Up next in 10
LK Samyang AF 16mm F2.8 Prima Review | Does this Lens Make Sense?
86 views
Jul 24, 2025
FINAL PRICE IS $399 USD! Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a deep dive review of the LK Samyang AF 16mm F2.8 P FE. Is the new direction of the Prima series a good one? | Read the Text Review: | Purchase the LK Samyang 16mm F2.8 P @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/445fKYP | Adorama https://howl.link/rduekthjbuino | Amazon https://amzn.to/45z2w8L | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/3HkY6Zg | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/4jGVaDE | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/3SHwQXg Check out the DA Merch here: https://bit.ly/TWIMerch | Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/dustinabbott | On the Web: http://dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: http://bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: http://bit.ly/DLAinsta | Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1nuUUeH | Flickr: http://bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: http://bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu Follow Craig @ https://www.instagram.com/craigstoffersen/ Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at: B&H Photo: http://bhpho.to/1TA0Xge Adorama: https://howl.link/nt4zdz1goa7ql Camera Canada: http://bit.ly/DLACameraCan Sony Canada: https://www.thesonyshop.ca/?ref=abbott Amazon: https://amzn.to/3HrY64d Amazon Canada: https://amzn.to/3qG1p18 Ebay: http://bit.ly/DustineBay Into the AM Clothing: https://bit.ly/intotheAMda and use code DUSTIN10 for 10% off Fioboc Clothing: https://tinyurl.com/FiobocDA20 and us code DUSTIN20 for 20% off Make a donation via Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/dustinTWI ============================= Table of Contents: ============================= 0:00 - Intro
View Video Transcript
0:00
[Music]
0:10
Hi, I'm Dustin Abbott. Samyang has had
0:13
an interesting few years where they were
0:17
largely off my radar for a lot of
0:19
reasons because they were releasing
0:21
fewer products and also I had lost
0:23
contact with the company and didn't
0:25
really have anyone to set me up with
0:28
loaners and an opportunity to review
0:30
their most recent lenses. Fortunately,
0:32
that has changed here in 2025. And
0:34
recently, I gave you a review of the
0:37
first collaboration between Schneider
0:40
and LK Samyang, as they're now called,
0:42
of the 14 to 24mm f/2.8 wide-angle zoom,
0:46
a lens that I actually really like. LK
0:49
Samyang is continuing to produce
0:51
products on their own, however, outside
0:53
of that partnership with Schneider. And
0:55
today I'm looking at the first of a
0:57
couple of those lenses that are
0:59
releasing here in 2025 that are coming
1:01
just from LK Samyang. That does raise a
1:04
little bit of a confusing point,
1:06
however, because LK Samyang already
1:09
released during that time where I was
1:11
disconnected from the company, they
1:12
released what was essentially a series 2
1:15
version of their 35mm f1.4. They put it
1:18
under a new lens design or a new series
1:22
designation called Prima at that point.
1:24
Prima being Latin for first or premiere.
1:28
And so they released that lens which
1:30
seemed to be a new take on their
1:33
full-frame f1.4 type lenses. So this
1:38
year they're back with a couple of new
1:39
Prima lenses including this one, the
1:42
16mm f2.8 along with an 85mm f1.8, both
1:46
of which I'll be using as a part of
1:48
filming this review here today. These
1:51
lenses are much more like their tiny
1:53
series or their VAF series. Though
1:56
they're not video ccentric and so they
1:58
are more compact. They obviously have
2:00
smaller maximum apertures. They really
2:02
don't have much in common with the 35mm
2:05
f1.4. So is this the new direction for
2:08
the Prima series? I guess we're going to
2:10
find out. This lens is interesting,
2:12
however, and while some people have
2:14
written it off because it has an f2.8
2:16
rather than an f1.8 8 maximum aperture.
