Rokinon / Samyang 24mm f1.4 for Milky Way photography

[rexboggs5]

I am interested in Milky Way photography and have heard good things about this lens.

Does anyone on this forum use this lens? What do you think of it?

[arthurking83]

Which camera?

Lens rental did a comparison/test of this lens vs other 24mm lenses a while back(back in June) under the Variation testing blog they released.

The purpose of the of the blog was to assess variation between a selection of a number of copies of this lens.
While it was on the edge of the low side in terms of score, it's still turned out to be a very good lens, especially when compared on a price/performance scale to the more expensive stuff available.

I don't know how much one of those Rokinon/Samyang lenses cost nowadays, but in terms of price/performance/quality tho .. I'd say that the Sigma 24/1.4 is about as good as you'll find.

So lets say the 'Rokinyang' 24mm lens costs about $600-700 or so, and the Sigma 24 is at the $800-900 range, I think the quality of the Sigma plus the fact that it can AF surely makes it the better value for money lens in the long term.
If you're a Canon/Nikon shooter and compare the manufacturer's lens against cost .. at about $1500-2000 each .. then the Rok make a lot more sense!

ps. I have had a look for a price guide and local suppliers seem to price the Rokinon/Samyang and Sigma lenses very similarly .. at about $900 or so.
I've seen ebayers of questionable repute selling the 'Samkinon' lenses for high $600's - low 700s tho.

hope that helps.

[mongo]

Mongo is not sure about the Samyang and will leave that up to the well studied Arthur but Mongo would hands down agree with the Sigma 24 f1.4 as excellent and best value for money/performance

[feathers]

I have three samyang lenses 14 2.8, 85 1.4, and 135 f2 l'm happy with them. The nikon mount only,(which l have) has a chip that gives you a focus indicator.
I also have a couple of sigma lenses, 50 1.4 art and 105 2.8 macro and agree that the AF is very handy. There doesn't seem to be much of a price difference, so l would go with sigma too. The samyang 14 f2.8 doesn't do a bad job capturing stars. I'ts a lot cheaper if your after a budget lens? Cheers.

[Morgo]

I have the Samyang 14mm 2.8 which I bought mostly for astro and it does a good job.

I haven't tried the 24 but for the price increase I'd probably go the Sigma as the others have mentioned. The 14 is hard to beat for the price though especially since the Canon 14 2.8 is a $2000+ lens and optically no better if a little worse depending on the reviews you read.

[Larks]

I have the 14mm 2.8 dam yang purely for astro. Manual focus and aperture is no problem for astro shots. The only problem is the mustache distortion it gets but this can be fixed in PP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Larks]

That should read samyang, not dam yang. Silly autocorrect.

I should add that the 14mm is so cheap it's hard to go past for a lens that has a single use for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cage]

Another for the Samyang 14mm f2.8

The Milky Way is pretty wide and the 24mm's 84° Angle of View just 'aint going to get it all, whereas the 14mm's 116° is going to get much more. These angles are relative to a FF camera which I see from your profile you have.

The little 14mm jobbie is rated higher in edge sharpness than the 24mm and the $2000 odd offerings from the big boys.

Oh and I use one on my D800 so I can recommend from personal use. Focus of course in manual with 'Live View', and you can disregard the infinity focus indicator on the lens, it is way off.

[nwhc]

Hi there Myself and NCHANT on this forum use the 24mm 1.4 for astro head over to the night section i'm extremely happy with and by all accounts NCHANT is as well.