# what utter crap this is.... samyang 24mm TS



## Canon-F1 (Jun 3, 2013)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Samyang-24mm-f-3.5-Tilt-Shift-Lens-Review.aspx




> While I'm sure that marketing can put the right spin on this statement to make it factual even without the word "may" being included, but that word shows some wishful thinking. And from an image quality perspective, wishful is about as far as this lens goes – unless you stop down to at least f/5.6 or f/8.
> 
> With a wide open aperture, the Samyang 24mm f/3.5 Tilt-Shift Lens delivers blurry image quality. It's just ugly. Do not plan on using this lens at any aperture wider than f/5.6, or better yet, f/8 (especially for full frame corners image quality). Use the "Image Quality" tool link at the top of this page to see the lab test results for yourself.



???

over 900 euro and such a bad image quality?


----------



## agierke (Jun 3, 2013)

I have never used my 24 tse wider than F11 and can't really imagine a need to so if you are budget minded and need to go with the samyung over the canon I'm not sure if this is much of an issue.

It's a very specialized lens, designed for architectural purposes which require large depths of field. If your needs are more general purpose the the 24mm prime is much more appropriate.

Bottom line is you get what you pay for. Go cheap and it won't be top quality. Another route is a used 24mm ts version 1. I picked one up last year for 800.00 to hold me over til I can afford the version 2. It's still a serviceable lens.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jun 3, 2013)

agierke said:


> I have never used my 24 tse wider than F11 and can't really imagine a need to so



well you are only one person ... a very egocentric world view you have or you really lack imagination. 



> it's a very specialized lens, designed for architectural purposes which require large depths of field.



many photographer use it especially to REDUCE or PLAY with DOF.

i love my canon 24mm TS II for wedding photos with narrow DOF.
*and* for landscape photos with as much DOF as i can get.

don´t limit yourself because you think a lens is made for a specific purpose.

but the samyang IQ is crap... i don´t know who will pay 900 euro for this lens.
everyone would be doing better buying a used canon 24mm TS I.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Jun 3, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> agierke said:
> 
> 
> > I have never used my 24 tse wider than F11 and can't really imagine a need to so
> ...



I think you're going a bit far in the other direction saying it's complete crap. It's certainly not good until stopped down. But what about people like agierke who *do* stop down significantly? That $1000 or so can be a big deal to a lot of people, especially if they aren't making a significant living off of photography. Then of course, there are plenty of people (like you) who need to use it wide open, or need the maximum quality and so of course you opt for the Canon lens. 

That said, I was really hoping the quality would be a lot better, and I'm re-thinking buying this lens eventually in favor of the Canon v2. Although I probably won't for a longer time, given the Canon cost and that I won't be using it a significant amount of time. Guess it's time to go play the lotto and cross my fingers...


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jun 3, 2013)

Drizzt321 said:


> I think you're going a bit far in the other direction saying it's complete crap. It's certainly not good until stopped down.



but even stopped down the quality is not worth the money.
it´s usable stopped down.

and i really don´t want to see the borders when the center region is so bad already.




review said:


> ....
> captured crops were taken from a section of the frame about 1/3 of the distance from the center to the full frame corner – still within what should be the sweet spot of the image circle
> ....
> The Canon option delivers very noticeably better image quality – it as sharp at f/3.5 as the Samyang is at any aperture in this comparison.



and don´t get me started about the bokeh or distortions. :



review said:


> And unfortunately, this lens has more than an average amount of distortion (barrel) for a prime lens. Distortion can be corrected during post processing, but it is a pixel-level-destructive/image quality-degrading process.
> 
> If you are correcting for lens distortion, you can also correct perspective distortion at the same time. This all devalues having the shift feature in the first place.



i mean come on.. this is a prime lens, no IS, no AF, no electronics.... you could think they get the optics right for 900 euro. does not have to be outstanding but at least decent.

ok ok.. i payed 2000 euro for my canon TS lens.
not cheap sure.. but i think when you need a TS lens then you better buy a good one.
i sure would not be happy with the samyang.. not even for 700 euro.