2:18
I think this lens is going to make a lot
2:20
of sense for a lot of people. We'll dive
2:22
into it in today's review. Now, in full
2:25
disclosure, this lens was sent to me
2:26
from LK Samyang for testing. They have
2:29
had no input in the review itself, nor
2:32
have they seen it before. You are seeing
2:34
it today. This is a completely
2:36
independent review as always. So, let's
2:39
talk build and handling. I'm actually
2:40
using the 85mm f1.8 prima lens to film
2:44
this particular section. So, the price
2:47
comes in at $475.
2:50
Now, I give you that with an asterisk as
2:52
the final price has not been announced,
2:53
but that is the ballpark. Right under
2:55
$500 is where it will come. The lens
2:58
itself, as you can see, is very nice and
3:00
compact. And so, it does slot in nicely.
3:03
Very slightly larger than the tiny
3:05
series. About similar in length to the
3:08
VAF series, though narrower in diameter.
3:11
This is a great size of lens and it
3:12
means it's going to be a nice pairing
3:14
for uh bodies like Sony's A7C series and
3:18
obviously on other bodies. It fits in
3:20
there nice and lightweight. The lens is
3:23
69.8 mm or 2.75 in in diameter and just
3:28
a hair longer 70.5 mm or 2.77 in. So
3:32
really nice and compact. It is it weighs
3:35
only 207 g or 7.3 o. So, this is a lens
3:39
that is very easily to bring along if
3:41
you're backpacking, hiking, uh things
3:44
like that or traveling uh abroad and you
3:46
have weight restrictions on your
3:47
luggage. This is the kind of lens that
3:49
you're looking for because you can bring
3:51
it along without too much of a weight
3:53
penalty. Has a front filter thread of 62
3:56
mm, which is shared across a number of
3:59
other lenses. And by the way, the 85mm
4:02
uh f1.8 prima does share that 62mm as
4:05
well. Now, it's actually made of a new
4:08
material. The original Tiny series, uh,
4:11
it did have a plastic exterior, but it
4:13
was really cheap plastics, would flex
4:15
under your fingers. Um, it had kind of a
4:18
glossy finish that, you know, at this
4:20
stage maybe looks a little bit dated.
4:22
They have a whole new engineered
4:24
plastics that they have developed that
4:25
frankly feels a lot like the tough,
4:28
durable plastics that are being used in
4:30
like the Viltrox Air series. That is not
4:33
a negative. That's certainly a positive.
4:35
This is very fingerprint resistant. It
4:37
does feel tough and yes, it is a
4:39
plastic, but this does feel like a lens
4:41
that probably could survive some bumps
4:43
and maybe even some falls. And so, I
4:45
appreciate that they have a different
4:48
and unique diamond style pattern uh
4:51
knurled finish to the actual focus ring.
4:53
I like this. It's different from uh
4:56
their other lenses and it's different
4:58
from lenses generally. And so it kind of
5:00
reminds me maybe most of like the
5:02
control ring on Canon RF lenses. It's a
5:05
look that I like and I think that it
5:07
works here. The lens isn't particularly
5:09
fancy. It's a fairly straightforward
5:12
lens in terms of its overall appearance,
5:14
but that does set it apart as being just
5:16
a little bit different than uh other
5:18
opposing lenses. The manual focus ring
5:20
has nice damping. It's a little bit on
5:23
the light side. I would like it maybe a
5:25
hair heavier, but it's very consistent.
5:27
Uh it does a the focus motor is
5:29
responsive so you get a nice manual
5:31
focus simulation. There's about 135
5:34
degrees of focus throw and it feels
5:36
fairly linear in operation. I don't know
5:38
if it's perfectly linear but it seems
5:40
that I can do fairly repeatable uh focus
5:43
pulls at this point. On the side of the
5:45
lens we do have an AFMF switch which is
5:48
always welcome and that switch operates
5:50
with good precision. Has a definite feel
5:52
to it. Manufacturing seems good on this
5:55
lens. They have also taken another cue
5:58
from Viltrox and that is that there's
6:00
now a USB C port in the lens mount.
