Samyang AE 14mm f/2.8 ED AS IF UMC Aspherical lens now shipping

Samyang AE 14mm f/2.8 ED AS IF UMC Aspherical lens with Nikon F mount is now shipping. The lens was initially delayed for further improvements. A full review can be found here. The US price is $512.99 with free shipping.

"Samyang AE 14 mm f/2,8 ED AS IF UMC Aspherical with Nikon F mount is a wide-angle manual lens intended for Nikon DSLR cameras with FX and DX sensors. It comes with a microprocessor allowing for full control of exposure parameters, directly from the camera level. Moreover, it allows to freely use iTTL system and takes advantage of the built in rangefinder which facilitates fast and precise focus adjustment. Full information on the range of available stops, focus and focus confirmation makes shooting with Samyang AE 14 mm f/2,8 ED AS IF UMC easier and more comfortable than ever before. Recommended retail price for Samyang AE 14 mm f/2,8 ED AS IF UMC Aspherical is set at 389 EUR."

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • I love my 14-24mm dearly, but reviews are saying this is actually better at 14mm?

    Someone please talk me out of selling my 14-24 and buying a 24 1.4 and this…

    (but don’t talk me out of buying at 24mm f/1.4. I still want that. bad.)

    • iamlucky13

      The review above mentions mustache-distortion (harder to correct than simple barrel), flare, and vignetting. It’s also manual focus, although personally I don’t worry about that for wide angles.

      It’s not clear to me that it’s any sharper than the Nikon 14-24. If I had the money to spend, I’d personally stick with that one…unless you really need the extra aperture of the 24mm F/1.4 more than you need straight lines and flare resistance at 14mm.

      Fantastic price for those who can’t afford other ultra-wide angle options, however.

      • Yeah… Not selling my 14-24. 😉

        But I’m still going to somehow get a 24 f/1.4. I use 24mm about 80% of the time, and i love love the medium-format feel of wide angle depth of field.

        • Paul

          I was looking at the 24 f/1.4 for the same reason. But now that the 35 f/1.4 is out, I might have to go with that instead. The 35 is much closer to the fast 80mm prime look of 6×6.

          • Drab

            The 35 is much closer to the fast 80mm prime look of 6×6.

            FX cropped square is 24x24mm for a diagonal of 34, almost a perfect match for 80 on 6×6 (56x56mm, diag 79)

            Never thought of it that way. I’ve always mentally thought “80 on 6×6 = 50 on 35mm”.

            Thanks for making me think! 😉

            • Paul

              I think you’d need a 41mm f/1.4 on FX to be a perfect match for an 80mm f/2.8 on 6×6. They have a handy depth of field equivalency calculator on cabridge in colour.


              The 35mm f/1.4 cropped square is definitely the closest I’ve seen to replicating the look of medium format.

              The other (less expensive) method is to use a fast 50mm and stitch two frames (one on top of the other) to make a square. Some people call it the “brenizer method”, but people have been stitching long before it was coined.

      • John

        Yeah, other than the massive price difference, I can’t imagine choosing the Samyang over the new-ish Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G…

        • They aren’t even remotely comparable except in the fact they are both fast camera lenses wider than 35mm.

          • Mock Kenwell

            Come on Sean, you’re not being fair. They both have gold rings painted around the lens edges!

          • PHB

            Reports suggest that its not too sharp and has mustache distortion.

            The Nikon 10-24 DX is only a little more expensive and is acceptably sharp, acceptably distortion free and offers a zoom and AFS.

            I disagree, Samyang DO seem to know their market here: Idiots who think that a honking great big FX lens has to deliver better results than DX.

            This lens is going to look very pretty on the end of a D700.

            • Every image I’ve seen out of a Nikon 10-24 looked like crap compared to the 10-20 Sigma I owned, and REALLY bad compared to the 11-16/2.8 Tokina I owned. The 12-24 Nikkor is no winner either. Nikon really dropped the ball with it’s ultra wide angle DX attempts.

              The shots at the link above look full of win to me. They’re totally unsharpened and with even a little sharpening they looks stunningly sharp.

              Moral is, be ready to shop around for a good copy.

  • What s the built in rangefinder ?

    • Jabs

      Answer – the ‘built-in rangefinder’ refers to focus confirmation in autofocus cameras when a manual lens is mounted.
      The camera indicates that proper focus has been achieved.

  • texasjoe

    Review=this lens sucks unless using it without bright lights. So take knight photography with low image quality. Might as well get a disposable. It’s 100 times cheaper.

    • Teun

      the original link pointed to the previous version review. The link has been fixed and points now to the correct review of this newer version which improved the previous one. So there is no longer extreme flaring. I guess they used better coatings or so on this one.

