Massive Flood Of New Lenses From Rokinon, Gives A Strong Push For Cine Mirrorless Lenses

Mar 21, 2014

Udi Tirosh

If you’ve been reading this blog for a while you know how much we fancy the Rokinon (US) or Samyang (rest of world) line of lenses. Having a strong focus on prime Rokinon lenses deliver some great quality at affordable price.

Now Rokinon announces a flood of new lenses and an update of mounts for existing lenses with a strong focus on mirrorless and MFT cameras.

Here is a short summary of types, speeds and focal lengthes, for the full breakdown hit the jump:

Mirrorles: 10mm f/2.8, 12mm f/2.0, 8mm f/2.8 Fish-Eye, 8mm T3.1 Cine Fish-Eye

MFT (added mounts): 35mm f/1.4, 24mm f/1.4, 8mm f/3.5 Fish-Eye, 8mm T3.8 Cine Fish-Eye, 14mm T3.1 Cine, 24mm T1.5 Cine, 35mm T1.5 Cine, 85mm T1.5 Cine

DSLR: 8mm T3.1 Cine Fish-Eye

Rokinon is rally doing a big push with new lenses and updates to old lenses and putting a pretty strong focus on mirrorles and MFT lenses, while can indicate where (at least Rokinon) thinks the photography market is heading. of all the new lenses only one lens is a “classic” APC DSLR cameras.

Here is the full breakdown:

8mm f/2.8 UMC Fish-Eye II ($349)

This is an upgrade to an already existing lens.

Aperture Range: f/2.8 to f/22
12.8mm (35mm Equivalent)
Designed for APS-C Sized Sensors
Fisheye Design, 180° Angle of View

10mm f/2.8 ED AS NCS CS ($529)

This is the only APC lenses announced in this wave.

Aperture Range: f/2.8 to f/22
15mm (35mm Equivalent)
minimum focus distance of 7.9″

12mm f/2.0 NCS CS ($399)

Aperture Range: f/2.0 to f/22
19.2mm (35mm Equivalent)
minimum focus distance of 7.9″

8mm T3.1 Cine UMC Fish-Eye II ($399)

Aperture Range: T3.1 to T22
12.8mm (35mm Equivalent)
Fisheye Design, 180° Angle of View
Geared Focus and Aperture Control Rings
De-Clicked Aperture Ring
Built-In Lens Hood

Mount Updates For Existing Lenses

Aside from the new lenses, there are some new mounts for older (and newer lenses). The table below sums it up:

Photo Lenses
	10mm f/2.8 ED AS NCS CS Lens	12mm f/2.0 NCS CS Lens		8mm f/2.8 UMC Fish-Eye II
Mount Types	Canon EF, Nikon F, Pentax K, Sony A, Canon M, Fujifilm X, Samsung NX, Sony E, Micro Four Thirds	Canon M, Fujifilm X, Samsung NX, Sony E, Micro Four Thirds		Canon M, Fujifilm X, Samsung NX, Sony E
Photo Lenses for Sony E and MFT Cameras
	35mm f/1.4 AS UMC	24mm f/1.4 ED AS IF UMC		8mm f/3.5 UMC Fish-Eye CS II
Mount Types	Sony E, Micro Four Thirds	Sony E, Micro Four Thirds		Micro Four Thirds
8mm T3.1 Cine UMC Fish-Eye II Lens
Mount Types	Canon M, Fujifilm X, Samsung NX, Sony E
Cine Lenses for Micro Four Thirds Mount
	8mm T3.8 Cine UMC Fish-Eye CS II	14mm T3.1 Cine ED AS IF UMC	24mm T1.5 Cine ED AS IF UMC	35mm T1.5 Cine AS UMC	85mm T1.5 Cine AS IF UMC
Mount Type	Micro Four Thirds	Micro Four Thirds	Micro Four Thirds	Micro Four Thirds	Micro Four Thirds

Filed Under:

Gear

Tagged With:

Udi Tirosh

Udi Tirosh is an entrepreneur, photography inventor, journalist, educator, and writer based in Israel. With over 25 years of experience in the photo-video industry, Udi has built and sold several photography-related brands. Udi has a double degree in mass media communications and computer science.

Join the Discussion

DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.

11 responses to “Massive Flood Of New Lenses From Rokinon, Gives A Strong Push For Cine Mirrorless Lenses”

Craigc

Mar 22, 2014

Are you kidding me!! Still no 50mm? How can you say your a supplier of primes if you don’t have a 50 mm n the lineup? So we just shoot 35mm and 85mm all day?

Reply
1. jakecarvey
  
  Mar 22, 2014
  
  with crop sensors 50mm is not 50mm – so it’s a bit of a moot point
  
  Reply
  1. Junior
    
    Mar 22, 2014
    
    This isn’t true. I shoot Rokinon glass on my Scarlet-X, and having a S35mm sensor – I’d love to see the gap filled between the 35mm and the 85mm. For now I have a second hand lens that doesn’t have the same characteristics as the Rokinon glass.
    
    Reply
    1. jakecarvey
      
      Mar 22, 2014
      
      fair enough – I made the assumption you were talking about cropped sensors, as the majority of lenses on this list are designed for crop
      
      Reply
  2. bbutrick
    
    Mar 25, 2014
    
    50mm is NOT a moot point! It’s an essential part of the series. I don’t need more wide lenses, I need the middle of the set. 50mm cine lens please!
    
    Reply
2. Jayson Carey
  
  Mar 25, 2014
  
  Canon and Nikon both have very cheap 50mm lenses that they would be competing with directly. I believe I heard a statement from Rokinon that said they were working on one, but that it wasn’t their biggest priority at the moment.
  
  Reply
Michael

Mar 23, 2014

The link and price for the fisheye are wrong. The link provided is for the 10mm. The price should be $349 and the link should be http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1039943-REG/rokinon_rk8mbk28_m_8mm_f_2_8_umc_fish_eye.html

Reply
1. udi tirosh
  
  Mar 23, 2014
  
  too many lenses indeed :) thanks
  
  Reply
jakecarvey

Mar 25, 2014

Let me put this another way:

What lenses would be most desirable to create a basic complement of primes for *EACH* of the main sensor sizes:

1. M 4/3 (GH2 / 3 / 4, Blackmagic)
2. APS-C (Canon T3i, 60D, 7D, Nikon D7000)
3. Full Frame (Canon 5D mkIII, Nikon D800)

Reply
1. jakecarvey
  
  Mar 25, 2014
  
  e.g. for Full Frame sensor, we obviously want (approx.)
  
  1. 24mm
  2. 50mm
  3. 85mm
  4. 105mm
  
  and, maybe a 14mm for special cases
  
  Would this handle most of the day-to-day cinematic needs? And if so, we can literally just extrapolate the lenses needed for the other sensor sizes based on this list
  
  Reply
  1. jakecarvey
    
    Mar 25, 2014
    
    based on this list – M 4/3 is pretty much covered from 14 – 85mm, resulting in effective focal lengths of (approx):
    
    28mm, 48mm, 70mm, 170mm
    
    so the telephoto is a bit long, and the wide angle not quite wide enough – but reasonable enough range to make a film, considering the smaller sensor is going to create a fairly distinct look anyway
    
    Reply