6:03
That's a great step for them because in
6:05
times past you had to buy a separate
6:07
dock, the Samyang lens station to do
6:09
firmware updates or any kind of
6:11
customization of lenses. And so the
6:13
ability to just do a direct USBC
6:16
connection is great. And to me, that
6:19
place on the actual lens mount makes the
6:21
most sense because then you don't have
6:22
any kind of issues with weather sealing
6:24
because it's always in a sealed position
6:26
up against the body itself. Speaking of
6:29
weather sealing, the lens not only has a
6:31
gasket at the rear mount, it has three
6:32
other internal points up near the front,
6:35
at the ring, and at the switch there on
6:37
the side. And so, while it's not the
6:39
most complex weather sealing that I've
6:41
seen before, it seems capable and able
6:44
to get the job done. and they have
6:46
tested it up to an IP5 rating I believe
6:49
that I I read in some of their
6:51
literature and so certainly some
6:53
positives there at least when it comes
6:54
to dust intrusion and some moisture
6:57
resistance as well. It does come with a
6:59
nicely made lens hood and again this is
7:01
an a definite improvement over the tiny
7:03
series. The plastics definitely feel
7:05
more upscale and what's more it bayonets
7:08
on with just a greater precision. It
7:11
locks in in a very definite way. I would
7:14
say that the manufacturing has taken a
7:16
step forward for Samyang over the last
7:18
few years. This is definitely a step in
7:20
the right direction. Now, as noted, one
7:22
of the advertised strengths of the lens
7:24
is its ability to focus very closely and
7:26
thus give you a high level of
7:28
magnification. And you certainly can
7:30
focus very closely, as closely as 12 cm.
7:33
Only problem with that is that if I
7:35
measure from the sensor to the front of
7:37
the lens hood, it's about 11
7:39
centimeters, leaving you just one
7:41
centimeter of working distance, making
7:43
it very easy to shade your subject.
7:45
You're probably going to always want to
7:46
remove the lens hood when you're
7:48
shooting an uplose subject so you can
7:50
allow a little bit more light to reach
7:51
to it. However, if you can achieve that
7:54
optimal situation, you can get
7:56
magnification on full frame of 0.33
7:59
times. you switch into APS-C and that
8:02
will jump up to 0.5 times or a 1 to2
8:05
macro level. That certainly adds to the
8:08
versatility of the lens and is just an
8:10
extra bonus there. The aperture blade
8:13
here has seven aperture blades that will
8:16
produce a 14b bladed sunstar if you're
8:19
in the kind of conditions when you're
8:21
stopping down to achieve that. Sunstar
8:23
looks okay. It gets increasingly better
8:25
as you stop the lens down. And so if
8:27
that's a priority to you, go f11, f-16,
8:30
even f-22, and you will get increasingly
8:32
more definite sun stars out of the lens
8:35
itself. I like the package. I think it's
8:37
uh it's nothing particularly fancy in
8:39
terms of the look, but it's a nice clean
8:41
design that does look a little bit more
8:44
upscale than something like the Viltrox
8:46
Air series, and it should with the price
8:48
point. It also has weather sealing,
8:50
which the Air series does not, but it
8:53
still is very compact and lightweight.
8:54
This is a lens that's going to be easy
8:56
to bring along. I applaud that that
8:59
design decision. So, let's talk
9:01
autofocus. I'm filming on the lens right
9:03
now just you have a sense of the general
9:05
rendering for a situation like this. LK
9:08
Samyang has equipped this lens with a
9:10
linear focus motor and as you can see
9:12
from my formal test here, focus is very,
9:15
very quick, very near instant in making
9:18
ordinary focus changes. Whether that's
9:19
indoors or outdoors, I've never really
9:22
noticed any kind of slowdown in any
9:24
situation that I shot in, but always
9:26
found autofocus to consistently be very
9:29
fast. And fortunately, it's also very
9:31
accurate. Now, that because of the close
9:33
focus abilities of the lens has to
9:34
include uh accurate focus at very close
9:37
focus distances, and I was able to
9:40
achieve that as well. And so the
9:42
combination, for example, this shot
9:44
shooting up towards ivy, you can see a
9:46
little bit of a preview how sharp and
9:48
how high contrast the lens is. Or in
9:51
this shot of a wild flower, you can see
9:53
even at close focus distances just how
9:55
well focus is nailed. And so I didn't
9:59
notice any kind of issue with focus for
10:01
stills at all. The focus speed was good.