  • GlobalGuy

    Ken Rockwell received a copy that was pretty bad, according to his write-up. I think Samyang needs to understand that 14mm isn’t a hobbiest focal length — people need to be a bit serious there (and wider) or the images just look awful.

    Nikon’s 14mm isn’t too great, but it is pretty old and the 14-24mm is excellent (considering it is not a prime — it is a complex zoom!). Samyang seems to have the ability to get a sharp 14mm, but not consistently.

    I would suggest that Samyang took extra production time to weed out the bad copies (that’s what I would do), so they can make adjustments on the softer lenses and ship out the sharper ones. An extra level of quality control is usually reserved for Japanese and German (often American) products, but Korea can be a bit lax, even if their technology is just as good (Americans can be pretty lax too, by comparison).

    If Samyang is going to be serious about convincing people not to buy other lenses — when it doesn’t yet offer AF — it needs to offer only the sharpest copies (otherwise Manual Focus is just a pain in the butt).

    Samyang was good to do the delay. And if there is added cost, thats a GOOD thing, because we want GOOD, sharp, crisp lenses — not Chinese mass-manufactured lenses. If Samyang can deliver a 14mm 2.8 that is sharper than Nikon’s 14-24mm/2.8, then many people will say “Hey! Why don’t I buy the 16-35/4 Nikon and a 14mm Samyang for my wide angle needs……. and that would be a very reasonable pairing.

    Let’s see if Samyang’s last ditch fix sharpened the lens. Remember, don’t trust websites that were given a copy — ONLY trust reviews that went out and bought a lens randomly. A lot of companies try to put their “best foot forward” by giving out the nicest copies to the reporters/reviewers.

    Ken Rockwell tests a ProOPTIC/Samyang 14mm lens and said it was softer than a zoom, but with no AF. Yikes! No wonder Samyang wanted to weed out some of the bad ones. Lets see how the new batch fairs.

    • GlobalGuy

      By the way, people should refer to this lens as the “Samyang 14mm/2.8 II” — the version Ken Rockwell and many others have reviewed is actually “Version 1”. Samyang realized that lens wasn’t good enough (again, why so many complained about sharpness), so they went back to sharpen it up.

      The new lens is sharper and theoretically is as good as the 14-24/2.8 of Nikon, but has very complicated distortions, even worse than the original. So you need to remember this if you are shooting straight horizons (such as the ocean) or architecture or any kind of straight lines — you will get a wavey “{” moustachey pattern that annoys a lot of people.

      However, if you are shooting organic detail with rounded lines, then resolution becomes king, and this lens might be good for things like that (such as outdoor mountain horizon images).

      • Photozone reviewed a good copy, and their samples and metrics were quite impressive. No matter what, I’d order from a place that lets you return/swap for another if you get a crap version. The only difference to me is the AF, since the only reason I’d use this or the Nikkor are for the wide end.

        Is it a chipped lens or will cameras below the D7000 freak out in anything but manual mode?

        • Looks chipped to me. Otherwise there would be no CPU contacts at all.

          • …yeah, I guess I should have read the original post more closely.

        • GlobalGuy

          Guys — did you take a look at their SAMPLE photos though?? To me they were AWFUL!! If those were their sample photos how the hell did this lens rate so highly? I can’t figure it out, except that perhaps the photographer and the tester used two different bodies or had completely different focusing skills.

          I can hardly find “sharp” anything in the sample photos. I would say this lens might be decent for a cheap low-light solution, but i’ve seen garbage come out of my 14-24 that was much sharper than this sites sample images….

          Its just puzzling to me how they can rate so highly but the sample pics are so poor (take a look, maybe i missed something, let me know).

          • JED

            The sample pics on lens-tip are unsharpened. Download them and apply sharpening and things look a whole lot better.

            • sirin

              why would you buy a lens that needs additional sharpening? btw, sharpening brings out the noise too.

              and yes, the sample photos totally fail against 14-24 that’s not even a prime.

  • mshi

    still can’t attach ND filters?

  • Victor

    **Avoid !!…tried this lens and this lens is just bad……..i am glad i did not spend any penny on this…get the 14-24mm…no need look back or think twice ! Korean lens……never again !!!

    • Teun

      SUre you tested this version? And not the old, bad one?

  • The invisible wife

    Great news !!!!!
    It’s priced $512 on Ebay.

  • The invisible wife

    Admin, the link at 4444.99 is for the older one without any electronic contacts.
    The cheapest AE version I found is $512, still on Ebay.

    I think the Nikkon 14-24mm is a better investement.

    • You can’t do zoom blur with the Samyang.

      • Teun

        yeah you can, you just have to walk very fast instead.

        • preston

          I know this was a joke (and I laughed at it), but for those of us that actually do like fun cheap effects like zoom blur I’d like to clarify that walking fast will change the perspective of the shot while zooming won’t.

