1. Welcome to Cameraderie.org—a friendly camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Rokinon 12mm f2

Discussion in 'Fuji' started by KillRamsey, Sep 25, 2015.

  1. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Jun 20, 2012
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    And on that subject, when you're winging it in-cam like I do, there are 2 tricky things to nail down:

    1. Focus. You can't just bang the rokinon 12 out to the stop and go. It will focus slightly past infinity. So use that Focus Assist button, and I also try to shoot one quick one first, then pixel peep it in review for sharpness.

    2. White Balance. If you've still got the camera around 5900 from your daytime shots, your whole sky will be sodium vapor street light orange. I go way south for the deep blues, 3900 or so?
     
  2. Tim Williams

    Tim Williams Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    794
    May 31, 2017
    Central Florida
    Timothy Williams
    I have this lens loaded in my cart on Amazon. I love ultra wides, I'm just not sure because I have the 16. The 50-230 on the other hand I will probably buy as I don't have a long lens. I was going to buy a Nikon f4 300 afs and use it adapted and then it would work auto on the D300 with a 1.4 for a little more reach. the 50-230 sure will be lighter, but the 300 Nikon is a razor. Decisions, Decisions.
     
  3. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Jun 20, 2012
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    Indeed.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. AndyMcD

    AndyMcD Veteran

    332
    Jul 15, 2017
    East Midlands, UK
    I can't say that I have used my Samyang 12/2 since I got the 16/1.4. I do still sometimes carry it, but the 16/1.4 works so well for me that it has eclipsed both of my Samyang lenses (12 and 21). Plus I got fed up with trying to remember my settings and adding them back in during PP.

    I have also got the 50-230 just to have something longer for the very few occasions that I need a long lens. It has a great cost/value return for my needs (i.e. for the 2-3 times I use it in a year).

    I'm currently trying to work out whether I should look to something prime and telephoto (50/2, 56/1.2, 60/2.4 or 90/2) - I hate that Fuji make so many great lenses!
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Tim Williams

    Tim Williams Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    794
    May 31, 2017
    Central Florida
    Timothy Williams
    I passed on the Roki and bought the 50-230. My 16 is too good.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Bobby Tingle

    Bobby Tingle Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    I've had the 56 1.2, and currently have the 50 f2 and 90 f2. All are outstanding lenses. As you already noted. Which one to get really depends on what, how, and which conditions you shoot in. Like in my case, I have a 90mm. But it turns out I am not going to be shooting the events I bought it for. So I have it up for sale. Currently I am running a 16mm 1.4, 23mm f2, and 50mm f2 kit. It covers all of my shooting needs. Weather sealing is more important to me than the extra aperture of 56mm. Although, being me, I may find I need a 35mm f2 more than the 23mm due to what I shoot changing some. My dad has the 60mm and found it to be great lens, and good for macro work. If you have any questions, feel free to ask.
     
  7. AndyMcD

    AndyMcD Veteran

    332
    Jul 15, 2017
    East Midlands, UK
    Thanks @Bobby Tingle@Bobby Tingle I'm trying to work out what my priorities are for this too. I need (want!) something longer than 35 that isn't the 50-230 (which is a handy lens for the few times I use it but is too slow for the outdoors work I do for sea cadets and OIS doesn't help in those cases).

    I need to start with focal length. 90 might be too long for what I am looking for, which would leave me in the 50,56,60 range. I am going to try this out using some adapted lenses (I have a 50 and 90, so will be able to assess how useful they would be).

    I think (from some research) that the focus speeds would be 60 (slowest), then 56 being faster and 50/90 being fastest. However, I wonder how much effective difference there is in focus speeds between the four lenses working in a normal 2m-infinity range.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Bobby Tingle

    Bobby Tingle Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Sounds like you have it pretty well figured out. The times I shot with the 60, it reminded me of 50-230 in focus speed. If the subject was in/near where the 60 was already focused, it was quick enough to lock focus. Anything else was slow to get locked onto. The 50/90 are noticeably faster than the 56. But that does not mean that the 56 is slow in any regards. It is quite fast. The 35 f2, 50 f2, and 90 f2 are in a league of their own for AF speed. The 16, as you know, is also very fast.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. AndyMcD

    AndyMcD Veteran

    332
    Jul 15, 2017
    East Midlands, UK
    Thanks @Bobby Tingle@Bobby Tingle that really helps. Do you have any idea how fast the 56/1.2 focuses compared to the 35/1.4 (which is from around the same time I think).

