Best Samyang / Rokinon 14mm Review With Sample Photo
Download Raw Samples Below
Also known as the Rokinon 14mm f2.8 and Bower 14mm f2.8 Ultra Wide Angle Lens
I not too long ago picked up the Samyang 14mm f2.8 (Rokinon 14mm f2.8) after doing a ton of research and comparing it to other lenses.
This lens compared to the Canon 14mm will save you somewhere around $1,600.
Samyang 14mm f2.8: (Amazon)
(Canon) (Nikon AE) (Sony E Mount) (Olympus) (Pentax) (Samsung NX) (Sony Alpha)
Bower 14mm f2.8: (Amazon)
(Canon) (Nikon) (Nikon AE) (Olympus 4/3) (Pentax) (Samsung NX) (Sony A)
When it comes to Ultra Wide Lenses, this lens is easily the best bang for the buck.
I've seen this lens a few times this last year on sale in the $300 dollar range. If you see it down at $300 or less don't think twice about buying it. It's worth it for sure. I got mine years ago for $400.
This lens goes by many different names. Samyang 14mm f2.8, Rokinon 14mm f2.8. And I've also seen it as the Bower 14mm f2.8. I bought the Rokinon version. They are all built by Samyang just branded differently.
You can also get the Rokinon Cine 14mm T3.1 Which is a cinema version built with a De-Click aperture ring and Follow Focus Capabilities. Same quality all around.
And check out the Full Rokinon Cine Lens Kit - 35mm + 24mm + 14mm + 85mm + 8mm for Canon Bundle It's a pretty killer deal I am tempted by it almost every day.
The Samyang 14mm f2.8 Reviews And Problems
I've read a lot of bad reviews about this lens and a lot of good reviews. What I learned was the people giving the bad reviews were criticizing the lens because it was all manual. So are Zeiss lenses and many others. It's possible these people just didn't know what they were getting into, plus the lens can come with auto focus for Nikon users.
I also saw a few reviews, particularly one by kenrockwell who had a bad experience with his lens. I've seen people posting this review and discussing it and many people didn't buy this lens because of it.
After my experiences I'm pretty sure the person on this site just got a bad copy. My lens does not exhibit the bad qualities they speak of which you can see in my test shots below. I actually love this lens. And remember it's Ken Rockwell. Take anything he says with a grain of salt. He has a bad reputation for bad reviews.
I also get several emails a week now from people who are on the fence about this lens, afraid of getting a bad copy. I always tell them not to worry about it since people vocalize a lot more when they receive a bad copy than when they receive a good copy. If you have any concerns of the quality of this lens just read all the good reviews over at Amazon.
Update: A reader of this site had some problems with one of his lens. The left hemisphere of his lens was a lot softer than the right. He pointed this out to me on some of my photos as well. My lens also exhibits the same problem in some shots. But it's really hard to notice, and I've dropped my lens at least five times over the last few years.
Redondo Beach Pier Sunset - My number 1 selling photo was shot with this lens!
Samyang 14mm f2.8 vs My Canon 16-35mm f2.8L II
I also have a review you can check out of the Canon Ultrawide Zoom 16-35mm f2.8L II which is probably my favorite lens.
Other common threads I saw was a comparison between the Samyang 14mm f2.8 vs the Canon 16-35mm f2.8L II. Instead of buying that Canon 14mm f2.8L II that I mentioned above, I actually decided to buy both these lenses instead. I even saved a few hundred bucks doing so.
To quickly compare them, I can say I really like the Samyang as a primary landscape lens. Just know that you will have to get a custom Lightroom lens profile to fix the annoying mustache distortion. You can Google search some of these and find them pretty quickly. Only drawback, I can't find a profile that will work when shooting jpg. Since I like to shoot a lot of my 5 shot HDRs jpg, this forces me to always use RAW. Which is better anyway just uses more space.
Optically I find the Samyang to be edge to edge slightly sharper than the 16-35mm f2.8L II, except at infinity the Canon is slightly sharper at the center.
The Canon lens also has pretty bad chromatic aberrations in the edges when shooting in high contrast areas. Actually the edges are a mess compared to the Samyang.
So taking these two things into account, mustache distortion on the Samyang that I haven't been able to correct when shooting jpeg, and the chromatic aberrations and optical inferiority of the Canon zoom, I've found these lenses to be usable in very different situations.
