Samyang just released a new lens that will be available for both, A and E-mount camera owners. It’s the 10mm f/2.8 “ED AS NCS CS” lens. It covers the APS-C sensor area and is priced at around $400. It will ship from end January. Image samples can be seen at Samyangs website (Click here).
Samyang press release:
Prototype version of Samyang 10mm f/2.8 lens has been presented to the public on Photokina 2012 fairs. Samyang has stepped its gear and introduced a focused development program to obtain the highest possible optical parameters and reduce the product’s size at the same time. These efforts resulted in the latest version of Samyang 10 1:2.8 ED AS NCS CS lens featuring parameters and capabilities comparable to the best wide-angle prime and zoom lenses on the market.
Samyang 10mm 1:2.8 ED AS NCS CS is an ideal tool for indoor, architecture and landscape shooting. It provides an exceptionally wide field of view of up to 109.5 degrees and rectilinear image mapping function. Owing to a fast f/2.8 lens speed you can also use the lens in low light conditions. This is why it turns out a useful tool for sport photography and photojournalism purposes. The product’s optics comprises 14 elements divided into 10 groups, this includes 2 aspherical AS lenses and one lens made of extra-low dispersion glass. During development works on the prototype version the lens was fitted with an embedded lens hood which ensures more compact size of the lens and reduces its weight by approximately 160 grams*. * – applicable to a version with Canon E mount
NCS (Nano Coating System)
Samyang 10mm 1:2.8 ED AS NCS CS is the first Samyang Optics lens featuring a nano crystal anti-reflection coating system. This technology provides lower reflection factor than (U)MC system as the coating is now applied more evenly on the surface of the lens. Benefits brought by the nano crystal layer include better light transmission, increased resistance to reflections and higher contrast, and all of this translates into supreme optical resolution of the lens.
59 Responses
Samyang: We need native fullframe e-mount lenses! For example a fullframe version of the Samyang 8mm f2.8 Fisheye.
But still it might be a nice lens for some users. APS-C equivalent to the 14mm. Well, apart of the aperture of course…
I fully agree! The E mount mirror lens 300/6.3 is swell but does not cover the FF frame. Comes very close but falls short. For use on a NEX, it is one superb lens (when used properly)! It is not easy to contact Samyang. Their website contact form sucks.
Nice lens, but: no filters in front. For a wide angle lens, where landscape photography as one of the main applications, this is a real disadvantage. ND filters and polarizers are very useful with landscapes.
So, what is the big advantage of this lens to e.g. the Tokina 11-16mm f2/8?
‘So, what is the big advantage of this lens to e.g. the Tokina 11-16mm f2/8?’
My thoughts exactly. Probably only useful for E mount… but only if it has AF (which I doubt it has).
maybe the image quality will be better.
1 mm wider, and hopefully better resolution. The Tokina i not bad, but wide open at night you can see the limits. And that mm more is good, too.
But is it worth the difference if you already have the tokina… like me? kinda doubtful.
Tokina 11-16 vs Samyang 14 @ F2.8 & F8
Note that the 14mm is on a FF bodu so mid-frame and edge are way further vs the 11-16mm on a crop body !
http://bit.ly/1d1mpl4
http://bit.ly/18JiBIg
Price maybe. Samyang usually costs less.
Well at least this mirrorless lens isn’t as big and long and a Sony Zeiss plunger.
Err.. No. length of this lens for E-mount is 105mm, for example Sony Zeiss 55mm FE-lens is only 71mm.
err. no, Zeiss lenses that are long and big, not the few small ones. the fe is also a plunger..same with the 35mm zeiss e lens thats as long as a zoom. the tout lenses are also big plungers.
Here’s the complete list of Sony Zeiss lenses EVER produced: 24mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm for A-mount and 24mm, 16-70mm, 24-70mm, 35mm and 55mm for E-mount + 12mm and 32mm Touit lenses for E-mount. There is only one single lens that’s longer than this Samyang 10mm for E-mount and thats 135mm -lens.
Take a look at the Samsung primes. most of them are pancakes, pancakes pancakes, pancakes. any lens made today that is longer than equivalent lenses made in the 70’s is too big.
Umm lenses have to be longer today because they have to be telecentric so light strikes sensor in a more direct fashion to work right with digital sensors. So….. Good example LEICA Digital lens are pretty big. Its even more true with mirror less because shorts flange distance.
I have the Zeiss 35mm E-mount already, and it’s tiny. I don’t know what the hell you are referring to.
Maybe he was thinking of the Zeiss Otus which is quite big.
