November 30, 2013

Rokinon 24mm, 35mm, & 85mm T1.5 Cine Lens Set for Canon, Nikon, or Sony Now Only $1,300

The Samyang/Rokinon lenses are about the cheapest cine-style lenses in existence (and most of them cover full-frame 35mm), which means both the iris and the focus rings have gears for a follow focus, and the iris is measured in T-stops, and is smooth so you can ramp exposure during a shot if necessary. For example, if you're starting a shot inside and need to go outside, or if a cloud goes behind the sun right in the middle of shooting, you can change exposure. There are many reasons you'd want cine lenses, but until these lenses they were just not affordable in any way -- and now they're even cheaper.

B&H is running a deal where you can get these three Rokinon cine lenses in Nikon F, Canon EF, Sony Alpha, or Sony E-mount for just $1,300 (these are basically the same as the Samyang except they are branded differently):

If you bought them separately they would be a little less than $1,600, so you'd be saving about $300. The cine lens range also extends to an 8mm T3.8, 14mm T3.1, and 16mm T2.2. These may not be the perfect focal lengths depending on your format (they are still missing a 50mm lens which is apparently coming), but you can also add a few lenses to fill out the whole line. For example, adding the 16mm T2.2 lens which is designed for APS-C/Super 35mm cameras gives you a real wide option on that format, and you could add a 50mm lens from somewhere else to have a relatively complete lens set.

Matthew Duclos has said some interesting things about these brand of lenses, and Luke Neumann did a test of probably the weakest lens in the bunch wide open, the 24mm, to see how it compared to other cinema lenses:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73rxg-yxTr4

These lenses are also useful if you're adapting them to other cameras that can only take a manual iris lens. For example, if you bought the Canon EF mount version for a Canon DSLR, and wanted to use them on a Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera, you could use them with just a cheap dumb mount, and not have to deal with the mounts that try to give you a fake iris to stop down.

The sale is only until December 3rd according to B&H, but occasionally these are extended. Check out the lenses from the links below.

Links:

Your Comment

52 Comments

Got these. From Adorama, apparently they matched price once B&H listed them for 1299

November 30, 2013 at 5:10PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

14
Reply
Archie

I own this set (bought about a year ago) along with the 8mm and 14mm. Best lens money I ever spent.

November 30, 2013 at 5:44PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

5
Reply

Really want to see how the 8mm does on something like the BMPCC

November 30, 2013 at 5:58PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Sadly, its not that exciting, at least for me. Too much distortion.

November 30, 2013 at 7:45PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
marklondon

Luke, I bet the Sigma 8-16mm with the Metabones Speed booster would be a better wide angle solution for the Pocket.

December 1, 2013 at 2:53AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
You voted '+1'.
Reply
Dave

I want me some Rokinons :)

November 30, 2013 at 6:07PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
avatar
Micah Van Hove
Writer
director, producer, dp

I just shot a scene with these today and was super impressed with them. I wish they made a 50mm

November 30, 2013 at 6:25PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
Christopher

Shouldn't the images get sharper at T/ 22?

November 30, 2013 at 6:30PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
Rizzo

They don't because of diffraction. Most lenses are sharpest around 5.6/8, sometimes even 11: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffr...

November 30, 2013 at 6:36PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

The 35 has become my favorite lens to use on the C100... it's magic!

November 30, 2013 at 6:44PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Wide open the Rokinon 24 isn't very impressive, or even useable.

November 30, 2013 at 6:56PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Larry Vaughn

can someone confirm if EF cine mount lenses focus the correct way? I've seen photos on which they do and photos which they don't (could have just been F mount pic in EF section). Also I saw one mounted on a BMCC EF on an expo and that definitely focused the wrong way.

November 30, 2013 at 7:10PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
ts

No its the right way. Canon is the wrong way ;)

December 1, 2013 at 6:10AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Any good for the GH2?