----------



## ahab1372 (Jun 3, 2013)

Isn't one of the possible application that you can (apparently) have a large DOF with wider apertures? Foreground to background sharp without having to stop down to f/11 or higher?


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jun 3, 2013)

ahab1372 said:


> Isn't one of the possible application that you can (apparently) have a large DOF with wider apertures? Foreground to background sharp without having to stop down to f/11 or higher?



yes.. this lens is a complete let down... iyam.


----------



## agierke (Jun 3, 2013)

> love my canon 24mm TS II for wedding photos with narrow DOF.
> and for landscape photos with as much DOF as i can get.
> 
> don´t limit yourself because you think a lens is made for a specific purpose



maybe i mispoke...i almost never have used it wider than F11. i've done the tilted wedding shot with the 24mm and i personally didnt find it all that rewarding given what the subject was so i stopped doing it. it was more of a gimmick in my mind than "creative". my cousin uses the 45mm TS during the portrait portion of a wedding and i find that much more of a "creative" use of TS. but whatever...to each his own.



> Isn't one of the possible application that you can (apparently) have a large DOF with wider apertures? Foreground to background sharp without having to stop down to f/11 or higher?



very true but at some point you reach diminishing returns. if the goal is to maximize DOF through tilting then you are not likely to push it wide open as this would defeat the purpose. you are more likely to push it to F8 and tilt than to go wide open. but sure, i guess there are "creative" moments where you would want wide open with a maximum tilt....but not to maximize your DOF.

my point was clearly missed. the lens is designed for architectural and landscape photography which traditionally requires large DOF. is it such a stretch to imagine Samyung kept costs down by designing a lens that would fulfill the traditional needs of this genre of photography and bypass any IQ on the wide open end?

if you already have a 24mm TS II then why is this of concern to you? do people really expect a 3rd party 900.00 lens to match up with one of the best canon lenses ever made at a price point of 2300.00? seriously...common sense would suggest no. to me this is no surprise and really very little concern.

mountains are being made of molehills


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jun 3, 2013)

I was excited for this lens, but my excitement is long gone. It seemed a natural fit - Samyang's have overall had very good optics - just no real moving parts (AF/Aperture control). Here's a lens type that is traditionally manual focus only. I thought Samyang would be able to really compete here, but they have failed to do that at all. Color me disappointed.


----------



## jthomson (Jun 3, 2013)

Well I bought the lens and am quite happy with it. It makes the verticals vertical, and generally I need it to be at f8 to f11 to get a large DOF.
I'm frequently photographing structures like below in poor light conditions. The Samyang works just fine.
The data on Lensrentals clearly show that at f11 and above the resolution of the Samyang is equal to the Canon. Yes it would be nice if it was better below f8, but why make such a big deal about it? Its not the first lens that needs to be stopped down to get decent resolution, and it won't be the last.


----------



## ahab1372 (Jun 3, 2013)

agierke said:


> > Isn't one of the possible application that you can (apparently) have a large DOF with wider apertures? Foreground to background sharp without having to stop down to f/11 or higher?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agree, that's why I wrote "one possible application". I don't think the lens is useless. For maximizing DOF at f/8 and shift and higher it still delivers the required functionality for half the prize of the Canon. But possibilities are more limited than with the Canon. As usual, lens design is about trade-offs. 
If this lens is still a good value for the money depends on the individual making the purchase decision and their intended use


----------



## Andy_Hodapp (Jun 4, 2013)

Before we go all crazy on hating the lens, lets all remember that that was one lens tested. Rokinon is known for not always having the most constant quality of product. This lens might have just been a bad copy, when they start trying out more of them and find the same thing, then we can get a little upset but before then, we should just wait and see.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 4, 2013)

Andy_Hodapp said:


> Before we go all crazy on hating the lens, lets all remember that that was one lens tested. Rokinon is known for not always having the most constant quality of product. This lens might have just been a bad copy, when they start trying out more of them and find the same thing, then we can get a little upset but before then, we should just wait and see.