No, take a look at 35mm lenses of today. The f2 or 2.4 35mm simple primes lens today by Samsyang or SonyZeiss nex for example or even Sigma or way way too big. i dont recall seeing any 35mm lenses made 40 ears ago for even slrs that remotely are as big as some of these modern plungers. If the lenses are longer than the same lenses of the past then they re doing it wrong. The lenses today are so long sand heavy theyre front heavy like pamela anderson.
Over 600g weight for E-mount-version. No buy. This is a lens designed for dinosaurs cameras (DSLR) and not optimised any way for mirroless design. Once again E-mount version is just a DSLR-lens with permanent mount-adapter attached. Really pity.
Dinosaur skeletons are far cooler, and much more popular than others!
So, if you want an extra mirrorless version are you prepared to pay the additional R&D costs?
What additional cost? I don’t understand your point. Whenever a new lens is designed, it will require R&D cost and time. Can this “additional” R&D cost be seen when Samyang redesigned their DSLR-fisheye lens for mirrorless cameras. Answer is no, and actually this mirrorless lens is bit cheeper compared to the DSLR-counterpart (at least in my area).
The real problem with expecting any company to custom build lenses from the ground up for E-MOUNT is the small market size. Even as of now 83% of all cameras coming out of Japan are DSLR of the remaining 17% mirrorless Sony has maybe 25-30% of this market which boils down to at best 5% of the interchangeable lens market.
These are the real numbers from CIPA not the plucked from fresh air claims of the forum fanboys.This is why the Sony E-mount lenses from Samyang are basically just their APS/FF options with a built in mount adapter.If you were the owner of a lens company would you concentrate on making lenses for 83% of the market where the only difference is the mount,same optics same senor size etc.Or would you be custom designing and manufacturing lenses that require different optical formulas different manufacturing processes etc with low user bases {relatively speaking }.I know which option I would opt for.
CIPA DATA: http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html
Well, Samyang did introduce mirrorless only lens, the 8mm for mirrorless.
And your numbers about Sony are much better? Your point about the small market size is perfectly valid, but, imho, you are drawing the wrong conclusions. Market share hardly says it all and if a market is considered to be the future, then surely it makes sense for companies to invest themselves in it. Samyang’s approach to e-mount lenses quite probably only means that they want to keep their prices down and nothing more. Sigma has already made E-mount lenses, Zeiss too. Zeiss has even announced an entirely new family of lenses for the FF e-mount.
As to which option I would go for, it would be the same as what Apple is doing, smaller market, huge profits.
Apple is one of the largest companies in the world with a $37 billion profit this year.They are one of the very few companies who have managed the trick of making customers pay more for their branded products which are typically no better than cheaper products from rivals.Even at their highest end the same money paid for their products will buy you more elsewhere.
Small companies { on a global scale} like Samyang have to aim at the largest market sector.They simply do not have the brand value to charge the premium prices they would need to do if they designed and manufactured a range of lenses targeted at 5% of the world market.
As for the Zeiss lenses if you are happy with manual focus there is a spectacular choice of lenses available to you.I will not be in the least surprised if they are simply the current Zeiss offerings for Nikon & Canon with an e-mount.
And few of their lenses offer better quality than other cheaper options here is the £1300 35mm F1.4 DISTAGON vs the £630 Sigma 35mm F1.4
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Zeiss-Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-35mm-f14-ZF2-Nikon-on-Nikon-D800-versus-Sigma-35mm-F14-DG-HSM-A-Nikon___391_792_1057_0
Sigma products produced for the mirrorless market are just standard APS fair with different mounts built in a 19mm mFT lens that gives a 38mm FF equiv AOV and FF equiv DOF/total light of an F5.6 is little more than a token effort.Look at a few of their recent and excellent options like the 18-35mm f1.8 ,or the 35mm F1.4 have you seen any in e-mount ?
VLAD apples smaller market isn’t small though. Its more like the Game market. zillion games for iPhone Zillion PC and console games. almost no games for Mac. Same for lenses. You might buy the lens but will they sell enough to recover RD cost to redesign lens smaller to work any better then DSLR version works.
I forgot to add my numbers are based on actual CIPA data which covers all the Japanese makers in their entirety.I appreciate that many in the mirrorless forums do not like to look at actual numbers as it does not coincide with their religious fan boy beliefs.But facts are facts and the market share for Nex mount is based on Sony’s own numbers
Feel free to have a read through the data:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html
@Randy Comparatively speaking Apple’s market share is small. And I provided this comparison for one specific reason – to show that market share is hardly the whole picture.
@jwdoy Small companies do have to aim at the largest market sector, indeed. That was precisely my point above, Samyang isn’t that representative here. As to Sigma, I did say that you do have a valid point, but I disagree with the conclusion that there is no interest for companies to build lenses for the e-mount, simply based on market share. This interest will differ depending on the company (Zeiss is making lenses) and will also only grow over time. I believe, these are perfectly logical assumptions.
