wide angle/fisheye lens?

brad mole

brad mole

Suspended / Banned
Messages
88
Name
brad mole
Edit My Images
Yes
hi im not really sure on the difference between these two (fisheye and wide angle), but im looking for one for my nikon d80, can anyone reccomend some, ive been looking at the 10.5 nikkor one (is it any good?), can anyone reccomend somewhere to get one at a decent price, or maybe reccomending a different lens, i will be using it for car photography mainly and just want some different shots

EDIT: i think im going to go with a sigma 10-20, wheres they best place to buy?
 
The 10.5mm produces amazing results but you are limited to a distorted, fish eye view like this:

newtown_simon_westmore.jpg


A proper wideangle like a Siggy 10-20mm or the Nikon 12-24mm produced distorted images but without the amount from a fisheye, like this:

843056253l.jpg


I have a 12-24mm Nikon f/4 and can't fault it - my best buy so far - although it's expensive (I paid £450 used - it's £700 new at park cameras). The Tokina 12-24mm f/4 gets rave reviews and is £400 new, a great buy. The Sigma 10-20mm is much loved by some, loathed by others (myself included) because it is very wideangle and I think the image quality is poor around the edges. But it's £330.

Personally I'd go with a wideangle zoom like the Nikon or the Tokina because you can vary the effect with the zoom; get the 10.5mm fisheye and you are stuck with one look. Have a look in the for sale section on TP first to see if anyone's selling and then look at park cameras or Warehouse Express - they both do good prices on those lenses.

(**Images aren't mine - they're just pulled off google to illustrate the point**)
 
Fish-eye will give a circular image (or part of, on a cropped sensor). On a say 8mm you will get near 180 dg coverage - you have to be careful to keep your feet out of shot !
Gives a distorted image.

Probably limited use, although you can get software to de-fish the image.

Wide angles, on the other hand, give a more realistic perspective.
The Sigma 10-20mm is usually well regarded, there are several posts about this lens on here.
I believe Tokina now do a wide angle that has had good reviews.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=125573&highlight=sigma+10-20
 
thanks for the replies, just what i was after, after looking at some of the pics on the above link i am being swayed towards the sigma 10-20, good choice and worth it?
 
I just picked up a Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8 from Kerso. Yet to have much of a play with it, but it gets decent write ups. It wont produce the extreme fisheye as per the 10.5mm shown above however, so depends what you're after.
 
Here's another 10.5mm shot - not exactly spectacular, but it shows that fisheyes aren't always so distorted if used to avoid that issue (cropped to avoid my own foot being in this one :lol:)

My 12-24mm couldn't get anywhere near having the top of this tree in shot

DD

PS - fisheyes only distort lots IF you want them to, it's easy enough to avoid if you don't like too much distortion - this is a full frame shot (save for my foot being cropped out!)

1021.jpg
 
The main use of the 10.5 fish eye is for 360x180 pans the distortion is removed in this process.

a number of programs Like PTLens can de-fish , fisheye lenses, as can most good Panaorama programs used in single shot mode.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
The main use of the 10.5 fish eye is for 360x180 pans the distortion is removed in this process.
Click to expand...

Dis :agree:

I use it 'straight' for landscapes as well as weddings - and of course 'funky' shots

DD
 
i think the distortion of the 10.5 might get annoying after a while, wheras the wide andgle 10-20 will be more practical for other things, but the f4-5.6 is putting me off as opposed to the f2.8 from the 10.5
 
fabs said:
Would you be using it in low light often?
Click to expand...

i often use my camera in dark-ish light, its not too much of a problem to use a tripod, but would feel better knowing ive got f2.8 to go to if you know what i mean
 
fabs said:
Would you be using it in low light often?
Click to expand...

I do :) Weddings are often in darker places than we'd like :(

But remember - using the reciprocal function to calculate the lowest shutter speed you can 'safely' get away with, there's sod all difference between a 12 mm or 10.5 mm

I often HAVE to shoot my 12-24 at 1/30th, and it's fine at that throughout the range if you have good shooting technique

DD
 
Heres a shot with a 8mm Sigma, I really got it for panos, but its fun to play about with.

This shows the cut off on a 40D (Cropped sensor) on a full size you would get a circular image.
Welland_0.jpg

img%5D



Here is one cropped. I love the distortion, but you can get too much of it after a while...

