Laowa 12mm f/2.8 D-Dreamer Photos and Mini Review

[Macro_Cosmos]

Received it a while ago, here is a really quick review! 

The "zero distortion" claim is at hyperfocal distances, and virtually zero, not literally. For close focus, there is a tiny amount of distortion.

I went out to to do some astrolandscapes, while having an impressive field of view, the lens exhibits a moderate amount of coma in the centre which gradually gets worse in the corners.
Stopping it down by one stop greatly improves the coma performance in the middle, however the corners are still not that good. I'd say Samyang's 24mm f/1.4 or Nikon's 20mm f/1.8G would be a far better choice for panorama stitching. The Tamron's 15-30 f/2.8 SP VC still remains untouched when it comes to coma performance wide open.

Sharpness and resolution is both really good. Nothing to worry here indeed.
Glare and flare resistance is okay, it is not bad but there is room for improvement. Canon's 11-24 f/4L does a great job! Samyang's 14mm f/2.8 and their 15mm f/2.5 (or Irix if you think they are indeed a different company) perform far worse than the Laowa in terms of flare and glare. Comparing a 12mm to a 14 or 15 is certainly unfair. The worse case scenario where rainbows and colourful blops are produced is at certain angles, which can be avoided. Generally, it will not be a problem for slow landscape shots. Glare -- magical fingering  method works well!

The most interesting aspect I have found and enjoyed is its close-up capability. The lens focuses close to 18cm and can produce some really fun and neat perspectives. Laowa does make a 15mm f/4 1:1 macro lens that does exactly that at a higher magnification. It's a bit of a shame that with a PK-11a extension tube, the point of focus is just on the surface of the lens! Maybe I should try DIY an even shorter "tube".
Dominating Thistle by Daniel Han, on Flickr
Lock by Daniel Han, on Flickr
Also, the Laowa 15mm f/4 1:1 Wide-Macro is going to be updated, maybe some time in the upcoming year. No guarantees here. The updated version will certainly allow aperture mechanical coupling and has a better shift mechanism.

Build quality is obviously superb and mechanically, the lens is a step-up from their previous 105mm f/2 STF. The 12mm is an AI mount which means "stop down" method isn't required when metering. Nikon however only allows 13mm to be set in the non-CPU settings. I can see the possibility to fit a G-series chip on the mount, I might talk about it in the nerds section.

Focusing is easy, in most situations, you don't even need to focus! Simply put the lens at hyperfocal distance and snap away -- it is that wide! My astrolandscape shots were all at infinity.

Filters of 100mm is allowed and circular filters of 95mm (C-PL  ) may be used with their dedicated square filter holder, which is not out yet. This is a huge advantage for me. I find 150mm systems to be really troublesome and costly. I do not want to carry a pack of ipad mini sized glass around.

Take a look at the coma:
Laowa 12mm D-Dreamer f/2.8 Coma, and Mini-Review by Daniel Han, on Flickr

Here's my subjective advantages and disadvantages list.
Advantage:
1. Small
2. 100mm filters -- huge save of space and money
3. Focuses really close, can create nice effects
4. Really wide and easy to handle
5. Sharp, great resolution, colours are accurate (The 105mm f/2 is really flat and the colours are fairly desaturated... but hey its Otus level sharpness Me: Zzzz)
6. Great build quality, smooth focusing ring and nicely clicked aperture ring
7. Lens front element is coated with droplet repellent material, laowa calls it the "Frog eye coating"
8. Sony users and fuji users will love this. Using the MSC that will be released soon ($300), the lens can be converted into a 17mm f/4 with shift ability to correct for perspective distortions. The MSC is a field of coverage extender, NOT a teleconverter. This also means the lens can be used on a medium format mirrorless (I'm looking at the Fuji GFX) due to the larger coverage. Image quality is yet unknown and I have no way to test it since I'm invested in the Nikon system already. I may meet up with some friends on my trip to China next year to try the MSC out.

Disadvantages:
1. Coma performance is disappointing, the Sigma 12-24 f/4 (newer version) handles coma far better, both set at f/4
2. Rather prone to glare due to being so wide, prominent in all UWAs
3. Dinky hood does not reduce glare at all, besides protecting the front element, it is essentially useless. Laowa told me that they will make a circular hood later that significantly reduces flare and allows 95mm filters to be attached. I will test it out when I get a copy.
4. Ai-P would be even better! (that is me nitpicking)
5. Samyang uses Neutrino coating on their Irix lenses, Laowa should step the game up and use positrons or tachyons to coat the glass.

Why not mention "lack of autofocus? and the ability to press the shutter button by receiving signals from my brain along with making all the settings for me! I want it to do everything!!!!11!"
Answer: This lens simply does not need autofocus, it is so wide that at f/8 and the lens set to infinity, almost everything is in focus. For closeups, I trust my eyes more than letting the lens decide. The AF success rate on my 105VR is probably 1 out of 20, handheld that is. Honestly, do not worry about AF.

Here is my one step to using AF lenses:
1. Learn 

The lens is not easy to use at all. The user must acquire the skills to control the perspective distortion, the angles, the focal plane and the overall composition. All my shots without thought ended up being rejected. I slowed down significantly and was able to obtain pleasing results.

I am going to compose a video with way more detail soon, I have written a script already.

