[Na Horuk]

Well with photography its always been difficult. We know some companies have worked together in the past, or one supplied some glass elements, or one bought a design from another, and so on. So it would be interesting to note exactly if and how much Samyang is involved. Since Samyang already has lens-making capabilities, I would not be surprised if some outsiders would hire them to make a batch of.. well, maybe not whole lenses, but at least some parts. Remains to be seen, I guess.
And yes, the Swiss thing is probably done for marketing reasons. There are quite a few companies in Germany, Switzerland that actually do most of their production outside of Europe, but they get to have the "European quality" thingy in their marketing brochures

[WPRESTO]

A question or thought that perhaps has already been raised on this thread. Is there any reason to think that this lens will be significantly better than the Rokinon-Samyang 14mm FF lens? Both professional reviews and owner evaluations and ratings of the latter indicate it is an excellent WA and much less expensive than the Irix.

[MJKoski]

There is no real evidence of Samyang being the manufacturer. That Hubert was one link, slogan other and then: Irix - Meet the Irix 15mm f/2.4.

"Irix Swiss Design stands for minimalism in style while maintaining maximum functionality. It is a perfect mixture of European design combined with Korean precision."

Korean precision yeaaaaah! How many well-known lens companies are there? Like doing modern stuff right now today. Plus think of that new Samyang premium line lens, 14/2.4. It may share some design but leaves out the filter support for extra coverage.

[Zygonyx]

And what if IRIX would be Samsung Optics' relict ?

[Class A]

How many well-known lens companies are there?

I don't know what lens manufacturers produce in Korea. Do you?

All I'm saying is let's not jump to conclusions and effectively call the people at Irix liars.

Plus think of that new Samyang premium line lens, 14/2.4.

The optical designs of the Samyang Premium 14/2.4 and the Irix 15/2.4 are very different.

[D1N0]

Schneider-Kreuznach who made the lenses for the Samsung NX line also have a subsidiary in Korea.

[MJKoski]

Nobody is calling them liars. Korean precision just hints at some direction.

Optical design differs of course. But if they were designed in collaboration who knows what was the starting concept? Example images from the 15/2.4 look more like Zeiss 15mm Distagon rendering instead of previous Samyang designs like the 14mm/2.8. Samyang just announced that the new premium 14mm lens has new coating. Irix advertises their super-duper Neutrino coating.

The secrecy behind Irix is just weird. Why not announce where they are made? Pana-Leica lenses are well-known in m4/3 and so are Sony-Zeiss lenses. Cosina manufactures some Zeiss lenses and Voigtlanders too.

[Class A]

Nobody is calling them liars.

Well, you asserted that the lens is manufactured by Samyang. Perhaps you are not effectively calling them liars because Irix may not have ever denied that they use Samyang as a manufacturer.

I know that Irix denied being just another label for Samyang but since you did not state "Irix = Samyang" but only that Samyang manufactures Irix lenses you may not be calling them liars. Apologies that I may have overlooked a subtle but important difference.

So, apologies again, I'm not calling you out for effectively stating that Irix are lying; for that I'd have to find a statement by Irix that they are not using Samyang to manufacturer their lenses. Maybe such a statement exists, maybe it doesn't. To me either way is fine.

First of all, I have no issue with Samyang's manufacturing; my personal experience has been great. Second, Irix could be using different QC standards which would address any (supposed) issues Samyang may have. Third, Samyang being a potential manufacturer for Irix started as a rumour and you stated it as fact. Next thing, someone turns that "fact" into the assertion that "Irix" is just another brand label used by Samyang. The latter would not be your fault, but you would have helped to construct that leap, no?

Why not announce where they are made?

They tell you that the lenses are made in Korea. Does it matter by which factory in Korea? Would it provide any extra information?

Some of the cheaper Metz flash models are not made in Germany. I don't think Metz makes a big disclaimer about it either. Does it constitute "secrecy" that should have one worry? As long as the product delivers, its all good isn't it?

