Automotive Deals BOTYSFKT Shop Women's Clothing Learn more nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Sun Care Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis STEM Segway miniPro

Style: Canon|Package Type: Standard Packaging|Change
Price:$319.00+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on March 28, 2013
Cons:

- Manual lens, but you know that, right? Thankfully its depth of field at anything over f/5.6 is deep enough to cover most situations, those close-ups require patience. Perhaps it's my eyesight, but I have a hard time seeing the image clearly enough to gauge precise focus. I usually resort to a test shot or two.
- no range rings to assist with depth of field
- even with the fixed hood, its bulbous glass makes it a big target for rain; I hike in the Pacific Northwest, so you can understand the challenge to keep it clean
- the mustache distortion begs for post-process fixing on images with long horizontal lines

Pros:
- great images -- crisp, but it gets a bit blurry right at the edges/corners
- only $350!
- fast @ f/2.8
- solid lens cap -- my lenses get bounced around a lot and I appreciate the extra protection.

Updated 10/22/2013:
I continue to believe this is one of the best lens values on the market. If you're a competent photographer and can handle a totally manual lens, you will be hard-pressed to own a better lens value for the price. I have some photos from this lens that rival or exceed the quality of Canon L-glass lenses.
review image review image review image
1010 comments| 228 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on February 28, 2014
This lens is wonderful. It is one of the top rated nightscape lenses that is currently available on the market. Here is what I have found:

Pros:
1. This lens is cheaper by orders of magnitude over similar lenses. To get a fast prime lens like this usually costs upwards of $2000, for a mere fraction of that price this lens blows away the competition.

2. Sharp. This lens has great optics and takes sharp pictures corner to corner by f/8. Wide open it is is a little softer in the corners, but that is just how it goes, unless you want to spend $5000 that probably won't change.

3. Almost no Coma or Chromatic Aberration. For those who don't know, coma is when points of light appear as streaks or smears. The only time this is really encountered in a practical situation is when you are photographing stars. Even on the much more expensive canon and nikon lenses the corner stars appear as ugly streaks, this lens has some of the best coma correction available

Cons:
1. Fully manual. This may or may not be a con for you, but in the age of auto-focus, and auto everything, it certainly takes some getting used to. My first 20 pictures with this lens all looked terrible because I was focusing wrong and underexposing. Once I spent some time learning how to properly use a manual lens those problems disappeared.

2. Distortion. This is not really a good lens for architecture. There is rather significant mustache distortion in this lens. This can be corrected in post processing by finding the correct lens profiles online, but that is not ideal if you are photographing buildings and man made structures for a living. However that being said, if you use this lens for landscapes, nightscapes, or pretty much anything that isn't architecture then you will never notice the distortion and shouldn't worry about it.

3.. Focus scale is off. This is the only reason I gave this lens 4 stars instead of 5. From reading around this seems to be a common problem with these lenses. For some reason the focus distance scale is not set correctly. If you google this lens you can easily find a guide to correcting the focus ring and setting it to the correct distances. However upon doing this I found out that it is actually more subtle than just a wrong distance scale. With my particular lens I found that I obtained maximum sharpness for objects ~1mile away when I set the distance scale to between the 7ft and 10ft marking on the lens. This is quite a ways away from where the infinity mark is. However at night when attempting to photograph the stars, I found that I obtained maximum sharpness of the stars with the focus set slightly past infinity. Most of the time one would expect that 1 mile is essentially infinity when it comes to lenses, but for some reason there is a huge difference between 1 mile and infinity. Once I conducted enough tests and examined the test shots at 100% I was able to use simple masking tape to re-label my lens for the correct positions for various situations. It should be noted that this is really only an issue if you are shooting wide open at f/2.8. By f/8 everything will be razor sharp and in focus no matter where you set your focal point due to the enormity of the depth of field of such a wide angle lens.
44 comments| 140 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 15, 2010
I am using this lens on a Canon 5D Mark II. I have several zoom lenses in this range, but was looking for a fast, superwide prime. The choice would be this or the Canon 14L II. This is the same as the Samyang, rebranded.
After receiving the lens, I ran some tests against 16-35 2.8, and sigma 12-24, and was floored. The corner to corner sharpness of this lens is fantastic. I peaks at around 5.6, but the corners at 2.8 are better than the other 2 lenses at f11. the microcontrast and color is very good. The barrel distortion is hefty, and complex with a mustache distortion, however, often not well visible in landscape, but visible in architectural images. It is correctable using a $25 program called ptlens, and there is also a profile for acr 6.1 out there, which works great. It is an absolute bargain. I purchased a focus confirmation chip for 14 from ebay, glued it on, and I get focus confirmation too.

feb 2012 update
I have had this lens along side Nikon 14-24 2.8, adapted to canon with use on my 5d2, and at 2.8, the rokinon is sharper in the corners has less flare and less CA than the mighty Nikon. However the nikon has less distortion, and catches up by f 5.6 even in the corners. Additionally, do not rely on the distance markings on the focus ring. On my copy infinity focus is achieved at the 3 meter marking. 3 meters is achieved at 2m. for my style of shooting I dont find this troublesome at all. for landscape shooting I focus with live view anyway. for hand held, my focus is between 1 and 2 meters most of the time and it works fine.
2626 comments| 251 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 13, 2013
I currently have the A99 with the Zeiss 24-70mm. I love using the Zeiss at 24mm for my wide shots but then I rented the Zeiss 16-35mm lens and that lens at 16mm gave me a whole new perspective of the "world" I was shooting. And then I put on the Rokinon 14mm on my A99 and wow. The 2mm difference between the Rokinon and the Zeiss at 16mm actually noticeable (12%).