Here are some of my shots, critique is greatly welcomed and appreciated, I want to get better. I have no prior ultra wide experience, as the widest I got back then was a 20mm.
Cloudy Night by Daniel Han, on Flickr
Cave at Hassans Walls by Daniel Han, on Flickr
Central Main Concourse by Daniel Han, on Flickr
20161031-_DSC7898-HDR by Daniel Han, on Flickr Kicked out by out security staff after just 6 shots, "big camera, must be selling the photo". 
UTS Building 7 by Daniel Han, on Flickr -- Pretty mundane, straightened in lightroom. Probably an 18mm crop.

Here is a good example of how levelling really matters:
Central Tunnel by Daniel Han, on Flickr
The lines just look weird, camera was not perfectly levelled. Pretty much a ruined shot in my opinion.

Here is my personal album on the lens, more to come! https://flic.kr/s/aHskKz7fPE
Here is the group that I manage: https://flic.kr/g/rqjVb

Note: I paid for my copy. People can say I am affiliated with the company as I usually get insight to their future products, but such relationship in no way will affect my integrity and personal judgement when coming to composing a review thriving to be neutral.

[chambeshi]

Most interesting and informative - especially on the coma and comparisons with prominent competitor lenses.

Impressive photos  :-)

After seriously considering this Laowa, I have opted for the Zeiss 15mm f2.8 Distagon Z* ZF.2 (used in very good condition) which I am planning to test soon!

thank you and kind regards

woody

[Bjørn Rørslett]

The coma details indicate a mild decentering of the optics.

Try the K-1 as extension. Any shorter than that can only by achieved by shimming the bayonet on the lens.

Backgrounds are always a problem with such ultra wide lenses. Things crop up that one never thinks of until seen later in the finished photo.

[Erik Lund]

I have cut open a K1 to have a look if it was possible to trim it down - It' is only possible to shave of about 0.5mm to 1mm of the length of a K1.
This is due to the Bayonet flanges, the lens flanges will simply hit the front of the mount of the camera if any shorter - Nikon engineers did the extension as short as possible when they designed the K1,,,

[MILLIREHM]

I was about to recommend using a K1 Ring as well. That should be easily available on the second hand market

[Erik Lund]

You are right!

K1 doesn't transfer aperture value or stop down,,,

[Bjørn Rørslett]

If memory serves, K-1 adds 5.8 mm and the PK-11/11a 8.5 mm. Thus there is a difference which for very short focal length lenses can be significant in favour of K-1.

However, K-1 is a bare-bones extension with no transfer of aperture value or facility for stopping down the hosted lens.

[Erik Lund]

Sorry My mistake I was taking about K1 ring, I'll correct it!

[Macro_Cosmos]

The coma details indicate a mild decentering of the optics.

Try the K-1 as extension. Any shorter than that can only by achieved by shimming the bayonet on the lens.

Backgrounds are always a problem with such ultra wide lenses. Things crop up that one never thinks of until seen later in the finished photo.

Thanks for the heads up! I was thinking the same thing when I saw the unequal performance across the borders, however, upon testing a second copy, the same results were yielded.
Unless both are decentered, it's probably due to the lens being so wide? I'll have to pick a nice brick wall to test out when it stops raining!

[Macro_Cosmos]

You are right!

K1 doesn't transfer aperture value or stop down,,,

Yeah, that's why I went with the PN/PK line which has coupling. I'll try pick up a K1 tube anyway, the viewfinder shouldn't be that dark at f/8 with liveview enabled.
There's no copies in Australia as usual, had to get the entire PN set from Japan. Ehh well I'll test it out when I find a copy!

[David H. Hartman]

I'm quite sure the K-1 ring is 5.8mm. Photography in Malaysia says the PK-11 is 8mm. I couldn't remember the the PK-11. The PK-11a is suitable for AF and AF-D lenses but not AF-S if I remember correctly.

It's difficult to search on a phone. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on the AF-S in PK-11a thing.

Dave Hartman

[Roland Vink]

Yes that's right:
K1 - 5.8mm
PK-11 - 8mm (also PK-11a)
PK-12 - 14mm
PK-13 - 27.5mm (half 55mm)
PN-11 - 52.5mm (half 105mm)

The K rings, as Bjørn said, is a bare-bones extension ring, metering is entirely stop-down, so it relies on having a lens with an aperture ring so you can stop it down.

The PK and PN rings are AI so any lens mounted on them will be reduced to AI. This is fine for AF, AFD and AFS lenses with an aperture ring. If the lens does not support AI in the first place, such as G and the new electronic-aperture E lenses, then you are out of luck.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

... or you need the extension ring to have a CPU. Works will all lenses except for 'E'.

[Erik Lund]

On a K1 ring the two bayonets are rotated, so if the lens has a fixed petal type lens hood, like many ultra vide angle and full frame fisheye lenses, there will be vignetting.

[Macro_Cosmos]

I'm quite sure the K-1 ring is 5.8mm. Photography in Malaysia says the PK-11 is 8mm. I couldn't remember the the PK-11. The PK-11a is suitable for AF and AF-D lenses but not AF-S if I remember correctly.

It's difficult to search on a phone. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong on the AF-S in PK-11a thing.

Dave Hartman

I've read about this somewhere but I'm not sure.
The PK-11 will damage the contacts on the camera [?] according to someone with a keyboard on the internet. I am not sure however, but the difference between the PK-11 and PK-11a is the coupling prong, the PK-11 one is longer.

This leads to me thinking that one can simply trim the PK-11 prong to avoid whatever potential damages to the camera or lens it may do.