Thanks for all the great examples. Seems these lens types are much more versatile than I once thought. I can now see that they've definitely got a place in the lens line-up and can make for some really cool effects. I guess distortion isn't such a bad thing if that's the look you're going for.
Great thread! Thanks to Searcher for starting it.
Searcher, I've never really thought I needed a fisheye. But sometimes I see a fisheye foto that's pretty cool. And that effect can probably be done with PP.
Though I doubt I will ever own a true fisheye, I probably at some point will buy a Lens Baby. I really like what they can produce, with the OOF edges.
But, if you really DO collect lenses, what choice do you have?
SS
SharpShooter wrote:
Searcher, I've never really thought I needed a fisheye. But sometimes I see a fisheye foto that's pretty cool. And that effect can probably be done with PP.
Though I doubt I will ever own a true fisheye, I probably at some point will buy a Lens Baby. I really like what they can produce, with the OOF edges.
But, if you really DO collect lenses, what choice do you have?
SS
No choice after seeing the images above. I am going to pick up on Oddjobbers suggestion for an add-on and see if I can do as well you guys.
Im not sure if you have ever looked at KEH.com but give them a look. They may have a good quality fisheye for sale in your cameras mount.
Ive spent over 20k with them over the years for gear from 110 format to medium format rangefinders to digital gear. I have never been shy about buying BGN (Bargin) rated glass from them. The barrel comes lookin like hell, the glass is clear as day, no fungus, no issues with Focusing manual or AF. BGN rated lenses will look cosmetically beaten like a rented mule, but perform like they were new.
If you feel you bought a lemon, their return policy is great. Ive returned a few lenses to them and was credited back my funds in a very timely fashion. My only bad thing to say about KEH is the fact their website is still run from a Windows NT4 server and they have never heard of USPS Flat Rate Priority shipping. Their shipping methods are as slow as molasses.
If you shoot Nikon, I cannot scream my praise for the 10.5mm DX Fisheye and the 16mm AF-D fisheye enough. Both are very good but different fisheyes.
OddJobber wrote:
As promised some SNAPSHOTS. No consideration for artistic merit, CA, focus, camera shake or any of that other normal stuff. Good grief these are just samples and it was cold out there! Sometimes you have to get closer, these were shot with a .42X converter then distortion adjusted with Elements.
I know you haven't spent any time on these, but nethertheless, I do like them and can see the potential. Thanks for the advice and link about the add on converter, I will choose and order tomorrow without feeling guilty.
Play nice and don't mention Snapshots for a few days-that was a long thread.
Photo Phledgling wrote:
Though I've never owned or used one, I do think the effect can be interetsting. But, as you say, how many fish-eye photos can you look at before boredom sets in.
However, I understand that there are features included in PP software that allow one to "flatten" the image from round to flat to make a pseudo-panorama with one image. How effective this is I have no idea, but I know the option exists.
Perhaps there's a person out there just like you who, for £400, will take a leap of faith, use the lens for a limited amount of time and re-sell it to another like-minded individual? If you think you can re-sell it without much difficulty to such a person, I say get it and try it.
I'm sure there are other hoggers that know a lot more about these lenses than me.....
just my $.02 (what is that in £BP?)
Though I've never owned or used one, I do think th... (
show quote)
When you are trading with OLD lenses it is very easy to catch a cold. My last acquisition, a 300m prime gave me flu.
I purchased a Tokina 10-17 f3.5-4.5 What's nice about this fisheye, it's telephoto and on the 17 mm side, makes a nice wide angle with very little distortion. They run about $450 on ebay, B&H, KEH or Adorama.
Bloke
Loc: Waynesboro, Pennsylvania
That first one is great... Last time I was there, was just a couple of weeks after 9/11, and you couldn't walk out on the dam, or get into the visitor's centre at all. I have some pics, but they are not good.
Yes there can be a real practical use for a fisheye.
They don't all produce circular images.
Some of them fill your photoframe with detail and get in a 180 degree horizontal view.
As some have noted the centre vertically and horizontally is distortion free, so framing the photo carefully may mean no correction is required.
Take a relatively distortion free shot and then crop for composition.
But if that view is distorted and you do not want it to be then they can be software corrected.
Ken Rockwell provides us with a great example with his Death Valley pic.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/dxo/optics-pro.htmWith shots with moving subjects this can be a much better option than trying to stitch multiple photos together. eg ocean waves, traffic, people, animals, trees/flowers moving in wind.
Surfers, skateboarders, bike riders etc are often shot with these from very close distances.
Or you can learn to use the funky fisheye effect for creativity.
Sometimes the photo can have distortion but you hardly even realise it because it is so skillfully used - as in the magnificent shot of the dam wall and mountains earlier in this thread.
Searcher wrote:
If you have a bucket load of spare cash, this topic probably won't apply to you.
I do not own one, but I do collect and use old lenses and a moderately priced fisheye has come on to the market, but I just cannot see the point of it. I could spend an hour or two taking circular distorted photos then boredom would set in. At about £400 for the lens, 4 hours of use = £100 per hour, then put the lens away.
Is there a real - practical - use for such a lens or are they just to produce fun effects?
If you have a bucket load of spare cash, this topi... (
show quote)
Musket, this is very very good. Nice work.
I like it. Great fisheye use.
DOOK
Loc: Maclean, Australia
Kestrel1029 wrote:
I second the Rokinon. I got one for my Sony NEX. Very cool effects. Fun to play with. Certain subjects really work well with it. I never thought that I would have any interest or need for a fisheye but I like using it.
I agree. I bought the same lens for my Nikons. At first I thought it would end up a paper weight, but I really like it. I don't use it every day, but it has its uses. With the right subject, it's dynamite. :D
i went for the fisheye add on lens, it was cheaper and gives nice effects for me.
RJM
Loc: Cardiff, S Wales, UK
I have a Fisheye Samyang 7.5mm (15mm on FF) and a 'normal' Panasonic 7-14mm lens.
The Fisheye gives some very nice effects and adds interest and perspective to images when used correctly. The Samyang has a 180 degree field of view so you need to be careful with your feet and fingers!!!
The Panasonic has 120 degree field of view.
Here's some in an album that I have taken. You either like them or you don't BUT they do grab peoples attention!
https://www.facebook.com/rjmorgans/media_set?set=a.10151410801268608.496311.674748607&type=
juicesqueezer wrote:
I purchased a Tokina 10-17 f3.5-4.5 What's nice about this fisheye, it's telephoto and on the 17 mm side, makes a nice wide angle with very little distortion. They run about $450 on ebay, B&H, KEH or Adorama.
A
telephoto fisheye lens? No wonder newbies get confused!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.