November 30, 2013 at 8:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Andrew David Clark

Will these work with the coming SLR Magic anamorphic adapter?

November 30, 2013 at 8:15PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Andrew David Clark

not a fan of these lenses at all.

November 30, 2013 at 8:24PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

why?

November 30, 2013 at 10:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
sek

SOO soft. It may be cheap, but it won't pass for professional work. I would rather purchase a set of used Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses for $3500 for six lenses.

December 1, 2013 at 12:44AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

12
Reply
Kenneth

either that or get a sigma 18-35 1.8 , nikon manual lens(28,35mm), or tokina modded all of these lens are budget wise decent and are nice wide open , good contrast etc

December 1, 2013 at 2:08AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
JAYE

Not true. These lenses are shape. The 24mm is a little softer at T1.5 (F1.4, and its a nice kind of soft) but at F1.8 and above its fine.

The bokeh on these is beautifully creamy. I have all of Nikons high end lenses and I don't touch them since I started using these.

This is shot largely with the 35mm and some shots with the 85mm on a D800 (except the first 3 shots, gopro3black). https://vimeo.com/79944107

And this with the same lenses on a Sony F5. https://vimeo.com/79547092

I can't recommend these lenses highly enough, at any price. Really love the 35mm at T1.5. Has quite a 3d look to the footage.

December 1, 2013 at 6:28AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

21
Reply

Very nice documentary, my only gripe been the ultrawide gobro shot, at least someone who is shooting and can show his work and not only talk through his ....

December 3, 2013 at 1:00PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

16
Reply
Daniel Villiers

Thanks Daniel. I had to use the GoPro on those second and third shots for discretion and the third shot because I was sitting on the back of a rickety little motorcycle on very bumpy roads. I needed to be as wide as I could for that otherwise I would never have got anything smooth enough to use, although I like the way it shows the scale of the buildings in the slum. I have about 14 hours of footage and that one shot sums the place up more than most of the rest. The discretion was because it was just dangerous to have a camera on you there. Even a cheap camera there was worth more than my life so from time to time the GoPro was great.

December 3, 2013 at 6:34PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

What is "professional" to you [and others leaning on this work/expression]?
When it comes to lenses, it depends on the effect that you're going for. There is no universal "look" of professionalism. Never was, never will be.

Stop down to f5.6 on nearly any lens and it's usually sharp. If you're doing for a wide open look and the results aren't what you're looking for, move on to different glass. But, at least don't use the term "professional" as if that is some static method of filming in any respect [regarding gear]. Old C-mount lenses were soft and bloomed wide open too, and they were used on features, commercials and news casting/reels.

Really, this is a tired, misinformed stigma.

December 1, 2013 at 7:49PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

14
Reply

Agree 100%, its odd that people complain, as if there is a comparable option that we should be looking at?

December 1, 2013 at 8:12PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply

I guess it depends on your clients and the work. In my field, advertising producers and creatives are developing more discerning eyes, and they notice when things are soft or fuzzy. Thanks to Red (and this is not a bad or good thing, just the way it is) and higher resolution pictures that are going around these days, people are used to and often want things to be tack sharp. Furthermore, if you're shooting on a budget, you likely won't have a lot of lights to work with, meaning you will probably be shooting very close to wide open a lot of the time. In these circumstances, the Rokinon lens may cost you a client or a potential one.

If you're trying to make it in filmmaking, you have no excuses. Your material has to look as good as everyone else's--or better. Fuzzy-ness isn't in, these days.

Also, C-glass didn't have to be as sharp because 16mm film isn't the sharpest either. You can tell what's cheap glass on a high-res ditigal camera whereas film was more forgiving.

