After the 16mm f/2.0 announcement Samyang just showed the picture of this new Rokinon 300mm f/6.3 Lens on facebook.. This is the NEX version but there will be a MFT version too. Sales will start in July and price is set at $299. Going to buy it?
This isn’t their first Mirror Lens. They already sell the [shoplink 39126 ebay]500mm f/6.3 lens on eBay (Click here)[/shoplink]. To get notified when the lens will be o auction on eBay save this search on Slidoo.
40 Responses
Hmm – I wonder whether there will be any advantages of this lens over the Tonkina?
I was under the impression that the Tonkina mirror lenses for m43 where t-mount with an adapter included.
It will be interesting to see if there are any functional differences between the two.
I hope it can stand up to the build quality of the rokinon 7.5mm as it is a fantastic lens.
The Tokina 500mm f/8 is a t-mount and comes with an adapter for one of several mounts. The Tokina 300 f/6.3, however, is a very small mirror lens built specifically for micro 4/3:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/03/tokinareflex300_6p3
The Rokinon is slightly larger (mostly longer, by the looks of it) due to being created for mirrorless cameras with APS-C sensor, not m4/3.
The size is great but in the end it will be all about how sharp this lens is going to be.
Mirror lenses are notoriously soft and the “donut bokeh” sometimes makes or breaks a photo. I believe that it is overrated as defect though, most of the times you don’t notice it.
people are not used to the donut effect, because you dont see it that much anymore. I remember from old Neckermann fashion catalogues most shots were done with mirror lenses back then.
the outdoor shots only ofcourse
Rokinon is a brand often put on Samyang products. This lens will probably ship under different brand names, such as Bower, Rokinon, Samyang and perhaps some others.
i’m not interested though. The price is a bit steep for what is essentially a ‘toy lens’.
This is not a toy lens. In average to good light, this thing can give you precious captures, but it is much better suited to an IBIS body. It can be pretty solid for candid photography too.
Toy? Its essentially a small telescope with a camera mount.
Perhaps it’s just me, but I personally don’t see the point in a 300mm manual focus mirror lens for $300, when I can get a much better Nikon AI, Canon FD, or Olympus OM 300mm telephoto lens with an adapter for less money. While mirror lenses certainly have their place, I believe that place is much further past the 300mm range since the average photographer just can’t afford the expense of buying the big manufacturer’s super telephoto lenses, but still need that super telephoto focal length.
The OM 300mm f/4.5 is a great lens, but weighs 1kg and cost at least US$200 if you want a good one of the earlier non MC version. The later MC version is more like $300 unless you don’t mind using a beat up one with scratches/fungus.
Not sure how it goes on m43 since I have only ever used my 300mm on my OM-4Ti.
The Olympus 75-300 beats this lens hands down, and it has a quick AF. Sure it costs more, but If you are serious about tele photography, it’s a far better option.
When you are talking about uncompromised optical quality and manual AF, there are surely a number of better options out there. Mirror teles – at least at this range – are IMO pretty pointless.
Kabe
One word: SIZE!
Actually it’s two words: SIZE and WEIGHT.
Max aperture, and the quality of the glass mean more to me than size and weight. I’ll happily take a used vintage lens in good shape over a mirror lens of any weight, any day of the week. The Canon FD 300mm f/4L that I picked up in a pawn shop for $250 will do the trick.
Which means everyone shares your preference?
Also, mirror lenses have an additional advantage (provided they are reasonably well designed) in that the 2 mirror elements are free of any form of chromatic abberations. The price for that is lower contrast, donut bokeh and fixed aperture. Its a matter of choice and priorities.
I don’t think this lens adds anything useful simply because a better one already exists (in size and in being ‘active’, ie it communicates with the camera for things like focal length, aperture, focus distance and manual focus assist)
You’ll notice the key phrases “Perhaps it’s just ME”, “I PERSONALLY”, and “mean more to ME”. Reading comprehension dude. I couldn’t care less what other people use, or what their opinions are. If a $300 300mm mirror lens is what you want, then by all means buy it. I’ll pass.
Wel, you ask about the point of such a lens. Someone tells what the point is, and your response is about aperture (which is indeed slow and this is rather obvious from the f/6.3) and quality of optics which you simply do not know at all, or do you have mtf charts of it?
And before you claim that mirror lenses means bad optics (when compared to refracting optics), think again. I pointed at one very clear and long known advantage, no chromatic aberrations at all from the mirror elements. That is the primary reason why someone like Newton was already very interested in them, and one of the 2 reasons why almost every serious telescope in the world (and the ones we put in space) uses mirror optics. You think they would if mirror implies bad optics?
Anyway, you do indeed say things like ‘to me’, but the entire tone of your post, and again of your reply to me reads like ‘anyone who disagrees is just not very smart’. Sorry if that wasn’t your intention.
It wasn’t my intention at all to imply that anyone who disagreed with me wasn’t smart. You will notice in my first post that I agreed there is a definite use for mirror lenses, but that I just don’t think there is much need for one with a 300mm focal length. Granted, there is the 2x crop factor, but I just think they’re better suited to longer focal lengths of 500-600mm to start with.
