Rokinon 135mm F2 for Pentax now shipping

formercanuck · 03-28-2015, 07:23 PM

Originally posted by filoxophy

Just for an example, look at the B&H listing for the Rokinon 85/1.4. No "A" setting, no aperture lever. But we know that lens has both.

I'm just going by Occam's Razor...which is more likely: that Samyang has always made "A"-compatible K-mount lenses and suddenly stopped, or that they copy-and-pasted a photo of the Canon model into the Pentax listing?

I say the latter.

Yes on the latter. Those posts typically indicate that image is not for a specific mount "Alternative mount shown". I have the Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, and can tell you for certain that it is a PK-A lens.

Nicolas06 · 03-29-2015, 12:02 AM

Originally posted by Class A

Do you have any numbers to support this statement?

When I read responses to Samyang lenses, I typically receive confirmation of my own impression that the lenses are optically excellent, very well built, and a steal for their price.

Actually I don't recall anyone reporting issues with a copy. I'm sure it happens, as it does with every lens manufacturer but on the basis of my observations, there is no support for the idea of a "high defect rate“.

Lens Rental explain they have much more issues with Samyang than with other lenses and that they can't keep them as long as other brands. Unfortunately this is not that easy to recall. I should have bookmarked it.

Class A · 03-29-2015, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by Nicolas06

Lens Rental explain they have much more issues with Samyang than with other lenses and that they can't keep them as long as other brands.

The "Lensrentals Repair Data: 2012-2013" appeared to have been modified by LensRentals because they had some classification issue with Rokinon/Bower/Samyang lenses and hence removed the data. Perhaps that's why you cannot find it anymore.

I don't know whether the data was pulled because it was misleading due to the classification issue. I do know that I don't see people complaining about problems with Samyang lenses. I also know that while Roger Cicala (from LensRentals) observed the use of some plastic parts and was sceptical about the longevity of a particular model he looked at (Rokinon 14mm f/2.8), he also called it a "bargain" and noted that replacing it with a new copy would be cheaper than having a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 repaired. He also called the lens better than the Nikon 14/2.8.

He also notes that if someone babies their lens, it could easily last a lifetime while the LensRentals copies see a lot of stress.

I remain unconvinced that there is actually a real cause for concern.

rawr · 03-29-2015, 07:58 AM

The Lensrental blog made reference to Rokinon insisting that, while they may be part of the SamYang 'family', Rokinon maintained different and higher standards of quality under their label, compared to the other arms of the collective (Vivitar, Bower et al, maybe even SamYang themselves). Hence they didn't like his clumping all the SamYang labels together in his presentation of the reliability data.

I think the only SamYang lenses that are certifiably dodgy are those 650-1300mm mega zooms of theirs.

khengleong1975 · 03-29-2015, 10:15 AM

Hello

Nicolas06 · 03-29-2015, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Class A

The "Lensrentals Repair Data: 2012-2013" appeared to have been modified by LensRentals because they had some classification issue with Rokinon/Bower/Samyang lenses and hence removed the data. Perhaps that's why you cannot find it anymore.

I don't know whether the data was pulled because it was misleading due to the classification issue. I do know that I don't see people complaining about problems with Samyang lenses. I also know that while Roger Cicala (from LensRentals) observed the use of some plastic parts and was sceptical about the longevity of a particular model he looked at (Rokinon 14mm f/2.8), he also called it a "bargain" and noted that replacing it with a new copy would be cheaper than having a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 repaired. He also called the lens better than the Nikon 14/2.8.

He also notes that if someone babies their lens, it could easily last a lifetime while the LensRentals copies see a lot of stress.

I remain unconvinced that there is actually a real cause for concern.

