Looks nice, but at that size and weight I prefer the Sigma 8-16mm by far...
12-07-2013, 04:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-07-2013, 04:59 PM by Rover.)
Quote:Looks nice, but at that size and weight I prefer the Sigma 8-16mm by far...
That, or the Tokina 11-16 looks much more attractive (AF, aperture control, EXIF, filter threads, sharp, good price... need I go on?) I can't imagine this Samyang being very popular when the APS-C UWA market is so crowded.
This Samyang is f/2.8 for those who care about it over the Sigma 8-16. Tokina, we can argue the difference between 10 and 11mm. I hope it is low distortion (unlike their 14mm). It could be very interesting for night shooting, even more so if corner performance is up to scratch. Price will also be a contributing factor. If it comes in close to the 8mm/14mm they already do, it will be very interesting.
Hmm... that's a lot of "ifs". Shall wait and see.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
i think this would go down a lot better if it was for mirrorless and very compact...
i've just bought the pansonic GM1 with 12-32mm as a replacemnt for my climbing camera (replacing panasonic LX3), initial tests show the lens is pretty good at 12mm (though doesn't compare to my D600 with Nikon 20mm 2.8). The crazy thing is just how small it is. with the lens retracted it's no bigger than the LX3 whos sensor is about 1/5th the size! i would love a compact high quality 9-10mm lens to go with it for shooting in the mountains, even if it is only f/4 (as long as it was sharp wide open).
That's also my argument when chatting with SLRMagic (we do at times).
Something like a 10mm f/4 pancake would be really, really nice.
10mm MFT is not that that different from 12mm.
I'd rather have a 8mm f4 pancake design.
12-09-2013, 10:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-09-2013, 10:13 PM by Klaus.)
Yeah, but then 8mm would have been very extreme on APS-C.
From a business perspective, 10mm is a sound conclusion whereas f/2.8 has more something to do with reputation rather than real appeal. Seems as if the message, that mirrorless systems are optimized for size, has not been received yet - but then they'll also offer this for DSLRs.
I have to wonder out of curiosity, what is the relative market size for 3rd party lens manufacturers? Split between SLR and mirrorless. I'm still primarily in SLR territory, so size and weight isn't anywhere near my priority list. I want excellent optics at low price. Wide angles in particular are a nice area, since you don't have so much MF penalty in actual usage.
Having said that, if they did make great lenses mirrorless exclusives, this type of application doesn't require a high performance body. Last year's budget model would do almost as a disposable body.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
Quote:Yeah, but then 8mm would have been very extreme on APS-C.
From a business perspective, 10mm is a sound conclusion whereas f/2.8 has more something to do with reputation rather than real appeal. Seems as if the message, that mirrorless systems are optimized for size, has not been received yet - but then they'll also offer this for DSLRs.
I thought it's the other way around - it's a DSLR lens, and the mirrorless versions are an afterthought (since they're just the same, only with longer barrels to compensate for the difference in flange distance).
|