For landscapes or seascapes, this lens is just an absolute must - especially when you frame your shot with objects in the foreground, this lens will grab all the foreground subjects and set the stage for the scenery in the background. You will NOT get the "look" you get from this 14mm on a 24mm lens. You just can't. If you think your 24mm is the ideal landscape lens, you will be shocked at what you've been missing with the 14mm.

The lens is very sharp. I would say the sweet spot is somewhere between f/8 and f/11 but I tend to set mine at f/16 for landscape shots.

This lens is a manual lens. It does not have an "autofocus" feature. If you are looking for an ultra-wide lens with an autofocus feature, please just buy a point-and-shoot camera because any professional landscape photographer will tell you you must manually focus your landscape shots in order to get the sharpest pictures. There's just no need for autofocus for this type of lens so stop using this as a reason to not get this lens.

The only downside I see about this lens is the inability to put a filter on it. I can't even use my Cokin filter adapter on it and it's mainly due to the "bulb" shaped glass in the front. For seascape shots, this may be a tough call especially when you're trying to cut through the water in order to capture rocks, etc. Don't get me wrong. You can certainly use this lens for seascape shots but don't expect the shots to look like the ones you're used to using a lens with a polarizer. But again, not all seascape shots require a polarizer.

At this point, I will NOT be buying the Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8 lens. First, it's cost over $1,600 and I would probably only use it at the 16mm focal length the majority of the time. With that said, why not go 2mm shorter to absorb even more into your short with a lens that is just as sharp (yes, you read that right).
review image
0Comment| 89 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 23, 2011
This is the new version with the auto-exposure chip (only for Nikon mount) and UMC coating. My impressions:

Pros:
-Sharp, sharp, sharp. Even at f/2.8, this lens is sharp. At its sharpest aperture, f/5.6, it's sharp corner-to-corner on an APS-C camera.
-Very good build quality. Solid weighty feel, brass mount, and smooth dampened focus ring.
-By far the least expensive 14mm around.
-No problems with auto-exposure or focus confirmation (including the electronic rangefinder function on newer Nikon bodies)
-FX or DX

Cons:
-Cheap rear cap fits a little loose. I swapped mine with a Nikon cap.
-Has significant mustache-type barrel distortion in the middle of the frame. Not a lens for architectural photography. However, this can be mostly corrected in post-processing (with the $25 software PTLens, or user-created Lightroom profiles on the net).

Some considerations:
-Like some other ultra wide-angle lenses, the front element is large and bulbous, and the hood is integrated and non-removable. You can't attach any filters, so this lens requires more care to avoid scratches on the front element. The lens cover should be kept on at all times when not in use.
-Although the lens works great with my DX camera, it's really meant for FX cameras. On my DX Nikon the full-frame equivalent focal length is 21mm, which sits in an odd space between UWA and WA. DX users should probably consider the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 or Sigma 10-20mm instead for their UWA needs. However, this lens beats both for corner-to-corner sharpness.

UPDATE:
I sold my Nikon AE copy and re-purchased this lens for Canon mount, for a Canon 5D body. My new copy was just as sharp as my previous copy in the center. However the lens showed de-centering on the right side, which was significantly blurrier than the left even when stopped down to f/8 or f/11. This area would not be visible on an APS-C body, but was visible enough on the 5D that I returned it for a refund. I deducted one star from my rating until I can test another copy.
1212 comments| 120 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 5, 2015
Primary use is for real estate photography (need for tight spaces like a bathroom) Crystal clear, I don't notice any vignetting and any barreling/distortion can be corrected in PS or with "PT Lens" software (cost is around $25...see photos of before and after correction) Bought the "clicked"aperture version first but ended up returning for the "de-clicked" and intend to use for video too. Versatile and well worth the space in my bag.
review image review image
11 comment| 28 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on August 8, 2011
Don't let the price fool you, you get more than you pay for. It's build quality is very sturdy. the permanent flower-petal lens hood feels like it'll take the shock if it was dropped. I actually prefer the manual aperture ring, so that's a plus. Its long focus ring throw is a pain, but that's a small downside to a sturdy, quality lens. See my sample photos and decide for yourself!
review image review image review image review image
0Comment| 29 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 8, 2012
I loved this lens when I first bought it. I own a Canon 5d MK II which I use for both professional photography and professional video production. In fact, I loved this lens so much that I went and bought the Rokinon 85mm, too. Then IT happened. And IT changed my perspective on the Rokinons. I use to share the sentiments held by most of the reviewers here on Amazon, but there is one big flaw in this lens, and it should be taken into consideration before you pull the plug and buy one.