For future reference, I’m a man. I say what I mean. I’m not afraid to sugar coat anything, and I don’t imply anything with my words. If I didn’t say that “people who disagree with me are idiots”, it’s because I didn’t mean it. My ex-girlfriend twisted my words around all the time, and I kicked her ass to the curb. 🙂
“I’m not afraid to sugar coat anything” should read “I’m not going to sugar coat anything”.
I didn’t ask you to sugar coat anything.
But lets see, you post a comment in a discussion about a mirror lens, asking what the point of it is.
Someone points out 2 advantages that you did not consider in your first post.
You reply by not even adressing those points, but stating your choice again, and giving 2 arguments, one of which is so obvious even a blind man can see, and the other one being a presumption because you cannot possibly know this right now.
When someone calls you out on this, you say that you don’t care for what others use.
That really raises 2 questions:
– were you at all interested in ‘the point’ or were you interested in dismissing this lens?
– why enter a discussion when you don’t want to consider what others use and why?
I’ll take your word for it that you weren’t trying to suggest anyone who disagrees is ‘not so smart’, but there is no twisting of words needed to get the impression that you were.
Hey dude, just because I gave my opinion doesn’t mean that I care about anyone else’s opinion. That includes yours. I gave you my answer twice already; that while mirror lenses are certainly needed, I don’t believe a 300mm mirror lens for $300 is worth buying, because I believe that mirror lenses are better suited to longer focal lengths. How many more times do I have to say that ffs?
f6.3 🙁
300mm at f/6.3? I have the lumix 100-300mm already. It gives me f/5.6 at 300mm. This new Rokinon seems like a fun little lens but it’s nothing I need or want.
I actually have the Tokina 300 for m4/3 and it´s pretty awesome! It is about a third in size and weight of the Lumix 100-300 and makes in good light conditions pretty decent and sharp images! For the price tag of around 300 Euros you get an ultra-compact 600 mm (35 mm equiv.) telephoto lens.
Put it on an IBIS cam or take a good mini tripod with you and even under dark conditions you are good to go.
I would everyone encourage giving the smaller Tokina a try – they will be pleased…
… and no, I don´t work for the company 🙂
As for the Samyang/Rokinon, as long as it´s not native, it definitely will be heavier and bigger than necessary. It would need serious improvement in image quality over the Tokina to be considered in the m4/3 world. For APS-C of course it´s great news!
I got one from a local tokina reseller for a quick evaluation, and was pleasantly surprised by it, enough to buy it. Its a fun small device that works pretty well provided you understand the advantages and disadvantages of a mirror lens.
NEXT…..
There should be a simple standard test for super/ultra-telephoto lenses: Just a picture of the moon. When I tested a 500mm mirror lens I discovered that the moon taken through a 75-300mm zoom lens looked a lot sharper and showed much more details. There is a huge number of “toy” lenses on the market, but unfortunately they are not declared as such.
Here is one made with the tokina 300/6.3 mirror.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrobjective/8650012972/in/photostream
“This isn’t their first Mirrorless Lens. They already sell the 500mm f/6.3.”
You’ve forgotten their 7.5mm fisheye lens, that is m4/3 only.
Mmmm … I agree that 300mm isn’t so functional.
Now a 500mm or 600mm at f/5.6 … that’ll be interesting.
The Vivitar 500mm f/6.3 mirror lens (T-mount) gives a lot more reach and is $160 including the adapter.
I am interested in a cheap option for a telephoto lens for the 3 or 4 times per year that I take photos of birds. But I understand this lens is manual focus only, right? I can not take photos of birds focusing manually…
Not very useful for birds in flight, but quite useful for birds at the feeder (for which presetting focus will generally work fine)
I’m pretty happy with my Olympus 70-300 mm FT lens and an adaptor. Gives me 140-600mm on my G2. Sure it’s huge and heavy, but it’s actually faster in F-stops than this Samyang lens, even though it’s a zoom. It also supports autofocus, though it’s pretty slow to respond and sometimes searches for ages. When that happens I just go to manual then switch to auto when I’m as close as I can get using my naked eye. So nope, wouldn’t buy this. I got my 300mm range covered and beyond.
What does the word Reflex mean in the context of the label on this lens?
It uses reflection instead of refraction for a significant part of its optics, in other words, it is a mirror lens.
Thanks, Rokinon, for expanding the range of m4/3 lenses yet again. I liked your fisheye, and I bought it. Manual focusing is not a problem with such a short focal length!
But I won’t be buying this 300mm. Auto focus is essential for many uses. By the time I’d focused on a bird it would have flown away!
I thought it´s the other way around: you focus in advance and wait (with some prepared bait) for the bird to fly INTO focus?!
Anyways, the final few inches of sharpness are about 5 degrees to turn on the quite similar Tokina Mirror Lens, which means, manual focusing should be really quick on this one as well.
On the folowing website it is said there’s an ED element inside. So I asume the quality of the lens should be higher than their other mirror lenses + the Tokina one:
http://www.samyang.pl/index.php/samyang-reflex-f63-300mm-ed-umc-cs#tab1
Specs Tokina lens (no ED): http://www.tokinalens.com/tokina/products/other/reflex300mmf63mfmacro/
Allthough the Tokina seams to be Macro, while the Samyang/Rokinon lens is not.
The weight of the lens is similar to the Tokina mft: 318g vs 298g.
Hope the price isn’t higher as well. I don’t like the price of the Tokina mft lens.