10:04
The focus motor is very quiet. I could
10:06
feel a little bit of not really
10:09
vibration, but just could feel on my
10:11
hands a little bit when I was doing the
10:12
formal test the thrust back and forth.
10:14
And so maybe it's not perfectly damped,
10:17
but overall focus performance for stills
10:19
was really quite fantastic. Video
10:22
autofocus was also quite good, though
10:25
one minor exception that I'll point out
10:27
here in terms of doing my focus test
10:30
where I do pulls back and forth. You can
10:32
see that that happens very smoothly. It
10:35
happens quickly. It's well damped. No
10:37
issues there. But what I did notice is
10:40
that while focus breathing is low, when
10:42
I was doing my test for it, I noticed
10:44
that there's some pretty obvious warping
10:46
in the corners. Now, that could be due
10:47
to the correction profile that is trying
10:50
to correct for that. But certainly, it
10:52
is something to watch out for that if
10:54
you're doing a major focus change and
10:55
you do have uh corrections on for
10:58
distortion, you may see some of that
11:00
warping effect. What I did find on the
11:03
positive note is that if you're not
11:04
doing a major focus, you know, change
11:06
back and forth, corrections were working
11:08
well and giving me nice straight lines.
11:10
Whereas the lens does have a significant
11:12
amount of barrel distortion, as we'll
11:13
see in a moment, the correction profile
11:15
is doing a good job of correcting for
11:17
that. Now, when it comes to my hand
11:19
test, no issues there. Good transitions
11:21
from the hand to the eye and back and
11:23
forth. And then I also found whether I
11:25
was shooting static shots, I was able to
11:28
get good stable performance. And then in
11:30
other situations where I was trying to
11:32
create natural focus changes, moving
11:34
from one subject to another, I felt that
11:37
overall it was good. It maybe wasn't
11:39
quite as reactive as what I would like
11:41
in every one of those situations, but
11:43
it's also well damped and so there's
11:45
nothing that's kind of jarring or pulls
11:47
you out of the shot. In general, this is
11:48
a lens I think that would work well on a
11:50
gimbal, would work well for vlogging and
11:53
things like that. It's got a great focal
11:54
length, and it's good got good autofocus
11:56
for video performance. So, let's talk
11:58
about image quality. The optical design
12:01
here is eight elements in seven groups.
12:03
So, those of you that prefer simpler
12:05
optical designs, this one's for you. One
12:08
HR or high refractive index element,
12:11
three extra low dispersion elements, one
12:13
aspherical element in the design. And
12:15
so, if you're counting at that point,
12:16
that's five out of the eight elements
12:18
that are exotic elements, leaving only
12:20
three ordinary elements behind. So, that
12:22
helps to achieve a pretty strong
12:24
performance. The MTF shows a very sharp
12:28
center, a very sharp mid-frame, but
12:30
shows some drop in the corners. They
12:33
also show an MTF at f8. And basically
12:35
what it shows is that the corners are
12:37
sharper, but there is some stigmatism,
12:39
some separation between the sagittal and
12:42
meridional uh planes, but it does show
12:45
that definitely the corners are going to
12:46
sharpen up as you stop the lens down.
