# New Samyang 10mm f/2.8 ultrawide! Looks impressive...



## jrista (Dec 6, 2013)

Samyang 10mm f/2.8 Manual Focus Wide Angle Prime

This looks pretty impressive. Samyang has made excellent wide angle primes for a while, but this is the first time I've seen one with a nano crystaline coating on an internal lens element. Canon and Nikon have been using nanocrystal coatings on internal elements for a while, and it has a truly amazing impact on reducing flare (total transmission loss is in the range of 0.1%, vs. often more than 1% for basic multicoating. 

For rectilinear wide field astrophotography, this lens could be a true dream come true...not to mention the applications for high quality ultrawide landscape photography (especially on full frame!)

Curious to see how corner performance is. If it is anything like the 14mm and 24mm Samyang lenses, it should be phenomenal...but 10mm is pretty darn wide...


----------



## distant.star (Dec 6, 2013)

.
The piece I read indicated there would be one with a EOS-M mount. While I'm not particularly interested in this lens, that is encouraging for future M models.


----------



## Hannes (Dec 9, 2013)

it seems to be aps-c only unfortunately


----------



## jrista (Dec 9, 2013)

Hannes said:


> it seems to be aps-c only unfortunately



Are you sure? It is listed as Canon EF on the dpreview page, not EF-S.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 9, 2013)

jrista said:


> Hannes said:
> 
> 
> > it seems to be aps-c only unfortunately
> ...



Google is your friend (ok, it isn't, but it returns good search results): http://www.samyang-lens.co.uk/samyang-10mm-f28-edas-ncs-cs-lens.html



> New Samyang 10mm f/2.8 ED AS NCS CS Lens is a ultra wide-angle manual focus lens designed for CS / cropped sensors APS-C cameras.


----------



## Hannes (Dec 9, 2013)

jrista said:


> Hannes said:
> 
> 
> > it seems to be aps-c only unfortunately
> ...



The third party makers usually use the EF mount regardless but it says APS-C in the first sentence on dpreview so I'd imagine that is the situation.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 9, 2013)

I bought the 14mm after reading the hype and it was awful. Users also said it was EF, but it came with a note in the instructions stating that it was optimized for crop cameras and FF users should expect poorer quality. That was a understatement.


----------



## nitelife2 (Dec 9, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I bought the 14mm after reading the hype and it was awful. Users also said it was EF, but it came with a note in the instructions stating that it was optimized for crop cameras and FF users should expect poorer quality. That was a understatement.



What was awful if I may ask? My copy of the 14mm is great (beside easy fixable heavy distortion). I use it with a 5D3.


----------



## xvnm (Dec 9, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I bought the 14mm after reading the hype and it was awful. Users also said it was EF, but it came with a note in the instructions stating that it was optimized for crop cameras and FF users should expect poorer quality. That was a understatement.



You might have bought the wrong lens. There is the Bower 14mm, which is for APS-C (albeit with an EF mount), and then there are the Rokinon/Samyang 14mm *IF ED UMC*. They have different specs.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/698923-REG/Bower_SLY14MMF28C_14mm_f_2_8_Ultra_Wide.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/769532-REG/Rokinon_FE14M_C_14mm_Ultra_Wide_Angle_f_2_8.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/859167-REG/Samyang_SY14M_C_14mm_f_2_8_Super_Wide.html


----------



## rs (Dec 9, 2013)

xvnm said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I bought the 14mm after reading the hype and it was awful. Users also said it was EF, but it came with a note in the instructions stating that it was optimized for crop cameras and FF users should expect poorer quality. That was a understatement.
> ...


Am I imagining things, or does that photo of the Bower you linked to have '14mm 1:2.8 ED AS IF UMC' written on it, exactly as the other two have?


----------



## ahab1372 (Dec 9, 2013)

Iirc there was an older MC and a newer UMC. The MC is still available, usually at a lower price. Not sure if that explains different IQs, or if it is copy variation


----------



## jrista (Dec 10, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I bought the 14mm after reading the hype and it was awful. Users also said it was EF, but it came with a note in the instructions stating that it was optimized for crop cameras and FF users should expect poorer quality. That was a understatement.



Hmm, that's strange. All the things I've read, as well as reports from a couple friends who recently bought the 14mm for FF cameras, have all said the IQ is excellent, particularly in the corners. From what I've seen, corner performance on the Samyang 14mm is vastly superior to any WA/UWA Canon Zoom, and still better than canon UWA primes. The only major issue I've heard of for the Samyang 14mm is the barrel distortion, which is apparently pretty bad. Not sure that is an issue most of the time for landscapes and astrophotography, though (which, aside from architecture, would be the lenses primary use cases.)


----------



## xvnm (Dec 10, 2013)

rs said:


> Am I imagining things, or does that photo of the Bower you linked to have '14mm 1:2.8 ED AS IF UMC' written on it, exactly as the other two have?



Forget the photo, look at the specs:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&A=compareChart&Q=&ci=&items=698923-REG%3B769532-REG%3B859167-REG%3B

They are different in Angle of View, Minimum Focus Distance, and Groups/Elements.

Besides it, the Bower says "Optimized for APS-C Size Sensors", while the others say "Compatible w/ Full Frame & APS-C Cameras". Yes, I agree that the wording is a little ambiguous, but the Bower not mentioning full-frame is indicative of a diference.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 13, 2013)

Can any of you imagine what reason a lens 10mm (APS-C) is more expensive than a 14mm (full frame)?


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 13, 2013)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Can any of you imagine what reason a lens 10mm (APS-C) is more expensive than a 14mm (full frame)?



Probably supply (new product = small quantities) & demnand (as there's only this 10mm aps-c prime), plus a price premium added for early adopters?


----------



## jrista (Dec 13, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Can any of you imagine what reason a lens 10mm (APS-C) is more expensive than a 14mm (full frame)?
> ...



Price premium added to cover the R&D cost. Early adopters are simply those who pay for the R&D. The price only drops once the up front cost for designing and developing the lens by the company are covered.


----------