    I guess the F2 trio focus fast because of their low weight of glass, plus later focusing techniques.

    I was sorely tempted to get the 35/2 instead of the 35/1.4 but in the end heart won our over head.

    That might be the case this time as well, the 50/2 seems like a pretty safe choice but I am sure tempted by the 56/1.2 and the 90/2 (and they are roughly equivalent in terms of cost).

    I suspect that the 56 might serve me better for low-light as well (SS of 1/90 vs 1/150 plus f1.2 vs f2 so somewhere around 2-2.5 stops I reckon).
     
  10. Bobby Tingle

    Bobby Tingle Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    @AndyMcD@AndyMcD The 56mm AF's lightening fast compared to the 35mm 1.4. Entirely different AF motor. The 56 is also much quieter than the 35 1.4.

    You are spot on about the f2 trio. Newer technology for the AF motor combined with small size and light weight.

    The 35mm 1.4 is a great lens which produces excellent images. And it renders differently than the f2 version. There is a reason why so many people won't part with that lens.

    The 56 would be better in low light for you. Especially with you shooting the X-T1. On the newer sensors you can push the iso higher with the f2 lenses. Although, you can keep the iso lower with the larger aperture lenses. So it is still a win/win.

    The 56 and 90 both produce amazing images. If weather sealing is not a factor, then it comes down to which focal length best meets your needs. The only reason I am selling my 90mm is due to me not needing that long of a lens. The 50mm covers my needs. Any other time I need reach, the 90 is not going to be long enough. But that's on rare occasions.
     
  11. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Jun 20, 2012
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    Seconding Bobby's assessment: The 56 is a big step up in AF speed from the 35. Just totally different. And I'm sure the newer lenses are better yet, but the height or the stair step between the 35 1.4 and the 56 is like 3 steps, whereas the step between the 56 and the 50 or 90 is probably 1 step.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. AndyMcD

    AndyMcD Veteran

    332
    Jul 15, 2017
    East Midlands, UK
    Okay, I am sold. Looks like I will be adding a 56/1.2 to my collection...
     
    • Like Like x 3
  13. Bobby Tingle

    Bobby Tingle Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 31, 2013
    Louisville, Ky
    Very nice choice. You won’t be disappointed.
     
  14. AndyMcD

    AndyMcD Veteran

    332
    Jul 15, 2017
    East Midlands, UK
    Just waiting for the shipping information....
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. AndyMcD

    AndyMcD Veteran

    332
    Jul 15, 2017
    East Midlands, UK
    They attempted to deliver it today but no one was home. Luckily they left it at the local post office, and I managed to get home before it shut :) 

    Obligatory wide open shot - wow!

    XT1A7503.
    X-T1    XF56mmF1.2 R    56mm    f/1.2    1/4000s    ISO 200


    Thanks for all of your help guys - your description of the focusing was spot on - definitely right alongside my 16/1.4.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  16. Tim Williams

    Tim Williams Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    794
    May 31, 2017
    Central Florida
    Timothy Williams
    Nice, I love the way this lens renders.
     
  17. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Jun 20, 2012
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    Niiiice!
     
  18. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Jun 20, 2012
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    • Like Like x 4
  19. ChardBurn

    ChardBurn New Member

    1
    May 15, 2018
    Nr. Ampthill, Bedfordshire UK
    Richard Burn LRPS
    I bought a used Samyang version back in January for around £200. It was in 'as new' condition and has barely been off my XT1 since I got it. Here's an image from last week taken at Thirlmere in the Lake District, hand held.

    Flowing into Thirlmere.
    X-T1    50.0 mm    50mm    f/1.0    1/140s    ISO 200
     
    • Like Like x 6
  20. KillRamsey

    KillRamsey Super Moderator

    Jun 20, 2012
    Hood River, OR
    Kyle
    "Barely been off my XT-1..." I know the feeling. I generally leave the house with 2 lenses, and this is one of the two 95% of the time.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.