I agree with you that I noticed complain of not properly calibrated lenses that needed some work (on the fish eyes if I recall?) but I never heard of anybody that had his Samyang lense working well then halt.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Now Shipping: Rokinon 50mm F1.4	Adam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	02-16-2015 06:20 PM
Electrical contacts on Rokinon 16mm f2 for Pentax??	dcmsox2004	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	11-05-2014 08:47 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Pentax K-30 body, Rokinon 85mm f1.4, JC Penney 135mm f2.8	causey	Sold Items	13	10-01-2014 07:15 AM
For Sale - Sold: Superb Pentax-A SMC 135mm f2.8 PRIME with FREE SHIPPING WORLDWIDE	cheekygeek	Sold Items	11	02-15-2013 01:55 PM
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 - now shipping...	Duh_Vinci	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	42	05-15-2008 09:36 PM

03-28-2015, 07:23 PM	#31
formercanuck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: SoCal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 518	Originally posted by filoxophy Just for an example, look at the B&H listing for the Rokinon 85/1.4. No "A" setting, no aperture lever. But we know that lens has both. I'm just going by Occam's Razor...which is more likely: that Samyang has always made "A"-compatible K-mount lenses and suddenly stopped, or that they copy-and-pasted a photo of the Canon model into the Pentax listing? I say the latter. Yes on the latter. Those posts typically indicate that image is not for a specific mount "Alternative mount shown". I have the Rokinon 85mm f/1.4, and can tell you for certain that it is a PK-A lens.

03-29-2015, 12:02 AM	#32
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by Class A Do you have any numbers to support this statement? When I read responses to Samyang lenses, I typically receive confirmation of my own impression that the lenses are optically excellent, very well built, and a steal for their price. Actually I don't recall anyone reporting issues with a copy. I'm sure it happens, as it does with every lens manufacturer but on the basis of my observations, there is no support for the idea of a "high defect rate“. Lens Rental explain they have much more issues with Samyang than with other lenses and that they can't keep them as long as other brands. Unfortunately this is not that easy to recall. I should have bookmarked it.

03-29-2015, 05:05 AM	#33
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Nicolas06 Lens Rental explain they have much more issues with Samyang than with other lenses and that they can't keep them as long as other brands. The "Lensrentals Repair Data: 2012-2013" appeared to have been modified by LensRentals because they had some classification issue with Rokinon/Bower/Samyang lenses and hence removed the data. Perhaps that's why you cannot find it anymore. I don't know whether the data was pulled because it was misleading due to the classification issue. I do know that I don't see people complaining about problems with Samyang lenses. I also know that while Roger Cicala (from LensRentals) observed the use of some plastic parts and was sceptical about the longevity of a particular model he looked at (Rokinon 14mm f/2.8), he also called it a "bargain" and noted that replacing it with a new copy would be cheaper than having a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 repaired. He also called the lens better than the Nikon 14/2.8. He also notes that if someone babies their lens, it could easily last a lifetime while the LensRentals copies see a lot of stress. I remain unconvinced that there is actually a real cause for concern.

03-29-2015, 07:58 AM	#34
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	The Lensrental blog made reference to Rokinon insisting that, while they may be part of the SamYang 'family', Rokinon maintained different and higher standards of quality under their label, compared to the other arms of the collective (Vivitar, Bower et al, maybe even SamYang themselves). Hence they didn't like his clumping all the SamYang labels together in his presentation of the reliability data. I think the only SamYang lenses that are certifiably dodgy are those 650-1300mm mega zooms of theirs.

03-29-2015, 10:15 AM	#35
khengleong1975 New Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 1	Hello

03-29-2015, 01:54 PM	#36
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by Class A The "Lensrentals Repair Data: 2012-2013" appeared to have been modified by LensRentals because they had some classification issue with Rokinon/Bower/Samyang lenses and hence removed the data. Perhaps that's why you cannot find it anymore. I don't know whether the data was pulled because it was misleading due to the classification issue. I do know that I don't see people complaining about problems with Samyang lenses. I also know that while Roger Cicala (from LensRentals) observed the use of some plastic parts and was sceptical about the longevity of a particular model he looked at (Rokinon 14mm f/2.8), he also called it a "bargain" and noted that replacing it with a new copy would be cheaper than having a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 repaired. He also called the lens better than the Nikon 14/2.8. He also notes that if someone babies their lens, it could easily last a lifetime while the LensRentals copies see a lot of stress. I remain unconvinced that there is actually a real cause for concern. I agree with you that I noticed complain of not properly calibrated lenses that needed some work (on the fish eyes if I recall?) but I never heard of anybody that had his Samyang lense working well then halt.