As to your numbers, point me to where it says that “Sony has maybe 25-30% of this market which boils down to at best 5%” and I’ll gladly admit defeat 🙂 And, please, stop throwing words like “religion” and “fanboy” around to support your arguments, because, well, it doesn’t. Your arguments are largely enough.
@VLAD FAN BOY? Its a market comparison dude. You have to sell enough to recoup your cost. iPhone has the LARGEST music and app market so every one writes for it. I don’t even own an iPhone so how can I be a fan boy. Its just called facts and economics.
@Randy What are you reading? My comment is right above, where did I call anyone fanboy? Seriously.
Here is the market share for iOS and the iPhone:
http://techcrunch.com/2013/12/02/apple-sees-significant-bounce-with-colored-5c-high-end-5s-models-android-still-trumps-with-71-share-of-all-sales/
How big does it look? And what is precisely your point about Apple having the largest music and app store? Do check the Apple computers market share too, where Apple is also making profits. How big is it? Your idea of selling enough to recoup your cost isn’t complete. There is a price somewhere there too.
Vlad sorry mixed reading comment in email missed the name. recouping cost is complete picture. If you can only sell so many and you can make one lens with different back to suit the needs. No one will R&D a E lens unless a lot of people will buy it. As you said there is still a VERY small e market. I own 4 lenes for my small camera systems. My studio gear I own 3 Rodenstocks and for my Mamiya LEAF I own 4. Thats Normal. (well I own 3 lens for my Contax as well)
@Randy A small market is a valid point, but only a part of the picture. One can sell less for a higher price, for example. That is what Voigtlander is doing for the m43 and what Zeiss is doing for e-mount (and that is why I am involving Apple, because its market share is smaller than Samsung’s, for example, but they do make more money). So, while some companies (like Samyang, for example) probably won’t bother to make a lens from the ground up for e-mount, others will do it ,either because they can charge more or because they believe that this is a growing market and want to secure their place in it earlier.
They only redesigned it after they had a DSLR adaptation like this on sale for a while, though…
If this thing sells like hotcakes – and if the IQ is as stellar as that of the fisheye, it probably will – the same thing might very well happen.
David K sais: SEL 10-18/4 all the way! Great for crop and good for FF:
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2013/12/03/using-the-10-18mm-oss-zoom-on-full-frame/
BTW: could anybody check if SEL 20 covers FF with the mask removed?
I just removed the backplate from my SEL20 and put it on my A7 and vignetting is minimal. The corners have a vignette, but it is limited to the boxes you have in the corners if your rule of thirds grid is turned on.
I have to test it some more but this is pretty cool 🙂
It doesn’t.
I didn’t remove the mask but the IQ behind the APS-C area is poor (something like smearing). I will do some test next week and send the information to the SAR site, so everyone will be able to see for themselves.
Removing the backplate makes quite a difference.
None of the NEX lenses are of any use on the A7/7R, including the expensive 10-18/4. I would not waste my money or time on these.
Meh… wish they would put out an 18mm f4 with excellent optics that takes filters and covers FF at the price of this or their 14/2.8 lens. Now that I’d buy in a heartbeat.
+1
Everybody is worried about A-mount being dead. Well, I hope it’s not. But I also hope that they stop making apsc lenses and start making more FF because in 5 years no one will want to buy apsc unless its for wildlife or sports. No point in having a wide lens. The future is affordable FF.
APS-C is only one stop below FF in almost everything, including price. With faster AF and global shutter it would be a good alternative.
FF cameras may come down in price, but the lenses wont, especially when sensor resolution is going up. APS-C lenses will always be cheaper, and most people wont want to pay FF lens prices for the small increase in quality (myself included, especially when the smaller sensor cameras are currently better for video quality, and FF lenses used for video are serious overkill)
really don’t mind if they want to keep APS-C going, and if some people still want to buy it. Personally i love the FF look and will do FF only so it’s a moot point. I just noticed that this has Nano coatings which is exciting. I think the one think i’ve seen with Samyang lenses is that they’re sharp but could use a little more contrast/micro-contrast (for my tastes)… hopefully these coatings do the trick. Really keeping by fingers crossed for a prime in the 17-20mm range. Doesn’t need to be 2.8 though that would be fine but it needs kickass performance across a 35mm sensor along with these new coatings. Oh and it needs to take filters since I love to use those for landscape.
I’ve been waiting a long time for this lens since owning the Samyang 8mm fisheye. I get a lot of use out of the fisheye. The inability to use filters is a disadvantage but I correct for that in post processing using either HDR or blending images of different exposures. Blurring waterfalls with an ND filter can’t be done in post processing of course.
The advantage of this lens is that it’s rectilinear so it corrects for UWA distortion in the lens. I’m not familiar with the other UWA lenses on the market so I can’t compare performance.
