so i got up too early today and set out to see the difference in low light situations with my new samyang 14mm 2.8 and here are the unedited results mostly raw and out of camera only adjusted white balance and blacks and shadows. tell me what you see and then i will post edits over the weekend
all shots taken at iso 100 f2.8 25-30 sec from 5:30 a.m. - 6:15 a.m.
Joseph, I see weird cyan / greenish color cast in highlight areas (sky, snow, water). Is this is some kind of post-processing artifact? Or maybe there was some strong light source casting this color on to the scene?
no there was no post processing the long exposure picked up a lamppost light that had a blu/green hue ...im finding it pretty annoying i most likely will scrap these images they are void of any real strong visual aspects i merely wanted to test the lens in low light detail
On last one should pay the most attention, has the great potential for me. All seems a little underexposed. Beautiful shots Josef!
thanks Radisa but purely a low light test without light or color these images are dead. they do seem under exposed even though i over exposed on my meter ...oh well ill be out again tomorrow for sunrise and try it again with light
The quality of this lens depends from copy to copy. It may seem to me, or your piece is little decentred, as if the left side is not as sharp as the right one or you do some cropping. Maybe it should be checked in the right conditions. I don't see it well, but I always doubt on third party manufactures. I do not want to scare you, but should be checked.
that is what im looking for as my experience level is low in this arena
I bought this lens about two years ago for astrophotography and after 6 months I sold it. It was not in line with my criteria, it was somehow fuzzy, images somehow blurry with no details, as I could have noticed for this time.
this exact lens or similar
Samyang (Rokinon) 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC with manual focus. I think he went to the market in 2016.
thanks Radisa i will take it to the camera shop and get it checked
I found something, straight Jpeg for camera.
Firstly at home check on a flat sheet or paper with textures, letters, numbers at 90 degrees angle as it looks (focus on center).
Not so hasty o.O
haha i sparked a real debate lol
Agree, there's an image here, but you need to spend some time finding a great composition and you need the light.
yes i was more concerned with how it handled it bad conditions more than anything else also wanted you to look at the image quality from the lens... good or bad?
It looks excellent on paper at any rate, get a daylight shot at f/11 and we'll have a look.
sounds good give me 15 min lol
If you have a printer, you can print an ISO 12233 chart, like this one here https://stephen-westin.com/misc/res-chart.html - take a shot at f/2.8, f/4 and so on. Check the corners in particular.
just sent to your website email
Checking.
It may be a teeny weeny bit softer on the left side, but you will hardly notice (this is at f/11). Wide open it may be more pronounced but when you shoot wide open you'll get soft corners anyway, doesn't matter if one side is slightly softer or not - in my opinion.
If you are looking to do a lens sharpness test, you need to a proper one, in full daylight on a tripod, at a single subject (w lots of detail). Take the same pic at the full range of apertures for a series of focal ranges (if a zoom). Then compare the detail in the center and edges for each aperture at each zoom. You'll quickly see that you probably have certain "sweet spots" for sharpness at different apertures and different focal lengths.
awesome thanks David its a prime so i only have to worry about focal distance
The trouble is, this is an FF lens on a crop sensor, so will be hard to tell.
I agree with Thorsten, this lens is designed for a full frame sensor, the edges of the images will be missing from the frame anyway due to the crop factor (closer to 21mm on crop sensor). Softness and distortion in the corners of 14mm lenses is unavoidable imo. Remember that the crop factor must be applied to aperture as well, meaning that the maximum aperture is more like 3.2 on APS-C. I have shot this lens quite a bit and find f8 seems to be the sweet spot for sharpness on a Nikon ff. This lens is super sharp, I believe it has a rating of 28 p-mpix at DXO-mark, this means it will out resolve the sensor on your 3300. This lens definitely takes some getting used to, try some vertical compositions with a close foreground and focus stack for optimal sharpness. Happy shooting!
absolutely right John manufacturer said 20mm equivalent however it still gets more than my 18mm kit lens...weird right. i expect some distortion it comes with the territory of the wide angle i just don't know if its an elongated distortion or a complete breakdown on a sharpness scale ...like it just gets fuzzy. i will definitely be working with this lens to get it right thanks a ton John glad to see you chiming in on the group.
Re: terminology here, Joseph, when photographers talk about lens "distortion", it refers to unintended bending of straight lines - dished or bowed sea horizons and that sort of thing.
Also, rectilinear lenses (lens intended to render all straight lines as straight, i.e. almost all except fisheyes) produce inherent distortions, more evident the wider-angle the lens is - and yours is pretty wide..
These include converging verticals, as in Radisa's church image, which can be good or bad, depending on what you're trying to do.
Another is that spheres at the edges elongate into ellipses, not circles. This can look odd with, say, a row of spherical lights in an image. I append an image where the man at the edge looks fat, and much wider than his shadow, for the same kind of reason (he's 3D, his shadow's 2D)..
On paper it should reach somewhere around 3500 lpmm in the center, the Nikkor 14-24mm/2.8G only gets to about 3000 lpmm, so yes, it should be super sharp.
lol your such a number cruncher thanks a ton Thorsten now i have to do the research of what your talking about hahaha
On A2 prints, I cannot tell the difference between ones made with my sharpest and my least-sharp lens. And not because they're all out of focus! I think we photogs can get obsessed with specs and tech. However, I note Radisa's experience in this discussion.
One thing I'd stress, Joseph, is that the weird colours are NOT because of faults with your lens - if anything, it's one limitation of our generally pretty marvellous digital cameras when light levels are low and the colours are inherently muted. I've had the same trouble with a D800E and good Nikon primes, when shooting waterfalls at dusk.