[MJKoski]

Samyang has over-the-top distortion, insane amount. IRIX has not. Other than that, Samyang is packs more punch wide open IF you get a good copy which is a real lottery. Out of SIX Samyang 14/2.8 copes I have owned one has been good.

IRIX is "weather-sealed" whatever it means. But requires at least front filter to complete the "seal".

[awscreo]

I guess I was lucky, my copy of Rokinon 14 2.8 from Amazon is great. Distortion is very prominent indeed, but lr profile fixes it up quite nicely, although it does crop the image a little bit doing so. Still, used it for interiors and ended up with good results.

[pinholecam]

Is there any sense to change Samyang/Rokinon 14mm /2.8 on this Iris lens? Did anyone compare this two lenses?
Because I have Samyang 14mm for landscape and asto shooting and I like it except next thing: I can't put round filters and take off lens hood, strange mustache distortion.
With Irix 15mm I have opportunity to use filters and rear gel filters, acceptable distortion. Also I like focus ring lock function, infinity click function. But also read that some lenses have bad optical quality with discentered effect. And at /2.8 aperture sharpness in the corner quite soft (Samyang has perfect sharpness all over the frame at /2.8).
So tell me please change Samyang on Irix or not? Thanks!

I have the Samyang 14 and I have friends I shoot with who have the Irix 15.
Personally I think the main difference (if you already have a good copy of the 14/2.8) is the distortion and the other is the external build quality (plus to the Irix).

With the distortion, its a double edged sword imo.
I find that images that have a subject does have a bit more pop to them over a distortion corrected image.
Futhermore, the LR profile does a decent job in most cases and at most that 14mm becomes 15mm after the crop.

For me, I have not changed to an Irix since I feel that the difference is not that big a deal for my needs.

[gazonk]

When Hoya owned Pentax they shared some lens designs like Tamron does now. Unfortunately, that was the end of Tokina K-mount glass. From that point on I don't believe Tokina made a K-mount Tokina lens.

This is very misleading, most of the lenses that were shared Tokina-Pentax designs (some designed by Tokina, some by Pentax) were introduced before Hoya bought Pentax. The SMC DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited (where there's a Tokina lens that's optically so similar that Pentax must have licensed it to them somehow) was introduced after the merger, but I think it was annonced before, so even in that case, it predated Hoya ownership.

[thibs]

1/ all but 12-24 are Pentax optical designs. The 35macro indeed is Pentax design too.

2/ As far as I know, Tokina already stopped developing anything K-mount before that optical designs licensing thing.

[Simen1]

The Irix 15mm f/2,4 cost roughly the double of the Samyang 14mm f/2,8.
There is also another expensive choice: The Venus Laowa 12mm f/2,8 Zero-D costs roughly triple that of the Samyang 14mm f/2,8.

[HankVonHeaven]

The Irix 15mm f/2,4 cost roughly the double of the Samyang 14mm f/2,8.
There is also another expensive choice: The Venus Laowa 12mm f/2,8 Zero-D costs roughly triple that of the Samyang 14mm f/2,8.

It depends where you live. If you live in Finland, options are: Samyang 14mm 365€ and Irix 15mm 429€.

[WPRESTO]

The Irix 15mm f/2,4 cost roughly the double of the Samyang 14mm f/2,8.
There is also another expensive choice: The Venus Laowa 12mm f/2,8 Zero-D costs roughly triple that of the Samyang 14mm f/2,8.

BUT, the Venus is significantly wider than either the Samyang or Irix, and compared to the Samyang, it is nearly distortion-free. Frustratingly, unless you signed up for the crowd sourcing it cannot yet be obtained in K-mount, although in Canikon mount it has been and is readily available.