          • Teun

            On a more serious note, Walking or zooming will blur the picture anyway, i don’t think that moving forwards or backwards would yield results that are all that different from zooming, because it’s blurred anyway. Perhaps if the background is farther away, that ought to make a (small?) difference in perspective shifts (these parts won’t move such a great distance across the picture as the subject would).

            I’m just guessing here, please correct me if you think i’m wrong, but please use valid arguments. (not just ‘you’re wrong because i’m smarter’ or that kind of dumb ass cheapforum-stuff)

  • GlobalGuy

    D800 arrival date rumor:

    Apparently the poster has been correct about a couple other things like 16-35 and 35.1.4. No guarantees, but perhaps a start.

    • I saw that link – the problem I have is with the historical predictions of this person, the information he posted in the past was already available here on NikonRumors. Also, all his previous predictions were written a day or two before the actual announcement and now all of the sudden he knows what’s coming in 12 weeks? I don’t know, I did not find this convincing enough to publish it here.

      • GlobalGuy

        Aww.. i wanted it to be real. 🙂

  • Phil

    The new lens kicks ass everywhere except for the optical distortion. Check out this review at Lenstip:

    The new Samyang’s only real weakness is the optical distortion. Fortunately that’s not a big deal. There is a $25 program called PTLens that has a correction table for the 14mm Samyang. The PTLens program has better correction than you can get even in Photoshop CS5.

    So if you add $25 to the price of the Samyang, you have a lens that puts the Nikkors to shame. Don’t believe me? Download the PTLens trial here:

    And apply it to this Samyang photo from the Lenstip review here:

    That’s now two lenses from Samyang that totally kick ass, especially for their price.

  • The invisible wife

    My mind is so setup on a Nikon D900 that the D800 name sound old….

    • Teun

      D9000 would make sense. The succesor of the D300 would be a problem than. perhaps a D8000? But that would break the D3xxx -D5xxx – D7xxx- D9xxx series. Perhaps they will just drop the d300 succesor, now that the D7000 has moved upwards in the line up. Based on the numbering, a low end D1000 would be possible, less advanced (say no movie, 3 af points), very low cost might come to the market, but I doubt that. The mirror less large sensor camera’s are already in that spot of the market.

      • Ronan

        It doesn’t make sense.

        D300 -> D400
        D700 -> D800

        Where do you guys find D9000 from? That would be a replacement for the D7000 after the D8000….

        I thought we agreed on that a couple months ago…

        Dx = Pro
        Dxx = Semi-Pro
        Dxxx = Amateur

        Even Nikon commented on that awhile back…

        Happy New Year everyone!

        • Drab

          There are so many things wrong with that post I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to find them all.

        • PHB

          The D300 and D700 are designated ‘Professional’, not semi-pro. And the D7000 is designated ‘Consumer’.

          It is fairly obvious that there would be sufficient demand for an FX body to sell well at a $1200-$1800 price point if supported by the right set of lenses. It is also fairly clear that such a body would need to be somewhat more substantial than the old D90 body to justify such a price. The D9000 name would fit right into the scheme.

          So now Nikon come out with a DX prosumer body that is part alloy it is not a huge leap to suggest that an equivalent FX model might be in the works.

          Another point to consider is that we are not likely to see the D4 sensor appear in a compact professional body for about a year after release. So it is most likely that the FX bodies released next year will be a D9000 body designated ‘consumer’ and a D4 body designated ‘professional’. If there is a Dx00 body, it is more likely to be a D700 with a D3s sensor package.

          We are also due a D5000 and D300s replacement next year so a D700s would be a fifth body.

          • Drab

            So now Nikon come out with a DX prosumer body that is part alloy it is not a huge leap to suggest that an equivalent FX model might be in the works.

            Another interpretation is that alloy bodies are moving down the lineup as carbon fiber gets introduced at the top.

            I rather expect the D300 replacement to take the D9000 name, and all x000 will be DX, while the D800 (700 replacement) might very well share a common chassis like the current 300/700 pair, but retain the x00 name.

            If you’re a betting man I’ll even wager through an escrow service! 😉

      • The invisible wife

        D300 & D700 are professional cameras.
        If you can’t take pro pictures with thoses camera, then change the photographer.

  • aetas

    I would not mind trying this lens out just to see how it shoots. May not be what im looking for but it could be interesting.

  • Albert Yang

    I own this lens and I use it for 99% of my architecture shots. Lightroom profile corrects it to basically no visible distortion and vignetting. It’s quite sharp; contrast is a bit low though. It looks sharper than the 14~24mm honestly. Manual focus isn’t a problem as i do architecture with it only. Sean; 6 years too late; but get this and the 24mm F1.8g and be happy and richer.

  • Back to top