# Samyang join the EF-M party



## paul13walnut5 (Jun 13, 2013)

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/06/13/samyang-announces-16mm-f2-0-and-300mm-f6-3-reflex-lenses-for-dx-aps-c-slrs-and-mirrorless-cameras


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 13, 2013)

Can't decide if double post is bad or not...

Anyway, that 16mm f/2.0 seems pretty nice for APS-C. It says it's for Canon EF, but I suspect they mean EF-S.

And a 300mm reflex mirror lens? Very interesting, although people probably won't quite get what they are expecting unless they've used a reflex mirror before. 

I like what Samyang is doing, challenging conventional lens manufacturers in select spots, and generally with some pretty good optical quality lenses.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jun 13, 2013)

If it helps you with your decision my reasoning was that the launches are of potential interest to all lens users, but spefically as a third party endorsement to m users, as this is an arguement often used against the much -and unfairly imho- maligned system, of which I am a user.

I have no affiliation to Samyang and recieve no benefit of any kind from them.

So good or bad? It's statements like this that make me just looooove internet forums.
Look hey! There's even a link so you can report me!


----------



## brad-man (Jun 13, 2013)

Drizzt321 said:


> Can't decide if double post is bad or not...
> 
> Anyway, that 16mm f/2.0 seems pretty nice for APS-C. It says it's for Canon EF, but I suspect they mean EF-S.
> 
> ...



I am one who has never used a reflex lens on a camera before. Could you modestly elucidate on the eccentricities of such a design? I would assume that distortion and flare could be a problem, but I'm just guessing.


----------



## rs (Jun 13, 2013)

brad-man said:


> I am one who has never used a reflex lens on a camera before. Could you modestly elucidate on the eccentricities of such a design? I would assume that distortion and flare could be a problem, but I'm just guessing.


They're very compact and light due to the light entering through a donut shaped front element, reflecting off a donut shaped mirror at the back of the lens, and then back off a mirror in the middle of the front, back towards the sensor/film. This makes a lens that would otherwise physically be 300mm long only 100mm long.

However, this creates a few problems - donut shaped bokeh being the main one, and also an inability to stop the lens down due to the middle of the aperture being unavailable. So, this lens has both a maximum and minimum aperture of f6.3. Also reflex lenses are almost never able to AF - not that Samyang like to offer that feature anyway. I think the Minolta 500mm Reflex lens is the only one which offers AF.

I'd like to know what the transmission of reflex lenses are with part of the light being blocked out - a normal f6.3 lens would be likely to have a transmission around T6.6 or so - would a lens such as this one be nearer to about T8.0?


----------



## hgraf (Jun 13, 2013)

brad-man said:


> I am one who has never used a reflex lens on a camera before. Could you modestly elucidate on the eccentricities of such a design? I would assume that distortion and flare could be a problem, but I'm just guessing.



Main pros:
- cheaper then regular lenses
- very compact and light

Main cons:
- usually harder to focus, although Samyang may have gotten around this "normal" limitation
- no aperture control (might be wrong, but I don't think I've seen a variable aperture mirror lens)
- bokeh is "ugly", you don't get blurring lights, you get blurry rings, often not an issue, but can be VERY distracting when you've got bright point sources of light (i.e. night scenes)

Still, given that, most mirror lenses are of very poor build and image quality, I wouldn't be surprised if Samyang has done it's job well and have come out will a solid performer. Can't wait to see the image tests!


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 13, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> If it helps you with your decision my reasoning was that the launches are of potential interest to all lens users, but spefically as a third party endorsement to m users, as this is an arguement often used against the much -and unfairly imho- maligned system, of which I am a user.
> 
> I have no affiliation to Samyang and recieve no benefit of any kind from them.
> 
> ...



Oh, yea, I figured you had no affiliation, and while I normally dislike the double posting, like you said, it definitely is of interested to both sub-forums.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Jun 19, 2013)

:-\


----------

