03-21-2016, 08:30 AM
Quote:Well, if you already mention zooms, the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 would also fit in this category and still is outstanding for it's price, as well as Canon's 11-24/4 although only f/4. Then there's a Zeiss 15/2.8 Milvus...I think that's somewhat of an exaggeration...although perhaps they have been looking over Fuji's shoulder
You all relaized, there will be two versions of this Irix Lens? same optical data, but one with lighter body and the other with tougher materials. Therefore 650€ will be possible for the cheaper one.
Makes it more difficult to see it's place in the market.
<div>
The rear gelatines mean you have to remove the lens fro the body for each change of a filter, also at slower apertures you will see (at this FL) each grain of dust. Also, a M95 filter might be cheaper than the adaptors with 150×150 Filters, but a good polarizer or ND at that size is no bargain. Expect 200-250€ for the circular polarizer.
Dave, I don't see the point of a lens with high resolution when the distortion sucks. Measure the resolution after correction of distortion and all of a sudden, it's just a mediocre glass. Maybe I read too much bad stuff about Samyang like badly centered or poor assembly and those comments were only exceptions but usually you get what you pay for.
</div>
........most lenses at that FL have strongish distortion but not many achieve the resolution of the Samyang into the corners.....corrected it will still be "way way" better than mediocre......the word on the street is that it's quite the opposite in fact...... also, it is often used for astro-photography where straight lines are not of high importance.
At €345 grey and €395 non grey... it's the sort of price a lot of people will pay for a lens that may not be often used.
Because of all that, the Samyang (and in it's other guises) has become a "cult lens", however as you say one has to "fix bayonets" in the battle to find a good copy. (I'm just sharpening mine now B) )
Oh and in the Nikon and Pentax mount it is AE.......sweet.....