12:49
Now, I will do a deep dive into the
12:50
optical performance at the end of the
12:52
video if you want more of that. But
12:53
here's where how some of the other
12:55
details shake out. The greatest optical
12:57
weakness of this lens is it does have
12:59
very heavy barrel distortion. It
13:02
requires a plus 33 for correction. And
13:04
as you can see with a manual correction,
13:06
it leaves quite a mustache pattern
13:08
behind. So you're going to want to use a
13:10
profile correction. Fortunately, as you
13:13
can see here, if we compare the JPEG
13:15
showing the actual profile corrections,
13:17
it straightens those lines up really
13:18
nicely. So that's going to apply to
13:20
JPEGs and videos. Raw files are going to
13:22
have to use an actual software
13:24
correction profile. Vignette is also
13:27
heavy. It's at plus 76. So that's a lot.
13:30
It's not the worst that I've seen in a
13:31
wide angle lens, but you're definitely
13:33
going to need to correct that. And it
13:35
tends to be quite concentrated in the
13:37
very corners. And so again, it's not a
13:39
particularly linear type vignette. And
13:41
so you'll you'll see it is just kind of
13:43
some dark spots in the corner. And so
13:45
you're probably going to want to correct
13:46
that. Now, when it comes to the
13:48
distortion, the Sony uh 16 millimeter is
13:51
f1.8G is just about as bad. And so, it's
13:54
not like the options out there are
13:56
necessarily better. The Viltrox does
13:58
have less distortion. However, it is a
14:00
much larger lens. And so, in these
14:02
compact lenses, it seems like barrel
14:03
distortion is kind of the price you pay
14:06
for entry to getting such a compact
14:07
lens. It does get worse, however. When I
14:10
reviewed the Canon RF 16mm f2.8, 8. It
14:14
required a plus 70 to correct for the
14:17
barrel distortion. It was nearly a
14:19
fisheye lens before correction. And so,
14:22
fortunately, this isn't nearly as bad. I
14:25
did see low amounts of fringing. And so,
14:28
I didn't see a lot of longitudinal style
14:30
chromatic aberration before and after
14:31
the plane of focus. And fortunately, I
14:33
didn't see a lot of actual lateral style
14:36
chromatic aberration either on my test
14:38
chart or out in real world results,
14:41
which is what matters the most,
14:42
obviously. So, that allows the corners
14:44
to have a little bit more pop to it. As
14:47
I looked uh using a 61 megapixel sensor,
14:50
the A7R Mark 5, and looking at 200%
14:52
magnification, I found that the center
14:54
looks fantastic from f/2.8 on. The
14:57
mid-frame looks great from f/2.8 on. The
15:01
corners are a little bit softer, but not
15:04
terrible. The biggest thing there is
15:05
that they are a bit dark due to
15:07
vignette. As you stop the lens down, you
15:10
will see that corner performance gets
15:11
increasingly better. By f8, I found that
15:14
corner sharpness kind of peaks. But what
15:17
I found in real world shots is that even
15:19
at f5.6, six, for example, which tends
15:22
to be my preferred aperture for shooting
15:24
landscapes. I found that I just had like
15:27
basically razor sharp images from corner
15:29
to corner. I also saw good centering.
15:32
It's very consistent all across the
15:33
frame. It's able to achieve outstanding
15:36
levels even on an ultra high resolution
15:38
camera. You will see defraction start to
15:40
show up by f11. It gets worse at f-16
15:43
and then we're still at f-22, which is
15:45
the minimum aperture. Contrast really
15:48
stands out as being fantastic on this
15:50
lens. Images have a lot of pop to them
15:53
and color saturation is very nice. I
15:55
also had good results generally with
15:57
flare resistance and I found that in
16:00
real world situations shooting that I
16:02
saw very very little actual flare impact
16:05
and so that was great. Bokeh quality is
16:09
generally okay. However, you will see
16:11
some outlining, which means that things
16:13
that fall into the transition zone are
16:16
going to see a little bit jittery or
16:18
nervous. They're going to stand out a
16:19
bit more. Frankly, you don't buy lenses
16:22
like this for the bokeh performance.