December 1, 2013 at 8:58PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Kenneth

I use these for professional work when i am supplying the camera package and not renting, Upstream Color was shot on a GH2 with the Samyang's and that made it to sundance, heres a shot from a short film i worked on https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153103980110276&l=2cd79dd593 that's the 85mm through the speed booster on the AF100 (not exactly known for it's sharpness). It's honestly impossible to complain about these lenses as there cost/performance delivery is extremely good, yes they are not perfect wide open (why i have the speed booster) but not many lenses in this price bracket are at T1.5! to me it makes a lot of sense NOT buying expensive lenses for yourself, you'll never beat the $5k + a piece CP.2s/CN-Es/Cookes etc so why run up a small mortgage buying them? Rent them when you can/have to and in the mean time enjoy these very affordable and pretty damn sharp (Above T2.2) Lenses for your own personal use and smaller projects.

December 1, 2013 at 8:11PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply

I've used them before and there was a lot of chromatic aberration on them. The lens made the colours very muddy. The Canon EF - L lenses are much cleaner in my opinion for a similar price.

December 1, 2013 at 2:55PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Color and contrast are what really set better lenses apart. The rokinons are terrible in that sense.

December 1, 2013 at 4:31PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Kenneth Merrill

I'm curious what camera bodies you guys used these lenses on? I get consistently sharp footage from these and on the 24 at T1.5 slightly soft but its a nice soft.

Its likely your simply not quite in focus which is easy to do with such a shallow depth of field. Use your focus zoom with these and if your still not getting sharp shots then have a look at your camera itself.

December 1, 2013 at 5:28PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

15
Reply

I have to disagree, there not "terrible", my god man what are you shooting on?

December 1, 2013 at 8:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

9
Reply

When I have the budget, I shoot CP.2. When I don't, I rent (and am hoping to buy sometime) Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses, which have really nice color and contrast and are a little sharper, I think.

December 1, 2013 at 9:01PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Kenneth

If you think these are soft then your wrong. Looking down your nose at these and calling them soft and unprofessional is just plain wrong when there are mountains of sharp professional work out there shot with these lenses that proves otherwise. I'll bet you've either never touched one, or that when you did it was on a soft body.

I've been a pixel peeper and hard to please when it comes to cameras and lenses for a long time but since I started using these they have been all I use now. I just wish they would make a 70-200.

Also CP2s might look trendy but remember they only open up to T2.1, These are T1.5. The 35mm at T1.5 is perfectly sharp. Maybe my experience is different because I've only even used them on D800s and the F5 which are both sharp bodies.

Also its the bokeh on these that I really love. Very creamy. In a blind test nobody will know what you shot something with when it comes to sharpness, but when it comes to bokeh these lenses really shine. Easily nicer than the CP2s.

December 2, 2013 at 12:32AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Look how sharp this is. Samyang and Rokinon are the exact same lens just incase anyone doesn't know.

http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/samyang-24mm-f2-exposure...

Notice how nice the bokeh is in the Background. So creamy :)

December 2, 2013 at 2:01AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

12
Reply

I love these lenses, i use these on my GH2, AF100 and BMCC. I use these almost exclusively with the Nikon Mount Speedbooster, apart from the wider field of view, sharpness increase and brighter T1.0 maximum aperture what i like is the fact that the sharper aperture settings T4-T5.6 are now giving me T2.8-T4. Looking forward to getting the 16mm T2.2 and the eventual 50mm

November 30, 2013 at 9:03PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

I work at a church and we have two of these sets. They are pretty solid and for the price you can't go wrong. We used them with a Red Epic we rented for our annual church conference http://vimeo.com/77151873 . It was sharp with the downscaling but they always perform on our other cameras.

November 30, 2013 at 9:35PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

I had bought the Rokinon 24mm T1.5 Cine lens to use with my GH3 but it was so soft wide open that I ended up selling it. Basically unusable for low light, which is the point of a fast lens. Instead I bought an SLR Magic 25mm f/0.95 which is BY FAR a much better lens. Even wide open at f/0.95 it is MUCH SHARPER than the Rokinon 24mm at T1.5.

