Yes or no? (Page 2): No Autofocus, No IS or VR. Comments I've read hear about the brand, not this exact model, but brand of lens.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Peterff wrote:

Given that this Samyang (Rokinon et al) lens has some pretty good reviews, what makes you think that it is junk?

No Autofocus, No IS or VR.
Comments I've read hear about the brand, not this exact model, but brand of lens.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

jeep_daddy wrote:

No Autofocus, No IS or VR.
Comments I've read hear about the brand, not this exact model, but brand of lens.

Yes, it is a manual focus lens, with no stabilization, but at 14mm that isn't a big deal. The Samyang optics are pretty good, and for the price excellent value.

I have the Samyang 8mm fisheye ( designed for APS-C ) and am very pleased with it, especially for the price.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/859173-REG/Samyang_SY14MAE_N_14mm_f_2_8_Super_Wide.html

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Chicopee wrote:

I am considering purchasing a Roknon 14 mm F2.8 le... (show quote)

A couple of years ago, I took a night sky course, and a camera that shoots raw was a requirement.

Hsch39 Loc: Northbrook, Illinois

I own the 14mm 2.8 Rokinon lens and I'm happy with it. . It's a manual lens on the Canon. Focusing is a little tricky. For night sky photography I prefocused infinity during the day and put a mark on the lens. Don't rely on the infinity mark on the lens. I will be using it in April on a Death Valley trip.

Algernon Loc: Milwaukee, Wisconsin

I own the Rokinon 12mm, and it is a wonderful lens. Very sharp. I use it on my Sony A6300.

Personally, I avoid the term Astrophotograpy for taking pictures of the night sky with a wide angle lens. Astrophotography, to me at least, implies taking shots of galaxies and nebulae using powerful telescopes. But it is clear from your question that you are talking about night sky photography.

PS -- I shoot RAW. Manual focus is best for night sky shooting anyway. Use a good tripod.

cthahn

It depends what you a re trying to take a photograph of. Astrophotography is the hardest because of low light and distance. The moon is the easiest as it is close with plenty of light . You need a long lens, 300mm or longer and a 2X extender to get a good moon shot. You can take star trails with a 50mm or less. Practice with what lenses you have. Read articles on the subject on the internet. Don't waste money until you try a few night of shooting.

Chicopee Loc: NY State, USA

Algernon wrote:

I own the Rokinon 12mm, and it is a wonderful lens. Very sharp. I use it on my Sony A6300.

Personally, I avoid the term Astrophotograpy for taking pictures of the night sky with a wide angle lens. Astrophotography, to me at least, implies taking shots of galaxies and nebulae using powerful telescopes. But it is clear from your question that you are talking about night sky photography.

PS -- I shoot RAW. Manual focus is best for night sky shooting anyway. Use a good tripod.

Ah yes, it would be night sky photography! I agree the term 'astrophotography' is a tad over the top for what I'd like to try. Agree w/ you. Thanks for feed back.

Chicopee Loc: NY State, USA

cthahn wrote:

It depends what you a re trying to take a photograph of. Astrophotography is the hardest because of low light and distance. The moon is the easiest as it is close with plenty of light . You need a long lens, 300mm or longer and a 2X extender to get a good moon shot. You can take star trails with a 50mm or less. Practice with what lenses you have. Read articles on the subject on the internet. Don't waste money until you try a few night of shooting.

Thanks for suggestion. I do have a 50mm 1.4 that I used on my film camera, but now have adopted it to my MFT olympus and Pana. I will do that first.......

Chicopee Loc: NY State, USA

Hsch39 wrote:

I own the 14mm 2.8 Rokinon lens and I'm happy with it. . It's a manual lens on the Canon. Focusing is a little tricky. For night sky photography I prefocused infinity during the day and put a mark on the lens. Don't rely on the infinity mark on the lens. I will be using it in April on a Death Valley trip.

Thanks for your reply.......sounds like quite a trip planned....Hope you'll share some of those photos taken w/ your '12'! I too would be putting it on a Canon....good advice.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Chicopee wrote:

....I will look into the Adobe Camera Raw editing program....no doubt its a part of Photo shop....I use Photo Elements 11.....

Adobe Camera Raw is built into Elements, Lightroom and Photoshop. ACR is not offered or sold separately.

You already have an older version of ACR in Elements 11.

$70 for Elements 15 might be a good upgrade, for a lot more than just the newer version of ACR.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Chicopee wrote:

I am considering purchasing a Roknon 14 mm F2.8 le... (show quote)

It is certainly possible to get a good shot with a jpeg, just as with a raw, but if you want to get your feet wet in raw, this would be a good opportunity, as noise removal be likely one of the works done in pp!

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

amfoto1 wrote:

Adobe Camera Raw is built into Elements, Lightroom and Photoshop. ACR is not offered or sold separately.

You already have an older version of ACR in Elements 11.

$70 for Elements 15 might be a good upgrade, for a lot more than just the newer version of ACR.

Consider that ACR in PSE is a very crippled/limited version of the software!!

Chicopee Loc: NY State, USA

jerryc41 wrote:

A couple of years ago, I took a night sky course, and a camera that shoots raw was a requirement.

I'm sure it would be an interesting course. I'm sure I would not make raw shooting my primary mode, but I certainly would like a better understanding of it.....Thanks for reply.

Chicopee Loc: NY State, USA

amfoto1 wrote:

Adobe Camera Raw is built into Elements, Lightroom and Photoshop. ACR is not offered or sold separately.

You already have an older version of ACR in Elements 11.

$70 for Elements 15 might be a good upgrade, for a lot more than just the newer version of ACR.

Yes, I really should consider that. As it was, I used Photo Elements 2 for many yrs....then finally upgraded to 11.....quite a span of yrs between. I will look into the version 15....or perhaps the 14 would be cheaper.

Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.

Chicopee wrote:

Yes, I really should consider that. As it was, I used Photo Elements 2 for many yrs....then finally upgraded to 11.....quite a span of yrs between. I will look into the version 15....or perhaps the 14 would be cheaper.

Cheaper might compromise your quality. You may be on a limited budget, but there is such a thing as false economy....