16:24
Unfortunately, I didn't have the right
16:25
kind of conditions for shooting the
16:27
night sky. Uh, and so I can't really
16:30
give you a coma performance. I did see
16:32
Christopher Frost covered that and he
16:34
found that there was a bit of coma smear
16:37
and the little bit of fringing that was
16:38
showing up near the edges in that kind
16:40
of situation. Overall here, outside of
16:43
the barrel distortion, which stands out
16:45
as being bad, though not necessarily
16:47
worse than some of the competing lenses,
16:49
I would say that the optical performance
16:51
is really quite outstanding. So that's
16:53
great if you're looking for a full-frame
16:55
lens with such a wide angle of view like
16:57
this. And I will note that performance
17:00
when it gets you get out to the edges of
17:01
the frame is way better than a lens like
17:03
the Viltrox uh Air 20mm f2.8. This is
17:07
definitely a stronger performing lens
17:09
than that. So my conclusion on the LK
17:12
Samyang 16mm f2.8
17:16
Pfe is largely positive. I think that
17:19
the main perceptual challenge for this
17:22
lens is going to be the perceived value.
17:25
And at $475,
17:28
that isn't all that much less than a
17:30
lens like the Viltrox AF16mm F1.8.
17:34
Obviously, the Viltrox lens is
17:36
significantly bigger and heavier, but it
17:38
also has more features. It has very good
17:40
image quality and it's going to be
17:42
perceived as quite a significant value
17:45
in comparison to this lens. I think that
17:47
the sweet spot for this lens is for
17:49
those that liked the form factor of a
17:51
lens like the Sony 16 to uh 16
17:54
millimeter f1.8G
17:56
lens, but don't want to pay the
17:58
basically double price that it would
18:00
take to purchase that lens. This lens, I
18:02
think, slots in there very nicely,
18:04
giving you an even more lightweight,
18:06
compact option that has great image
18:09
quality, as we've seen, outside of that
18:10
barrel distortion and vignette. And it
18:13
also is portable, has great autofocus.
18:15
It has a lot going for it. I still don't
18:19
quite understand how it fits with the
18:21
35mm f1.4 prima lens is that seemed to
18:25
be the direction they were going and now
18:26
this seems to be a different direction.
18:28
But I actually like this direction as I
18:30
think there's a lot of future in lenses
18:32
that are very compact and also are high
18:36
performing optically. A lot of people
18:38
including myself are interested in
18:40
lenses like that because they're so much
18:41
easier to bring along. you can throw
18:43
them into the bag and frankly you don't
18:45
feel bad if you don't end up using it at
18:46
the end of the day because you're
18:48
carrying 207 gram of additional weight
18:50
as opposed to carrying 6 to 800 g of
18:53
weight. And so I think that that's where
18:55
the sweet spot for this lens is. Now, if
18:57
you want a deeper dive into that optical
18:59
performance, stay tuned with me right
19:01
after this as we will jump into that and
19:02
examine it together. You can also check
19:04
out my full text review that's linked in
19:06
the description down below. There are
19:08
some buying links there as well as if
19:09
you'd like to purchase one for yourself.
19:11
So, let's jump into that image quality
19:13
breakdown together. So, let's start by
19:15
taking a look at the difference between
19:18
the normal full-frame covering and then
19:20
a super 35 or APS-C because this is a
19:22
lens I think that is certainly small
19:24
enough that it could also be purchased
19:26
by APS-C shooters. Uh, and it does
19:29
certainly have some advantages there and
19:31
particularly if you have maybe an
19:33
upgrade path in the future towards
19:34
fullframe. 24 millimeter equivalent is
19:37
always going to be a very useful focal
19:39
length. While the resolution is lower
19:41
obviously on my uh Sony A7R Mark R5 in
19:44
APS-C mode, you can see that the APS-C
19:47
image circle looks really crisp in the
19:48
corners. Likewise, it looks really good
19:50
here as well. Uh we can just see that
19:53
it's just a little bit softer in that
19:55
last little percentage on a full-frame
19:57
camera. So, the main optical flaw, as
19:59
detailed before, is a strong amount of
20:01
barrel distortion. This is a plus 33 to
20:04
correct here, but you can see it's not a
20:06
very clean correction. it's it create
20:08
creates some pin cushion distortion in
20:10
other places. So that's what we call a
20:12
mustache pattern where it's kind of a
20:13
wavy rather than a linear type pattern.
