Fishing for a Fisheye.....[*-)]
Hi guys!
Just want some advice & input regarding the MOST appropriate fisheye for my 40D (I have an Ef-S screen installed as well)... I'm gonna use it as my for my UWA purposes. Please see below choices:
- Samyang 8mm 3.5
- Vivitar Series 1 7mm 3.5
- Sigma 10mm 2.8 EX DC HSM
- Sigma 15mm 2.8 EX DG HSM
- Canon 15mm 2.8
BTW, can you also explain the differences between rectilinear, diagonal, & circular? Aside from the above choices, can you suggest the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8?
Thanks for all your inputs & advices in advance!
Chris
Re: Fishing for a Fisheye.....[*-)]
Hi,
can't tell you which is the most appropriate lens for your purposes, but this might help your decision:
- a rectilinear lens is not a fish-eye, it's a wide-angle lens that (attempts to) make straight lines appear straight, not with the "extreme barrel distortion" of a fish-eye;
- every lens illuminates a circle within the camera; a diagonal fish-eye illuminates the whole camera sensor, while the circle illuminated by a circular fish-eye is so small that it doesn't, so you actually get a circular-shaped imaged on your rectangular sensor; of course you need to take the crop-factor into account, a circular fish-eye for full-frame will just leave the corners dark on your 40D.
I have been playing with the idea of a fish-eye too, and will probably get a Lensbaby Composer plus the optional fish-eye optics. That's not the highest quality glass, but for half the price of a Canon 15mm fish-eye you get two lenses with lots of possibilities to play ;-)
Ciao, Colin
Re: Fishing for a Fisheye.....[*-)]
If you really want the 'fisheye look' you will be severely handicapped by any fisheye designed for FF bodies (e.g. the Canon or Sigma 15mm f/2.8 lenses).
The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is a rectilinear lens, not a fisheye (the Tokina 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 is a fisheye zoom, the only one I think, and it's designed for FF meaning you'd be cropping away much of the fisheye-ness on your 40D).
If you're going to use this as a UWA lens, give careful thought to the fisheye look - is that something you want in all your images, and/or are you willing to do the necessary post-processing (and suffer a big hit in corner sharpness) to remove the distortion?
Else, I'd really recommend getting a rectilinear UWA like the Canon EF-S 10-22mm (or the Tokina 11-16mm, the Sigma 10-20mm, the Tamron 10-24mm, or the recently-announced but not yet available UUWA Sigma 8-16mm).
Let me say it again, unless you really, really, really want the fisheye effect, get a rectilinear UWA. That look goes in and out of fashion like wide lapels and polka-dot ties. Even when it's 'in', it can easily be overused. If you already had a rectilinear UWA and wanted to supplement that with a fisheye, fine. But IMO a rectilinear lens is definitely the place to start.
Re: Fishing for a Fisheye.....[*-)]
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Else, I'd really recommend getting a rectilinear UWA like the Canon EF-S 10-22mm (or the Tokina 11-16mm, the Sigma 10-20mm, the Tamron 10-24mm, or the recently-announced but not yet available UUWA Sigma 8-16mm).
The Sigma, Tamron, & Canon 10-20mm's tend to be very dark in my VF due to the Ef-S screen installed. I haven't tried the Tokina but might try it in a few days time. I've tried the Sigma 15mm & 10mm. Both are quite sharp & the 15mm tends to be like a 24mm FOV w/c is not really that wide. I also haven't tried pp'ing the images. So, at this stage I don't have any clear idea of the effect of "de-fishing" the images. BTW, I've read the review of that Sigma 8-16 which wasn't that exciting at all.
