The full frame Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical lens (Nikon and other mounts available) was first announced in Europe last year, but then it was delayed and is now available for pre-order on eBay (ships in April, 2010):
Related posts:
- Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD Aspherical IF (Nikon mount)
- New lens coming out soon: Voigtlander Color Skopar 20mm F3.5 SL II Aspherical (for Nikon Ai-s)
- New ultra high power zoom: Tamron AF18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO
- New Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar 90mm F3.5 SL II with F-mount
26 Comments
what a sexy low profile lens. i need it.
It’s only available for pre-order. The top of the item description says:
“Notice: PRE-ORDER! The lens will be available from April 2010. All paid item will be sent first.”
So, not quite released yet.
Ok, I see…
I will be available in April, like the D900 !
Finally !
Thanks Admin !
I wonder how its distortion compares to Nikon 14-24mm?
i wouldn’t compare it. its a 500$ lens.
but there is a full review by lenstip on the net
The question is how does it compare with the existing Nikon 14mm f/2.8 prime.
(Which is not as sharp as the 14-24 zoom).
Is the Nikon 14mm worth comparing to?
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/14mm/14mm_test.html
The older 15mm AIS looks like a good deal (if you’ve got the right adapter):
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/15mm_2/sigma1224vnikon15f6.html
Too bad the upcoming Tokina 16-28mm f2.8 wasn’t in these comparos.
Yes, the Tokina 16-28 is very interesting. Let’s just hope they can keep up with the demand. Trying to find a Tokina 11-16 is a full time job.
Guess I’m lucky living over here in Japan. I bought my 11-16 months before it came out elsewhere and I don’t know that it was ever really in short supply in Japan. I find ‘em used occasionally as well. If you *really* want one, just ask someone in Japan to pick one up for ya
“Is the Nikon 14mm worth comparing to?”
If not you’re talking apples to oranges. That IS the direct competition.
14-24 is a whole other ballgame.
And that one (linked) review does not match up with the reality of what I see with the Nikon 14. It /is/ softer than the Canon in my experience, but I have not seen such deviations from planar focus.
That’s the thing w/ reviews- hard to really tell off of one experience. And the tester even mentioned they may have gotten a bad copy. I was surprised at how soundly the Nikon got whooped there.
This lens is perfect for all the people disappointed with nikkor prices.
and nikon quality control……
Not. The 14-24 is perfect. The question is price, not quality. If you consider the 14-24/2.8 to be 3 or 4 perfect lenses, then the price is fine.
A super-sharp version of any of these would be priced around $600:
14~16mm 2.8 ~ $600 Super ultra-wide
16~18mm 2.8 ~$500 Ultra-wide
18~20mm 2.8 ~$400 Very-wide
20~24mm 2.8 ~$400 Wide
—————-
$1900 –> So the price is COMPARABLE to a set of primes.
The fact that it is one lens and excellent throughout its range makes it spectacular (if heavy, intimidating and unweildly).
If you prefer to buy primes, then by all means.
Any one prime will certainly cost less. But if you buy 3 or so primes? Hmm…
What a piece of CR@P. No way I would attach this junk to my Nikon.
This lens has its place. For those who can’t afford 1500€ spending on a Nikon 14mm 2.8 lens maybe considering a lens which comes along with a 300€ pricetag. Seriously, how often do most of us take a 14mm shot compared to 24 or 35mm?
why compare 1800$ lenses to this budget-glass?
well, you could find out:
-that you do not need better glass than this one for 14mm? [save lots of $]
-that you never needed the 1800-lens? [buried lots of $]
-that you can afford a lens, that you normally dont need? [its fun, it costs little $]
-that a porsche will always drive better than a beetle? [everybody knows that, why spend $ for that information?]
i think every amateur will be pleased to get such a fast and special UWW-lens for small money. since samyang redesigned its coatings it may even have its flare/ghost-problems (see 2009 reviews of the preproduction lenses) removed/diminished – all in all this is nothing but a fair offer.
the 85/1.4 is the same case. tested, proven okay, maybe even good.
and easily enough glass for most of the people whose gear is better that their photographic skill.
True.
Qualitiy of this lens btw is excellent for its price. What i ve heard.
If you want pure glass you have to buy nikon though, cuz this one is a plastic Aspherical lens.
plastic Aspherical lens ->i guess
More expensive that their 85mm 1,4 and 8mm fishe-eye, but still interesting. Possibly even more on DX than FF. It looks smaller than expected. I might get one for my D300 if the tests are good.
Oops, I forgot about the curved front lens element and fixed hood, which mean no filter.
It is all right but to compare GLASS with PLASTIC. NO WAY.
It’s not about the lenses, it’s all about the pictures.
Saying if the quality is good enough it’s ok i guess.
i am still considering the 12-24 sigma, for that sexy 12.
Bingo. My issue w/ that one is the slow, variable aperture. Sure, I can crank the ISO up, but there’s just something about having fast glass at your fingertips. But then again, if I wanted f2.8 throughout, I’d have to put up w/ the bulk (ie- 14-24). Ah, just can’t win.