LensRentals tested 4 copies against the TS-E 24 and found it wanting wide open (unshifted) as well. LR found that the Samyang catches up to the Canon at f/11 and smaller, but the build quality of the Samyang is also much worse. People are definitely expecting more after Samyang produced some good products at very good prices. An optically inferior and less robust tilt shift costing 1000 is not a screaming bargain like some of their other products. Now if the price drops to 500, I'm sure there will be a more that will consider and buy it.


----------



## noisejammer (Jun 4, 2013)

Let me get this right. 
A $1k lens is not as sharp as a $2k lens... and you're spitting mad? Have you never thought that (usually) you pay for what you get? Quite often, you pay a lot more.

Excellent optics aside, Canon doesn't install IS, autofocus or even a reasonably fine MF arrangement in its TS lenses either...

If you're cash strapped, it's fairly easy to find 35 /2.8 FD mount TS lenses and Ed Mika offers a conversion kit. Going this route will usually cost less than $1k.


----------



## Sith Zombie (Jun 4, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> let us first se another test and exemplar first, Im not saying it not can be true that the difference are so big but it looks little bit od .here is lens tip http://www.lenstip.com/372.4-Lens_review-Samyang_T-S_24_mm_f_3.5_ED_AS_UMC_Image_resolution.html
> 
> its no blockbusters



Agreed, the digital picture review images look so bad but others look OK, not Amazing but pretty good.


----------



## Hillsilly (Jun 4, 2013)

And I've heard it doesn't even autofocus!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 4, 2013)

noisejammer said:


> Let me get this right.
> A $1k lens is not as sharp as a $2k lens... and you're spitting mad? Have you never thought that (usually) you pay for what you get? Quite often, you pay a lot more.



I think people are always upset when their expectations aren't met. Samyang has released several lenses that are optically very good, and at a bargain price. This lens appears to be neither.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 4, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> noisejammer said:
> 
> 
> > Let me get this right.
> ...



+1. Before it was released, a lot of people were hoping that it would approach the TS-E 24L II in performance. Now it seems like the discussion is turning to comparing how it does versus TS-E 24L (version I), which is similar in price used...


----------



## dadgummit (Jun 4, 2013)

noisejammer said:


> If you're cash strapped, it's fairly easy to find 35 /2.8 FD mount TS lenses and Mika offers a conversion kit. Going this route will usually cost less than $1k.



I agree, this seems to be the way to go. My Edmika converted 35 /2.8 FD mount TS lens is much sharper than the Samyang TS 24 example shots from that review. It is also sharper than the Canon 45mm TS that I ended up selling after getting the FD.


----------



## hgraf (Jun 4, 2013)

agierke said:


> I have never used my 24 tse wider than F11 and can't really imagine a need to so if you are budget minded and need to go with the samyung over the canon I'm not sure if this is much of an issue.
> 
> It's a very specialized lens, designed for architectural purposes which require large depths of field. If your needs are more general purpose the the 24mm prime is much more appropriate.



Sorry, but do you know what you are talking about?

Yes, the "shift" part of the lens is often used as you describe. Any clue what the tilt is used for? Hint: sharpness is VERY important when playing with DOF, and guess what the tilt function is used for?



agierke said:


> Bottom line is you get what you pay for. Go cheap and it won't be top quality. Another route is a used 24mm ts version 1. I picked one up last year for 800.00 to hold me over til I can afford the version 2. It's still a serviceable lens.



Hehehehehehe. Price does sometimes relate to quality, but to say that price is the ONLY bearing on quality means you've wasted alot of money in your life.

FWIW I'm dissapointed in Samyang on this one. They had a wonderful opportunity to produce something that kicked the pants off Canon and they blew it, this time. A shame. Fortunately the others 3rd party makers are doing a good job of it. 

Samyang DOES make some great stuff. Have been playing with my 8mm and it is a DREAM to use!