The Samyang is not weather sealed like the Canon nor does it have a front mounting threads. So when shooting in harsh environments, like the beach or the desert, I'd pick the Canon since it also accepts front screw on UV or ND filters that can protect the lens or creates cool effects. Pretty nice if you're shooting seascapes and wants to get the smooth water effect.
Something I'm going to be adding to my lens reviews is a diffraction test. I've learned diffraction is important and not many reviews include it. For example, I love my Zeiss 35mm lens that I got with my Sony A7r but the diffraction of that lens is terrible at higher apertures making the lens no good for landscape photography.
The diffraction on my Rokinon 14mm is great. It starts to be noticeable at f16 and is very bad at f22 on my Sony A7r. A camera with smaller pixels like the Sony A7r will handle diffraction much worst than something with large pixels like a Canon 5dMkiii. You can read more about diffraction here.
I've found the sweet spot to shooting landscapes on this lens is somewhere between f11 and f16. I usually don't go all the way to f16 anymore with the Sony A7r.
This image is cropped in 100% at the center of the lens.
The Sum Up
To sum it up I really like the Samyang. I'm really glad I bought it. For the price it's an amazing landscape lens or just a fun lens to play with.
Make sure you get a good copy and you'll love it. Full manual isn't really that bad but it does take some getting use to. Just finding infinity focus at night can be hard since you have to use live view and there is a ton of grain in live view at night.
Remember the distance focus marks on the lens cannot be trusted, I usually just make mental notes of where infinity focus is and go from there.
Walt Disney Hall in Los Angeles - Very sharp and crisp detail when shot at f16 and sharpened in post.
Few Things to Consider Before Buying - This is My Disclaimer
If you've read this review and you've seen how much I like this lens there are a few things you should consider.
This lens is not easy to use!
Like any lens it requires a lot of "Getting Use To." It took me awhile to figure out how to shoot good photos with this thing. Like I said earlier I didn't like it at first. But after spending $400 dollars on it, I stuck with it and kept using it until I figured out how to make it work for me. This lens by far had the steepest learning curve for me.
The reason I say this is because I get a lot of emails from people who buy this lens, then take a few shots around their living room or in their backyard then aren't happy because the lens isn't perfect. And this lens does have a few flaws.
This lens will give you very minor chromatic aberrations. Nothing Lightroom can't fix. And you do get some corner softness, but not nearly as bad as my $1,500 16-35 f2.8L II. This lens is also tricky to focus if you're shooting around your living room and backyard.
It's best used for landscapes where you can find that infinity point and shoot at an f16 to keep everything in focus. That being said, It's not very good wide open.
Here are a few tips for shooting with an Ultra Wide Angle Lens
-Don't shoot wide open on this, you'll loose a lot of corner sharpness and overall quality.
-When shooting landscapes keep in mind where your ground or foreground objects are. Don't let the lens be too close to the ground while trying to focus on something in the distance, the ground will always look like crap. Think about it, if you're shooting something 20 feet away, say on a beach, and you have the beach sand right below the camera which is 2 feet away, it will not be sharp or in focus. And this lens does not have a beautiful "out of focus" feel to it. If you see my photos below you'll notice I try to keep the scene at a relatively consistent focal distance. So when I shoot at an f13 the whole scene can be in focus including corner objects.
-Master post sharpening techniques. I always either use the High Pass filter or the Find Edges technique. Post processing is absolutely essential in enhancing photographs taken with mid range quality lenses.
-This lens really seems to like somewhere like an f8 to an f13. That seems to be the sweet spot. I'll go as high as f16 sometimes, but things start getting weird anywhere above that.
Free Downloadable RAW Sample Photos for the Samyang 14mm f2.8
I've included some RAW sample files in this review that you can download for free. These are all shot with the Sony A7r. No EXIF data is available but the aperture on these photos ranges from about f8 - f16. By downloading these you'll be prompted to give your email which will include you in my newsletter. I won't spam you and they are rare. Enjoy!
SAMYANG 14mm f2.8 / ROKINON 14mm f2.8 SAMPLE PHOTOS
Here are the test or sample of photos I've taken with my Rokinon 14mm f2.8 on the Canon 5Dmkii.
Samples Photos - Samyang 14mm f2.8 with the Sony A7r and the Metabones Adapter