N.B., I hope it is clear that I don't want to butt heads with you. You take awesome photos and who am I to argue with a very capable photographer? I just think we should give a new brand a chance and not let rumours and prejudices prevent us from being open-minded.

If it turns out that the Irix lenses aren't any good, I'm the first to say that it should be shouted from the rooftops so that people don't waste their money. But let's judge the product, not a rumoured provenance.

[repaap]

I do hope that proper reviews are coming soon...to steers this conversation back where it is supposed to be.

[geko5766]

Hi,

saw both lenses at PK yesterday. Be assures. Both lenses may absolutely not be compared.

Completely different. The IRIX guys stated that their 15mm is aiming at Astro-photography and landscape. Hence the digits are well readable even in dark and a special attention is to a ultimate performance in infinity.

However, having the lens on the K-1 is a dream. Built like a tank and with a F5.6 it is sharp as hell. But focusing manually with F2.8 need a lot of experience. You have to figure it our and with a short test there, the result was not completely satisfying to me. But this is a user failure and not that of the lens!

I like it, though the Laowa 12mm is much more handy and smaller.... hmm hard choices to be taken

Best
Georg

[MJKoski]

Fair enough, maybe it is not Samyang made, maybe it is. But riding on "European Quality" is total BS and cash ripping.

Geko, what version was there at PK? Blackstone or Firefly or both? Blackstone is particularly interesting because of that rubber ring for WR.

[Interspieder]

The Review is out.

Irix 15 mm f/2.4 Blackstone review - Introduction - LensTip.com

Well, for me the lens is not worth it. I mean, sure, weather sealing, focus lock, etc. are nice gimmicks, but if the optics are that bad in comparison to the Samyang, nope, i'll take the Samyang instead.

[awscreo]

Mm, too bad, I was hoping this lens would be on par with Samyang at least, which would make it a winner due to it's WR. Well, I guess it's never bad to save few hundred bucks on buying a Sammy)

[FantasticMrFox]

Well, for me the lens is not worth it. I mean, sure, weather sealing, focus lock, etc. are nice gimmicks, but if the optics are that bad in comparison to the Samyang, nope, i'll take the Samyang instead.

Did we read the same review?! The review distinctly sounds like a tie - the Irix is equal in resolution, does better on distortion and CA, and worse on coma and vignetting. The build quality and features are much better.

You can, for example, say that you care more about coma and vignetting and would thus prefer the Samyang, but you certainly cannot conclude from this review that the Samyang is optically better than the Irix overall.

[Interspieder]

Did we read the same review?! The review distinctly sounds like a tie - the Irix is equal in resolution, does better on distortion and CA, and worse on coma and vignetting. The build quality and features are much better.

You can, for example, say that you care more about coma and vignetting and would thus prefer the Samyang, but you certainly cannot conclude from this review that the Samyang is optically better than the Irix overall.

Well, i can quote some aspects of the review that led me to my conclusion:

" In the case of that camera the decency level is situated near 30-32 lpmm and top-of-the-range, fixed focal length lenses can get as high as 44-47 lpmm."
" The lens reaches the peak of its performance, which is 45 lpmm, a really high value, near f/5.6."
" [...] it’s worth noticing that result is weaker than the result of the Samyang 14 mmf/2.8 ED AS IF UMC which already at the maximum relative aperture was able to reach a truly brilliant level of 44 lpmm and then exceeded 46 lpmm on stopping down."

So: The Irix is as sharp as the Samyang- when you stop it down to its peak and look at the Samyang wide open. For me, that doesn't mean they are equal in resolution!

Furthermore you can look at the flares, they stay there even when stopped down to F8. The lenshood doesn't help at all. So you can't make any landscape pictures with the sun in it, or the sun at the side of yours.
Also the Irix is not sharp in close focus. The Tester said it was barely possible to find any focus point at close distance.

Sure, the distortion is smaller, CA aren't that much of a problem, but those are things which can be easily corrected afterwards.

And sure, Irix features are much better, but i said if you compare only the optics of the Samyang to the Irix, the Samyang wins.