Rokinon 16mm T2.2 Cine Lens – Dissapointed. (+test footage)

Are you using a focal reducer (speed booster)?

look at the bargain priced Meike cine lenses for the BMPCC4K
Rokinon are known to have ca and are soft on the edges when wide open

If your shooting wide open at T2.2 you gonna have a shallow depth of field. The edges aren't gonna be sharp, they're gonna be blurred.

Did you say you want to get more professional and buying a rokinon lens? LMAO RIIIGGHHTTT... all the pros are using it. Come on man. Also if you are shooting landscape at t2.2 that is your mistake... when you do depth you need a smaller aperture... its basic man.

The Meike Cinema lenses are dope

A lot of lenses have better centre sharpness and the edges get sharper when stopped down. Wide open apertures are not generally used for landscapes did you try stopping it down?

Did you look at your backfocus? Definitely if it's only one side, that's where my mind is going

i think you should work on some post production techniques to correct the softness/enhance the look, before getting yourself disappointed on a brand. Different brands have different characteristics to its lenses. have you seen anamorphic lenses yet? they have similar softness on the corners, minor barrel distortion and sometimes, slight chromatic aberration for depth. some people love that , if you want sharpness go for sigma art lenses

I have terrible vignette with my rokinon 16mm 2.2T on my 6d mark ii which I dont understand why because when I put other lenses it doesnt do that

Okay well a couple of things

1) You don’t generally want to shoot landscape on a 16mm lens, they’re for close up shots of your subject.

2) You’re using a speed booster which gives you chromatic aberration

3) The distortion on the canon sensor is how it’s intended to look

You’re just using the lens completely wrong

Well, those issues come up from sb, not from the lens itself. Anyway, blurred edge and chromatic aberration make the imagery way more cinematic I like this sense. Tho it's optically degradation, 35mm and 16mm film has it too.

I've had no issues with any of my rokinon lens 16, 35 and 85. They all have performed good.

This isn't a full frame lens.. It's a crop/ apsc lens.. I've owned 2 of these and what issues you're talking about hasn't been noticed by me, or anyone else I shoot with who either owns or has used mine..

don't shoot landscape wide open. you shouldn't see any burring if you stop down to F5.6 or something

I have the 16 and 85mm’s but with no adapters, don’t have any of these issues.

When you put a mounting adapter on a lens you change geometry of the optics somewhat. Iris also affects DOF. BTW, shallow DOF seems overused in student and indie projects. It's like they're trying to prove that they know what DOF is so they push it to the extreme.

It does sound like this lens did not meet your needs, so that's fair. I just think there's other things to consider in evaluating this lens.

One thing to consider about using full frame lenses adapted straight onto a Micro 4/3 sensor camera: the 2X crop factor means you are essentially blowing the lens's image up to 200%, and THEN capturing that with every pixel of the image sensor.

Let's say on a full frame camera, a detail 1 pixel wide smears out to a blur that is 3 or 4px wide. With the same sensor resolution with a smaller sensor with 2X crop, the same blurry spot will instead be 6-8px wide. Resolution aside, any errors in a full frame lens in any given point on the image will perceptually be more exaggerated on a 2X crop sensor. You're effectively spreading half the resolving power of the lens over the full area of your sensor, rather than taking advantage of all the resolving power. I would suggest using a good speedbooster to shrink the full frame image (and thus, shrink all the lens imperfections) to fit the smaller sensor. That might still not be super sharp, especially with the errors introduced by the speedbooster itself, but it could certainly help.

That being said, I have never had high expectations for Rokinon primes. They certainly get the job done for a fraction of the cost of other primes... but they are not known for their sharpness wide open, and while a 16mm MFT lens is not that wide, a 16mm full frame lens has to do a LOT of work to get such a wide field of view while minimizing barrel/pincushion distortion AND maintain such a fast aperture.

lol. show us that landscape set to at least 5.6 and i'll believe you ;) shooting landscapes wide open is not the way to go and thats pretty common knowledge. upskill bruh! <3

Don't expect to get a sharp image for landscape at such a low f stop. You need to increase to to f5.6 or higher. Looks to work pretty well when used in adequate settings.

This probably has everything to do with your speed booster being poorly calibrated.

Metabones speedbooster = sharper on the edges while wide open. Viltrox speedbooster = added blur on the edges.

😆😆😆😆

I have the 35 and I love it, but I have an F mount. Someone mentioned that the adapter could change how the footage looks, makes sense. But the b roll you showed at the end honestly didn’t look bad to me.

Are/were you a SDSU student?

SHAKY SHAKY SHAKY

Just stop down next time man.

This kid still struggling.

So maybe this Lens is best mounted directly on the Camera without an Adapter and aim to shoot at a slightly higher F-Stop if your prefer Sharpness. Otherwise accept that a Wider Aperture setting forgoes the Sharper image gained from a Higher F-Stop. And shoot great content, so your viewers aren't noticing the Sharpness of your Lens.

Obbiettivo 16mm, è un'obbiettivo interni?

Ignorance is not bliss in your case

I DONT NO IF ITS JUST MY LEN BUT I HAVE THAT LENS AND IT IS NOT A ZOOM LENS SO HOW ARE YOU ZOOMING WITH THIS LENS

It’s a shallow depth of field that’s why 🙂