< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED MC Aspherical with Nikon mount

Pin It

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):

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Ca

    what a sexy low profile lens. i need it.

  • Nonlin

    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.

  • http://www.d800.com The invisible man.

    Ok, I see…
    I will be available in April, like the D900 !
    Finally !
    Thanks Admin !

  • Hobbit

    I wonder how its distortion compares to Nikon 14-24mm?

    • Ca

      i wouldn’t compare it. its a 500$ lens.
      but there is a full review by lenstip on the net

    • Lol

      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).

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

        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.

        • Martin

          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.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

            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 :)

        • No

          “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.

          • No

            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.

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

            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.

  • Ray

    This lens is perfect for all the people disappointed with nikkor prices.

    • http://www.d800.com The invisible man.

      and nikon quality control……

      • Global

        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…

  • Bruce

    What a piece of CR@P. No way I would attach this junk to my Nikon.

    • Mynameisdave

      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?

  • KoJa

    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.

    • Mynameisdave

      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.

      • Mynameisdave

        plastic Aspherical lens ->i guess :)

  • fiatlux

    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.

    • fiatlux

      Oops, I forgot about the curved front lens element and fixed hood, which mean no filter.

  • Mohinder Khanna

    It is all right but to compare GLASS with PLASTIC. NO WAY.

    • Mynameisdave

      It’s not about the lenses, it’s all about the pictures.
      Saying if the quality is good enough it’s ok i guess.

  • ray

    i am still considering the 12-24 sigma, for that sexy 12.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/friedtoast/ Fried Toast

      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.

  • Back to top