SIGMA VS. ROKINON / 8mm VS. 14mm
- Thread starter J-rok
- Start date
CrotchKiller
Active member
Do you want a fisheye or a wide angle?
And do some research. There's a ton of info about them online, before you ask questions of people here you should know the objective issues with each lens so we can have a discussion without having to explain every detail of the performance of the lenses in question without having to do research ourselves for you.
Please cut out the bold type.
Please cut out the bold type.
*Fujative*
Active member
I have the Rokinon 14mm and I use it on my 5D. I love it but I wouldn't use it for everything.
J-rok
Active member
I have... i've seen people say that the 8mm distorts quality because of the fisheye, but i thought fixed lenses produced higher quality because there aren't extra glass pieces for zooming. The same was said about the 14 because of the wide angle. I haven't seen anything on what separates these 2 brands from the canon brand ones that cost hundreds more $$... I probably should have clarified that im asking why these ones are so much cheaper and if its true that the quality is reduced because of the fisheye/wide angle, and the fact that they aren't made by canon.
Word, well that's what I was looking for! ha.
They are cheaper for a couple reasons - one, of course, being brand name. Canon can charge more for lenses because it's all seemingly part of a system, and the brand is known for its quality.
Besides that though, the main reasons they are so much cheaper isn't because of performance. It's the fact that both these lenses are manual focus and won't communicate with the canon body at all, essentially a fully manual lens. I'm not even entirely certain that canon can accurately meter with the rokinon lenses but I might be totally wrong there since I don't use canon.
Besides that, the fisheye is pretty dope if you're shooting in sunlight, yea you get soft corners, but come on... it's a fisheye. You CAN pay for fisheyes that won't be as soft, but they are a lot more. It is definitely pretty soft at f3.5, but sharp at f8. It isn't super contrasty and can suffer in high contrast situations, such as shooting into the sky (skiing) on days that are partly cloudy. That's part of what you have to learn to work with if you're not going to spend the big bucks.
The 14 is a waste of money IMO. It's a pretty decent lens for the most part, but the big killer for me as a photographer is that it has some pretty intense and essentially un-fixable complex distortion (so does the sigma 10-20, although a better lens otherwise). I also think it has contrast issues. I would always suggest to anyone to save up for the tokina 11-16 f2.8. It's without any question the best crop sensor UWA out, it's an incredible lens.
Some people don't have issues with the distortion because they film skiing, where it doesn't matter much, or they simply don't care. I could never suggest anyone buy that lens otherwise.
They are cheaper for a couple reasons - one, of course, being brand name. Canon can charge more for lenses because it's all seemingly part of a system, and the brand is known for its quality.
Besides that though, the main reasons they are so much cheaper isn't because of performance. It's the fact that both these lenses are manual focus and won't communicate with the canon body at all, essentially a fully manual lens. I'm not even entirely certain that canon can accurately meter with the rokinon lenses but I might be totally wrong there since I don't use canon.
Besides that, the fisheye is pretty dope if you're shooting in sunlight, yea you get soft corners, but come on... it's a fisheye. You CAN pay for fisheyes that won't be as soft, but they are a lot more. It is definitely pretty soft at f3.5, but sharp at f8. It isn't super contrasty and can suffer in high contrast situations, such as shooting into the sky (skiing) on days that are partly cloudy. That's part of what you have to learn to work with if you're not going to spend the big bucks.
The 14 is a waste of money IMO. It's a pretty decent lens for the most part, but the big killer for me as a photographer is that it has some pretty intense and essentially un-fixable complex distortion (so does the sigma 10-20, although a better lens otherwise). I also think it has contrast issues. I would always suggest to anyone to save up for the tokina 11-16 f2.8. It's without any question the best crop sensor UWA out, it's an incredible lens.
Some people don't have issues with the distortion because they film skiing, where it doesn't matter much, or they simply don't care. I could never suggest anyone buy that lens otherwise.
Treblegrogg
Member
I'm also looking at getting an 8mm f2.8 for my sony nex, anyone used one and care to share their opinions on them? Also anyone have any suggestions for a different fisheye/wide angle lens that i haven't come across in my searches.
