Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Samyang XP 10mm f/3.5 for Canon EF announced
#11
Inifinity is one thing, but how many times would one want to focus at infinity with an ultra wideangle? That'll probably just net a big "empty" shot with lots of small distant things. Smile

I find it too difficult to find precise focus in MF anyway (for example when focusing in a light so lousy that AF refuses to lock on) - I tend to rotate it back and forth for a long time, many times just missing the correct distance and getting to where things are softer again (not helped by the fact that it usually takes a tiny rotation of a focus ring to throw things far out of whack). When I'm using MF it's usually when I let the camera/lens AF once and then turn off AF to keep the focus distance put lest the setup starts trying to refocus, thus wasting time (for example, when shooting fireworks).
#12
(02-28-2019, 10:46 AM)Rover Wrote: Inifinity is one thing, but how many times would one want to focus at infinity with an ultra wideangle? That'll probably just net a big "empty" shot with lots of small distant things. Smile

I find it too difficult to find precise focus in MF anyway (for example when focusing in a light so lousy that AF refuses to lock on) - I tend to rotate it back and forth for a long time, many times just missing the correct distance and getting to where things are softer again (not helped by the fact that it usually takes a tiny rotation of a focus ring to throw things far out of whack). When I'm using MF it's usually when I let the camera/lens AF once and then turn off AF to keep the focus distance put lest the setup starts trying to refocus, thus wasting time (for example, when shooting fireworks).

With these manual focus lenses the focus throw is usually much larger than with AF lenses. So, in theory you just could do a series of shots, i.e. focus bracketing, one shot should be ok.

Waiting now for the crop version of the lens...  6mm  ;-)
#13
This is a very impressive lens indeed, even more so considering the very small amount of (simple) barrel distortion it has. Busy testign one currently Smile.

BTW, focusing with this lens on an EOS-R is a cinch, thanks to the "Focus Guide" option - forget about focus peaking Smile.

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, extension tubes, an accessory plague, and an Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II and Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ...
#14
check the corners in this photo 

[Image: 1601609270]

too symmetrical to be flare 


also check the colors here

[Image: 1609579417]

looks like it has been heavily edited, some editing might be acceptable but here IMHO they went too far
#15
(08-16-2019, 11:08 AM)toni-a Wrote: check the corners in this photo 

[Image: 1601609270]

too symmetrical to be flare 


also check the colors here

[Image: 1609579417]

looks like it has been heavily edited, some editing might be acceptable but here IMHO they went too far

Both of those are heavily edited. However, there was an interestign thread on FredMiranda about this lens, and there is a more extensive test by one of the contributors to that thread.

So far, the lens looks certainly better than the Sigma 12-24, by quite a bit, but I may have some decentering - easy with UWAs -, affecting the lower left corner.

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, extension tubes, an accessory plague, and an Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II and Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ...
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)