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 4, 2013)

Wow, and at one time I was going to pre-order one. That samyang is garbage.


----------



## noisejammer (Jun 4, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think people are always upset when their expectations aren't met. Samyang has released several lenses that are optically very good, and at a bargain price. This lens appears to be neither.


Samyang doesn't provide IS or autofocus in their lenses but the competing Canon model doesn't have IS or autofocus either. Samyang had to provide for essentially the same mechanical operation but wanted to supply the lens at half the price... so where else were savings going to be made?

Sure... it's not up to their earlier optical standards _but it is still half the price._ Say it was 80% of the Canon and performed similarly... then everyone would be bleating that it was too expensive. The hard truth is that an optic costs what an optic costs. Either you buy it or you don't.


----------



## tron (Jun 4, 2013)

Random Orbits said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > noisejammer said:
> ...


Exactly:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=347&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=841&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


The $1K 24mm TS Samyang lens is worse than ... the $1K 24mm TS Canon lens!


----------



## insanitybeard (Jun 4, 2013)

noisejammer said:


> Samyang doesn't provide IS or autofocus in their lenses but the competing Canon model doesn't have IS or autofocus either. Samyang had to provide for essentially the same mechanical operation but wanted to supply the lens at half the price... so where else were savings going to be made?
> 
> Sure... it's not up to their earlier optical standards _but it is still half the price._ Say it was 80% of the Canon and performed similarly... then everyone would be bleating that it was too expensive. The hard truth is that an optic costs what an optic costs. Either you buy it or you don't.



OK, but as an example look at the Samyang 14mm 2.8, *FAR, FAR* cheaper than the Canon 14mm 2.8L but optically as good as if not better in most areas of performance, and here in the UK is only 20% of the cost of the Canon L! The Samyang tilt shift by comparison is 60% of the cost of the Canon 24mm tilt shift in the UK at present and optically inferior by some margin, so subjective value is much lower with this lens than Samyang's 14mm.


----------



## Harley (Jun 4, 2013)

dadgummit said:


> noisejammer said:
> 
> 
> > If you're cash strapped, it's fairly easy to find 35 /2.8 FD mount TS lenses and Mika offers a conversion kit. Going this route will usually cost less than $1k.
> ...



+1 I have the EdMika 35mm f/2.8 TS and it's fantastic! You can't beat the compact, all-metal build of the old FD lenses either. Ed's conversion kit is really easy to install and it's entirely reversible if you want to take the lens back to original.


----------



## noisejammer (Jun 4, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> OK, but as an example look at the Samyang 14mm 2.8, *FAR, FAR* cheaper than the Canon 14mm 2.8L but optically as good as if not better in most areas of performance, and here in the UK is only 20% of the cost of the Canon L! The Samyang tilt shift by comparison is 60% of the cost of the Canon 24mm tilt shift in the UK at present and optically inferior by some margin, so subjective value is much lower with this lens than Samyang's 14mm.


IMO, that's not really a sensible comparison - you're comparing the Samyang offering with Canon's most overpriced lens! Besides, the Samyang does have some strange distortions that the Canon doesn't. Yes, I know these can be corrected...

It might be better to compare the 35L and the Samyang 35/1.4 where the Samyang is about 40% of the Canon price ($550 vs $1330). In this case though, the 35L is quite weak and is also overpriced. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=121&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

The difference between the Samyang and Sigma is quite obvious - both in performance and price $550 vs $900. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

My point is simply this - if people don't like what's on offer they should vote with their wallets. The price will drop, or it won't but they get to decide whether it's worth the asking price to them. At some point, some people will be prepared to accept the trade off. This is inevitably true - ask yourself... if it was a dollar, would I pay for it? Ten dollars? A hundred dollars? Three hundred dollars?


----------



## insanitybeard (Jun 4, 2013)

My example was merely to give some justification as to why a majority of people are dissapointed in the performance of this lens relative to cost compared to some of Samyang's previous offerings.


----------

