Fuji 14 vs Samyang/Rokinon 12

[stevezphoto]

I've been happily shooting travel/landscape photography with the Fuji 14 for a couple years now. As I live out of a backpack or small suitcase most of the time, size and weight of gear is extremely important to me. The 14 has been a great lens, small, light, pretty wide, excellent edge to edge sharpness, without much vignette or distortion. I do find that for long exposure city night shots it tends to have undesirable flare from bright street lights which has annoyed me at times.

 

I went to Hawaii and did some astrophotography that I was pretty pumped about. But, the 14 isn't wide enough, which led me to looking at the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm. I would also appreciate the f2 for an extra stop of light. I think for astrophotography it is a no brainer ... but I don't really shot that type of work all that much, only when I'm in a place that is good for it, which isn't often.

 

So I am wondering about the comparison between the two lenses for the rest of my uses, travel and landscape.  I am wondering if I would be happy replacing the 14 for the 12 on a travel trip. For landscape work the lack of AF is no problem, but I do street photography sometimes and haven't ever been forced to learn to zone focus for moving shots. So I'm not totally comfortable with the idea of giving up my AF, but I am considering it. I am also wondering about real world optical performance comparisons between the two, if any of you guys have both lenses.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve Z

 

 

[yukosteel]

It takes some time to get used to zone focusing because these 12mm lens don't have DOF scale.

You can enable focus peaking that will display quite wide zone on 12mm, and get the idea before tracking moving subject.

 

I also had XF 14mm and switched to 12mm simply because I like that camera operates faster with manual lens (turning on/off and switching preview/shooting modes).

[stevezphoto]

I also had XF 14mm and switched to 12mm simply because I like that camera operates faster with manual lens (turning on/off and switching preview/shooting modes).

 

How about the image quality? You are happy with the results of the 12 vs the 14?

[bhu]

For astro-photography, look for reviews with measurements of chromatic aberration.

 

Photographing point light sources with numerical apertures that are close to zero using a lens with significant chromatic aberration will turn stars into rainbows with the worst of it in the corners. Any part of the photograph with enough chromatic aberration change a star's shape is garbage you will want to trim off, anyway, so a very wide lens can actually result in a smaller field of view after chopping off the bad areas. Look for the widest angle on a lens that does not show chromatic aberration.

 

If you can adjust for distortion and vignetting, you might try stitching images together. Image warping and adjusting luminance is workable but fixing chromatic aberrations is more challenging.

[stevezphoto]

I read a review post from a guy who specifically does astrophotography and he was very happy with the results. So for that purpose I am fairly convinced. But since astro would just be an occasional subject, I am interested in more general usage.

 

For astro-photography, look for reviews with measurements of chromatic aberration.

 

Photographing point light sources with numerical apertures that are close to zero using a lens with significant chromatic aberration will turn stars into rainbows with the worst of it in the corners. Any part of the photograph with enough chromatic aberration change a star's shape is garbage you will want to trim off, anyway, so a very wide lens can actually result in a smaller field of view after chopping off the bad areas. Look for the widest angle on a lens that does not show chromatic aberration.

 

If you can adjust for distortion and vignetting, you might try stitching images together. Image warping and adjusting luminance is workable but fixing chromatic aberrations is more challenging.

[darknj]

There is a whole thread around just for the Samyang 12mm lens, from what I could see, if you can nail the focus, the lens is plenty sharp where it needs to be.

 

But as a frequent legacy lens user, streets and manual focus is an acquired skill, your first few shots are doing to be softer than with an AF lens for pretty obvious reasons.

 

You can partially simulate the situation by going into MF mode on the camera and have fun with it from a week or so to get a better idea as on how it will be with the 12mm lens.

 

Now, if after a week, you think you can live without the AF for the wide angle lens, may I also suggest you to also buy the XF 27 F2.8 lens ? It can be found second hand at less than 300$ and very frequently at around 250$. The lens is small enough to be kept in a jean pocket and I find the field of view relatively good for streets.

Considering its size, you can very easily carry it with you and swap lenses for when you want/need the AF.

[stevezphoto]

I have the 35, so I don't feel the need for the 27 as they are pretty close. The WR 23 is of more interest as far as filling the gap between super wide and normal.

 

Yes, shooting with the 14 in MF mode, that is a solid idea, thanks!

[Aswald]

The Rok 12mm is as sharp as the XF14.....maybe a bit sharper.

 

Picture IQ is very close. 2mm diff is significantly wider for landscape.

 

Like Yukosteel says, zone focusing needs getting used to. On the XT1 it's better. XPro2 no issues. Challenging on the XPro1.

 

For the price of the Rok, it's really a no brainer. Excellent lens.