I’ll look forward to reviews of the lens and any recommendations of an alternative is appreciated. The new Tonika is looking good.
The Tokina 11-16, the Sigma 8-16 and the Samyang 14mm. Nothing branded comes close in price/performance (except maybe the 15mm Pentax, which has its size going for it). And the old Tokina 11-16 can be found for really cheap.
Nice, even if a year or so later 🙂
I already purchased the 16mm f/2(similar size & weight) for my NEX and unlike mr Munger I find mine sharp wide open. It’s nice for astro. Yes, it is imbalanced like hell on the NEX and I fear for the mount sometimes but I either A hold it in my hands or B aim it upwards on the tripod or C worry too much.
I hope to see astros from this one too.
nice lens!
I wish Samyang can be like SLR magic and release some ultrafast lenses too
How about a CINE version, will there be one?
Speaking of ultrawide alternatives, the 10-18 mm isnt a bad choice (used) for people using crop emount who may switch to fx. I loved it on yhe nex 5n and 7. Testing it on the a7r with no crop, it was better than expected at 13.5-16 mm. Requires some lightroom pp to remove vig and distortion but it’s defintely usable until a native solution arrives.
Does anyone have info on the Samyang 12mm lens that was announced for mirrorless cameras? It would seem an obvious candidate for the NEX but they didn’t seem to have it planned for E-mount.
“Sony has maybe 25-30% of this market which boils down to at best 5%” and I’ll gladly admit defeat 🙂 And, please, stop throwing words like “religion” and “fanboy” around to support your arguments, because, well, it doesn’t. Your arguments are largely enough.”
Yes sorry about that I got carried away 🙂 ,but facts are that the mirrorless market in total accounts for aprox 17-18% of the interchangeable lens camera market, current sales numbers from CIPA {frankly the only reliable source around.}
That 17% is shared between Sony,Olympus,Panasonic,Fuji,Pentax,Nikon and Canon
The peak market share for mirrorless was 2012 ,in the largest mirrorless market in the world Japan, Sony held 20.1% of the mirrorless market { 20% 0f 17% is 3.4%}
soucre
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/final-japanese-market-share-analysis-for-2012/
The 30% share of the mirrorless market for Sony is based on the various through debatable sources beyond the 17-18% market share of mirrorless as a whole.It is difficult to pin an exact market share number down by company with various unreliable data popping up all over the net.Even giving the most extreme claim for Nex mirrorless share I could find from back in 2012 never puts Sony over 40% of the mirrorless market.Even if you take this 40% as accurate { I don’t :-)}
But hey lest go with 40% that gives E mount a maximum percentage of the interchangeable market of 7%. Which put us back to targeting 83% of the market { DSLR lenses} compared to 8% you basically rule out most.
Ah, I do agree with your assumptions 🙂 Just teasing you about relying on actual numbers. I also do agree with the idea that a small market share will have an effect on third party options. I just don’t think that is whole picture. Like I said somewhere above, some companies will simply hike up the price (Zeiss for e-mount, Voigtlander for m43) and some will simply give it a try to have a foot in a market that will eventually grow bigger (Sigma with its lenses for e-mount).
I use, and like, the Min 25/2.8 AF on FF. It allows judicious use of c-pol filter in certain environments.
Does anybody use it on APS-C? I go to f8, by which point vignetting is at a minimum. I would think that on APS-C one could go to a larger aperture without increasing vignetting, and you could even use a filter. It’s a nice lens, I’m wondering how APS-C users compare these two.
Why would E-mount cameras users need that if there’s already very good and small 8/2.8?
good and small 8/2.8?? That’s a fisheye, this new 10mm is not!
Please samyang make 16 fe for around 400
Well this is the first time my semi-negative comment on a lens got censored. I only asked for a smaller, lighter mirrorless equivalent.
On the sample images there is quite a bit of distortion. I was hoping it was going to be at least the same quality as some of their other lens.
UWA RokiBowYang’s have a reputation for great chromatic aberration and coma control, even when wide open. I have a Bower 14mm f/2.8 for a 6D, and this quality was aptly demonstrated a week ago for a Milky Way (the galaxy, not the candy bar) shot. I guess if one’s appreciation of lenses was only limited to its price and “sharpness”, then the RokiBowYang offering would be lost on you.
(A glaring problem with the 14mm is the barrel distortion, which I do neutralize with a good lens profile. *That* would be a good reason to dismiss the UWA RokibowYang’s if you were a purist. That said, I think you’ll still achieve higher average resolution even after distortion correction than with any of its peers.)
Yes, I also have the SEL1018… and while that lens is great and much more versatile than any fast-ish UWA prime… it doesn’t come close to the overall technical excellence of the 14mm.