%3E
Well_2.jpg

img%5D
 
brad mole said:
i often use my camera in dark-ish light, its not too much of a problem to use a tripod, but would feel better knowing ive got f2.8 to go to if you know what i mean
Click to expand...

Get the Tokina or Nikon 12-24mm f/4. They are regarded as the best of the bunch, although not as wide as the Siggy, have a constant f/4 aperture throughout the zoom and have very minimal CA and fringing. The Siggy can be totally woeful wide open around the edges - we've stopped using them for magazine work for that reason. Plus, you can get a Tokina for as little as £450 these days. That's only a bit more than the siggy for much better quality.
If you're flush then get the Nikon - it's nice :)
 
cant belive no one hasnt mentioned the tokina 10-17 yet.

i cant comment sa mines not arrived yet, but it will soon.

my view is i have a pretty good wide angle (tam 17-50) so i want to try something new.

i can always de-fish in photoshop, but adding fish in the same way looks crap
 
Saxk - i'd be interested to know how you get on with the Tokina. I'm currently eyeing one up at the moment - the reviews are promising
 
the nikkor 10.5mm has a close focus of about an inch, much nearer than the zooms which can lead to some really unusual shots, it's also pin sharp
 
The Sigma 15mm "corrected" fisheye will give you 180' on a full frame. I've tested a few and they seem of decent quality.
 
I have the Tokina 10-17 and the 12-24, they are totally different lenses. The 12-24/4 is a cracking DX lens which I have used extensively on my D300 and previously D200 with some stunning results, although a little vignetting at 12mm.
The 10-17 is more of a play thing at 10mm-13mm, but at the zoom end it is a very capable piece of glass which gives good sharp results.

Your call, play thing or serious glass......

Gary
 
These were taken with a 12-24mm sigma lens on a crop body.

Crew.jpg

F1.jpg
 
well i went into jacobs and jessops yesterday to look at the sigma 10-20.
jessops (£380) said they would price match jacobs (£400) but wouldnt beat the price, i asked both if thats the cheapest they can go and they wouldnt budge, my local high street shop also sells this lens for £400, anyone know if there is a discount code online, or a cheaper way of getting this lens from somewhere?
 
Have a look on www.camerapricebuster.com. They often have discount codes for web sales.

Seriously though, the Siggy is one of the worst wide-angles out there. If you want to spend about the same money as that (£400) then get the Tokina – miles better build and image quality, and you won't miss that 2mm off the focal lengh. The Sigma looks awful at the edges when it's below f/11 – the Tokina and Nikon are the best and for the money, the Tokina is the better lens. I only bought the Nikon 12-24mm because I got it in mint condition for £450.

Just friendly advice but I've played with all three and the Siggy is well down the ladder in terms of performance... :)

Why not look at this Nikon 12-24mm?
 
Fabs, only going with what I've seen with my own eyes when guys at my work have shot for a magazine DPS. Edges falling off dramatically into a mush of horribleness...
 
specialman said:
Fabs, only going with what I've seen with my own eyes when guys at my work have shot for a magazine DPS. Edges falling off dramatically into a mush of horribleness...
Click to expand...


ive heard this on some wide angle lenses, do you have any examples?
 
Sorry to bring this thread up (found it searching for lightweight tripods of all things...) but I'm interested to know if anyone uses a fisheye for night sky shots? I have the Tokina 12-24 atm (brilliant lens as specialman points out) but it's just not wide enough some times, I was wondering how much extra coverage a fisheye would give me (on a crop 400d)?

Thanks
 
The 10-17mm Tokina gives you a 180° fov at 10mm, the 12-24 gives you 99° at 12mm - quite a difference.....
 
So theoretically if you stuck the camera and lens in a hole level to the surrounding ground you would be able to see the edge of the ground (just) in all directions?

How does this compare to the Canon 10-22 say, as from reading it appears a fisheye at 10mm will show a lot more than a normal wide angle lens at 10mm. Is that correct?
 
Brad Mole, I'll dig some out next week when I'm back in work.

Don't get me wrong, the Siggy 10-20mm obviously has a good following*–*it's one of the most popular wideangle zooms around – but I just seem to hear more dodgy QCV issues with the Siggy than other lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top