray[/MENTION]
hey Scott, what tips do you have for focusing this Samyang? I ordered both the Samyang and the Tamron, the Tamron is very convenient with the AF and the ability to use a filter, but I definitely see the image quality improvement with the Samyang. The feel and build of this lens is really first class. The only issue I have with the Samyang is that the focus travel is HUGE! The only way to accurately focus is by using the indicator in the viewfinder, the focus scale on the barrel of the lens seems to be WAY off on mine! Whats yours like?
hey Scott, what tips do you have for focusing this Samyang? I ordered both the Samyang and the Tamron, the Tamron is very convenient with the AF and the ability to use a filter, but I definitely see the image quality improvement with the Samyang. The feel and build of this lens is really first class. The only issue I have with the Samyang is that the focus travel is HUGE! The only way to accurately focus is by using the indicator in the viewfinder, the focus scale on the barrel of the lens seems to be WAY off on mine! Whats yours like?
Scott Murray
Senior Member
There is an L section of the focus barrel, I tend to set focus on the short section of the L where it raises vertical as this tends to be infinity. And this works in the dark. If this does not work then I use Live view and focus on a bright star zooming in during live view. These seem to work, even a bright light will work.
Englischdude
Senior Member
So, I thank you all for your feedback until now. Story so far.....
Nikon.... too expensive
Sigma.... only the 3.5 version of the 10-20 is suitable for IR, and then with flare. also more than I want to pay
Tamron.... ok for IR and the price is right
Samyang.... manual focus but very positive first impression, build quality and image quality.
I have the Samyang and the Tamron to test. Here the first comparison pictures of an IR shot under similar conditions from the balcony. The difference in sharpness is immediately obvious. I have used the same post processing presents for both images:
First the TAMRON:
And now the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/Pro-optik/Vivitar and co.
Both display good IR properties, no flare or hotspots, however the sharpness in IR of the Samyang is better across the entire frame.
More visible spectrum comparison shots to follow.
Nikon.... too expensive
Sigma.... only the 3.5 version of the 10-20 is suitable for IR, and then with flare. also more than I want to pay
Tamron.... ok for IR and the price is right
Samyang.... manual focus but very positive first impression, build quality and image quality.
I have the Samyang and the Tamron to test. Here the first comparison pictures of an IR shot under similar conditions from the balcony. The difference in sharpness is immediately obvious. I have used the same post processing presents for both images:
First the TAMRON:
And now the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower/Pro-optik/Vivitar and co.
Both display good IR properties, no flare or hotspots, however the sharpness in IR of the Samyang is better across the entire frame.
More visible spectrum comparison shots to follow.