If you're going to be using the lens at T2.8 and up, then the Rokinon is a great bargain, but if you want it for low light performance you should look elsewhere. Seriously, it's not usable at T1.5.

November 30, 2013 at 10:40PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

I agree... Rokinon 24mm is honestly... not a good lens period. 35mm is all around a very decent value and 85mm is probably their best lens. I would really forgo the 24mm.

November 30, 2013 at 10:54PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
John

Another confirm, the 24mm is wide open really soft, especially compared to the 35mm and 85mm rokinons which are pretty good instead. If you're on APS-C or BMCC I would rather go for a Sigma 18-35 which outperforms both the 24 and 35!

December 1, 2013 at 6:05AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

15
Reply
Renze Boeren

They're ok I guess, but after owning all of them (and multiple copies), I finally went with Zeiss ZF's and only kept the 85mm, really love the way it renders skin tones in portraits.

December 1, 2013 at 6:33AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

5
Reply
Michael

how about trying the Xenon FF-Primes in the future and the 2 new anamorphic adapters the letus and the slr magic ones

December 1, 2013 at 2:32PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply
Greg

What I think is important in a set like that is the way the lenses matches each other in color rendition.

Using a canon 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 gives back two different images in terms of color. This issue creates a lor of problem in professional works that uses compressed codecs like H.264 or AVCHD because you needs to have the best image you can straigh out of the camera, without color correct it.

I'm interestet in buying the set because of the cine mode (gear for the focus and iris ring, smooth iris and so on) but I will be very disappointed if I will find that the colors of an image are different from a lens to another.

Can someone tell me if that lenses have this issue?
thanks.

December 1, 2013 at 4:15PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
andrea

They're all uniform across the set

December 1, 2013 at 8:17PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply

I think the Canon is the winner here.

December 5, 2013 at 8:27PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Scott Armstrong

How can a cloud go BEHIND the sun?

December 6, 2013 at 9:48AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

9
Reply
Eric

Once a year it can ;)

December 6, 2013 at 5:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply

untill unless you have very specific requirements go for 50mm f/1.8 D for FX format and 35mm f/1.8G on DX format. both of them are very cheap and incredibly sharp. you can refer to http://pixelarge.com/nikon-50mm-f1-8-af-d-nifty-fifty-2/ for more details. good luck

Vishal Singh
http://www.PixeLarge.com

December 16, 2013 at 1:17PM, Edited September 4, 11:45AM

0
Reply

Also goes by the name Walimex Pro in Europe, got a 35 T1.5, a beauty!!! http://amzn.to/1gBPMO7

January 7, 2014 at 8:24AM, Edited September 4, 11:45AM

0
Reply

they are $1428 in Adorama now

January 9, 2014 at 10:49AM, Edited September 4, 11:45AM

13
Reply
sethkimstudio

i have that one . its a good lens

January 9, 2014 at 10:51AM, Edited September 4, 11:45AM

14
Reply
sethkimstudio

Hi guys, I'm really interested in these lenses for an upcoming indie film project (my first feature, with a few friends). Just wondering how these lenses compare to the "regular" (non-cine) versions.

The non-cine versions are about $100 less... just wondering exactly what the differences are, as they seem the same from a quick glance.

Thanks!!

March 9, 2014 at 9:54PM, Edited September 4, 11:56AM

0
Reply

hi,
I recently purchased a 35mm T1.5 vdslr for my Nikon D7100. the minimum focus distance is fabulous. but I suspect a problem with my lens, when I try to record video with the subjects that are far away, the focus ring is rotated up to the maximum but still can not focus well. video become slightly blurred. is that how it works or indeed there is a problem with the lens?
thanks.

June 3, 2014 at 10:11AM, Edited September 4, 11:56AM

0
Reply

I have the same issue...anyone else have an answer???

September 2, 2015 at 3:14AM

0
Reply
JoshuaMallett.com
Producer / Director / DP
91