Okay... I'll get right to the point. My first Rokinon 14mm started out great but somehow got dust inside the lens between the lens elements after only 3 months of use. At first I thought I could blow it out with compressed air, but had no such luck. I had a commercial shoot that week that required my Rokinon 14mm, so in a pinch, I bought ANOTHER one. I chalked up the last problem to bad luck. Unfortunately, after owning the SECOND Rokinon 14mm for only a month, the same thing happened. When the lens is stopped down to f2.8 it's impossible to tell that there's dust in there. But when you push the lens to f8, f11, f16, or f22 and point it at a light background, it becomes glaringly obvious that there is dust INSIDE the lens. The ROKINON LENSES NEED BETTER SEALING. Now I know that not all lenses provided by even the major manufacturers are fully weather sealed. But I've found that the Rokinon 14mm is much more susceptible to dust than any other lens I've owned (weather sealed or not). The same thing has happened to the last two $400 Rokinon lenses I've purchased and I will be purchasing no more from this manufacturer. It's just not worth the risk. I know it's a tempting purchase. When you consider that the Canon 16-35mm L is over twice as much money, the Rokinon seems like a great deal. But I believe the Rokinon is too much of a risk unless you plan on shooting in a sterile environment and avoiding the outdoors completely. Believe me, it's worth waiting and springing for the Canon 16-35 which is weather sealed. For the price I just paid for my now two defunct Rokinon 14mms, I could've owned a used weather-sealed Canon 16-35mm.

My primary background is directing. I am a working commercial director that has directed national television along with many national commercials and one feature film. I am also a cinematographer. Even shooting high profile jobs, I'm always searching for cheaper filmmaking options and ways to reduce budgets. I love independent filmmaking and all the work-arounds and problem solving it entails. I love finding cheap equipment that somehow rivals the big players in the business. So I was extremely excited to discover the Rokinons because as a cinematographer, they made sense to me. Why not make a lens cheaper by tossing out all the fancy electronics, automatic apertures and autofocus features that I don't need anyway?? Why not just focus on the glass itself and nothing else? The Rokinon glass is very nice for the price. Aside from the extreme barrel distortion, I thought it was the best ultra wide angle lens you could find for the money. Unfortunately, this lens needs to be sealed better. It doesn't necessarily need to be completely weather sealed, as some of my other favorite Canon lenses aren't weather-sealed and seem to do just fine. The Rokinon just needs BETTER SEALING.

It's no fun to spend $400 on a lens that becomes useless in a month. And in my line of work, where deadlines are harsh and stress can be high, two strikes means the game is over. This lens will EAT YOUR DUST and that is not a good thing.
2222 comments| 266 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 14, 2015
I started looking at Rokinon lenses (also known as Samyang in some countries) some time ago, and was really impressed by the reviews in photography sites and forums. This company was able to release a **tremendously sharp lens, with virtually no chromatic aberrations and excellent build quality**. However, to keep the lens at an affordable price, they left out automatic focus, and on-camera electronic control. Meaning this is a fully manual lens, so you will have to control both the Aperture and Focus settings from the lens itself. I have no problem with that since auto focus is not really a need for landscape/architecture photography at this focal length, and the *Focus Peaking* in Sony A7 series cameras works really well. However, you won't have the lens EXIF information embedded in your photos for post-production, so keep that in mind if that's important to you.

This lens exhibits what has been defined as a "mustache-like" distortion. Although it may not be noticeable in landscape or nature shots, it will definitely show up in architecture photos (or basically any scene with prominent vertical/horizontal lines). At first I thought it was a deal-breaker, but I then found out this can be easily corrected in Lightroom. You just need the correct *Lens Profile*.

I spent several hours researching on the subject and testing profiles available for download in photography forums and blogs. However, I found out that most of these profiles over corrected the lens distortion and some others basically made it worse. I ended up modifying the best one I found for an equivalent lens (you can find more info in http://bit.ly/1Insyfb , or just look for it in movingelectrons.net).

An important thing that should be noted is that the version for the Sony A7 (FE mount) does not match the picture in the item description. I have included a picture of the actual lens next to the Sony A7 for comparison.

This is a great lens that produces an outstanding image quality at a excellent price. If you don't mind the manual operation, it's one of the best options out there. I'm Knocking one star off because of its relative large size (with respect to their Canon mount option), the distortion and the fact that no EXIF information is passed to the camera.
review image
44 comments| 22 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 29, 2013
I could not be happier with this lens. I downloaded adobe's lens profile for it (Nikon D700 samyang 14mm f11) and the complex distortion is a thing of the past. This profile works pretty well with most full frame cameras. A friend of mine uses it with his 5DMk3. This lens is super sharp, even wide open. Coma is nearly nonexistent when shooting the stars at night. It reads f/2 in my camera, and the focus indicator works. The dof is pretty huge even wide open unless you're near the minimum focus distance. The focus ring is smooth as silk with a good amount of resistance, and the aperture ring is smooth as well. I would highly recommend this lens!!
review image review image
0Comment| 36 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Questions? Get fast answers from reviewers

Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.
See all 501 answered questions


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.