20:16
However, to put things in perspective,
20:18
you can see while it's not quite as bad,
20:20
the Sony 16mm f1.8 is nearly as bad. I
20:24
used a plus 30 rather than a plus 33 in
20:28
correcting, but both of them leave a
20:30
mustache pattern afterward. They're both
20:31
not great. If you want low distortion,
20:34
the way to go is with the Viltrox, which
20:36
has the most minimal amount of
20:37
distortion of any of these 16 millimeter
20:40
primes. Now, while I'm re releasing the
20:42
review before the uh software profile is
20:45
available here in Lightroom, you can see
20:46
that if I grab a JPEG out of camera to
20:49
compare with with the RAW on the left,
20:51
you can see all the bulge from the
20:52
distortion, but you can also see that
20:54
the correction profile in camera is
20:56
doing a great job and all of those lines
20:58
look nice and straight. Similarly,
21:00
here's another interior shot. And so,
21:02
you can see in the places where there
21:04
are some curves like in these various
21:07
straight lines, you can see that they
21:09
all get straightened out in the JPEG.
21:10
And you can see you are losing a little
21:12
bit of the frame there, but I would say
21:14
it's well worth it to get those straight
21:16
lines. Now, fringing isn't a significant
21:19
issue here. Now, you're going to with a
21:20
wideangle lens like this, you're not
21:22
going to have a lot of transition zone
21:24
areas with for fringing. You can see a
21:26
tiny bit of green fringing as it
21:28
transitions towards defocus here. No big
21:30
deal there. When it comes to lateral
21:32
style chromatic aberations near the edge
21:34
of the frame, I'm seeing very minimal
21:35
amounts both on my test chart and it was
21:38
similar when I looked out in real world
21:39
shots as well. So, taking a look at
21:42
resolution on a 61 megapixel A7R Mark 5
21:45
here at 200% magnification, you can see
21:48
the center of the frame is brilliantly
21:50
sharp. Great contrast, great detail. We
21:52
go over here to the midframe. The
21:54
mid-frame looks awesome as well. It's
21:56
only when we pan down to the corner and
21:59
in particular this last bit of the
22:00
corner that we see some drop off.
22:02
However, we do see a good consistent
22:05
centering with about equal performance
22:07
in all of these corners everywhere that
22:10
we look. So, for some comparison, here's
22:12
the Sony 16mm f1.8G
22:15
stop down to f2.8. We can see in the
22:17
center of the frame, I would argue that
22:19
the Samyang is every bit as sharp and
22:22
high contrast, maybe even a hair better,
22:25
which is very, very impressive. Here in
22:27
the mid-frame, they are very, very
22:29
similar. The Sony's benefiting from the
22:31
correction profile, whereas the Samyang
22:33
is not. If we look into the corners, the
22:36
corners are they're really not all that
22:39
different. And so, I don't know that I
22:41
can choose a winner. I do think that the
22:43
Sony is maybe a little bit better right
22:45
towards that very edge of the frame. And
22:47
up here, I'd say the Sony looks a little
22:49
bit better, but these lenses are
22:50
extremely close. If I compare to the
22:52
Viltrox 16mm f1.8, we can see that
22:56
center of the frame, Samyang is
22:58
unquestionably better. It's an easy win
23:00
there. In the mid-frame, the two lenses
23:02
are close, but the Samyang probably
23:04
shows just a little bit more detail. And
23:07
into the corners, the Viltrox is the
23:09
winner. it is the sharpest of the three
23:11
lenses right off to the very edge of the
23:13
frame. And that's true if we look at
23:15
either one of these corners here. Now, I
23:17
like to put that into real world
23:18
perspective. And so, we can see here
23:20
that even at f2.8 shooting up the wall
23:23
here, you can see just how brilliantly
23:24
sharp and great contrast is there in
23:27
this LK Samyang lens. It looks really,
23:29
really fantastic. Now, in the center of
23:31
the frame, stopping the lens down
23:33
doesn't really improve anything. you get
23:35
a little bit more contrast, but you're
23:37
not going to get any kind of e really
23:39
further gains. The mid-frame, that is
23:41
roughly true as well. Up in the corners,
23:43
however, you're going to see some
23:45
improvement as you go along. Most
23:47
notably at f8. Here's f8. And you can
23:51
see that it shows the best detail for
23:53
the corners. A bit of that may be some
23:56
field curvature, however, because real
23:58
images here at f5.6, I mean, it looks
24:01
fantastic. And that's true right off
24:04
here towards the very edges of the
24:05
frame. That is just brilliantly sharp
24:07
and high contrast. Here's another here.
24:10
And if we take a look here towards the
24:12
edge of the frame, we can see that
24:14
results are looking really, really nice.
24:17
Lots of detail all throughout the frame.
24:19
Uh here's another shot here. And again,
24:21
if I look right down here into the
24:23
corner, maybe in that last tiny bit,
24:25
there's a little bit of drop off, but
24:26
who's ever going to notice that? The
24:29
actual amount of detail contrast that is
24:31
rendered here is fantastic. Now
24:34
defraction will start to show up at f11
24:36
by f-22 which is minimum aperture. You
24:38
can see the image is significantly
24:40
softer due to the effects of defraction.
24:43
So as noted you can get a very high
24:45
level of magnification and you can see
24:47
there is good contrast here. I did note
24:49
a tiny bit maybe of fringing here at
24:52
very close, but while the field of uh
24:55
the plane of focus is not very flat, as
24:57
you can see, the amount of detail you
24:58
can capture up close is actually really
25:00
impressive. And of course, if you go
25:02
into APS-C mode, as I have done here,
25:05
you can increase that magnification
25:06
level even higher from 0.33 to 050
25:10
times. You're talking about something
25:12
extremely useful by this point. One
25:15
thing that stood out to me from this
25:16
lens is generally just how great
25:18
contrast is. And without having to do
25:21
basically any editing to this image, you
25:23
can see that contrast and thus color
25:25
saturation is really fantastic. It
25:28
allows images to really have a nice pop
25:30
to them, which I think is great in a
25:32
landscape style lens. And again, even if
25:34
you're up close, you can see that it's
25:36
rendering fine details really, really
25:38
well. All of these little fine hairs,
25:41
I'll call them on the edge of the petals
25:43
there. looks fantastic. Now, the bokeh
25:45
quality here, you can see it has more
25:48
outlining than what I would like. This
25:50
image actually, I think, looks pretty
25:51
good. However, you can tell the bokeh is
25:53
not super soft. Flare resistance, as
25:56
noted previously, looks good. And here
25:57
you can have a little bit closer look at
25:59
that sunst star. Now, this is only at
26:01
f11 here. The blades will become a
26:03
little bit more pronounced at f-16 and
26:05
f-22, though, as we've seen at the cost
26:08
of the image at large being a little bit
26:10
softer. And so, as you can see, this is
26:12
an appealing lens in a lot of ways. It
26:15
is extremely sharp and really the
26:16
contrast stood out to me. Images have a
26:19
lot of pop coming off of this particular
26:20
lens. And that certainly is going to be
26:22
appealing when you have such a compact,
26:24
lightweight package. As always, thanks
26:26
for watching. Have a great day and let
26:29
the light in.