Holy Smokes....This is pushing art to the limits

[Hacker]

I have often advocated that even wide angles lens can take very good portraiture shots. You don't need an 85mm or the traditional 135mm lenses. That is why on travels, I do not carry a telephoto. Simply too bulky.

However, these pictures taken with the Olympus 8mm fisheye have blown me away. The nearest I have taken is using an 18mm full frame fish eye. People, start saving up your $$$$.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=16856495

Pixs:

[hammer_400]

amazing stuff huh? so ... hacker when u gettin ur 8mm? hehe

[Raptor1]

OMG!!! i want i want!
but fisheye still abit wierd la.. the 11-22mm would be nice.. okok.. maybe the 7-14mm.

[yanyewkay]

using WA for portraits it not new already but few can actually do it properly.

Those are some good examples but you might want to post the links to the pics instead of posting the pics directly here.

[Raptor1]

i think hacker can be the next espn.. haha.. keep making people buy new stuff..

[Hacker]

Buy, buy, BUY! But if you look closely, it appears that for #2 and #3 the flash coverage is simply not wide enough.

[Hacker]

Originally Posted by hammer_400 amazing stuff huh? so ... hacker when u gettin ur 8mm? hehe

Got the 7-14mm. Not really used to too wide a fish eye lens, though I've used a Nikon 8mm once to shoot the indoor stadium when it was first commissioned for some official publication on its launch.

[dts_spawn]

Originally Posted by Hacker Buy, buy, BUY! But if you look closely, it appears that for #2 and #3 the flash coverage is simply not wide enough.

I think that is on purpose. To kinda spotlight the subject. Interesting, don't you think?

[chainsmoker]

Wonders if it'd cost a bomb here.

[Heartshape]

Originally Posted by Hacker Buy, buy, BUY! But if you look closely, it appears that for #2 and #3 the flash coverage is simply not wide enough.

Are you sure that's the case? I wan thinking "hmm...smooth Photoshop user".

[ParkertR]

wowza! very nice hehehe very veyr nice~ im bringing in 8mm's... but not oly. haha not sure will have oly mount or not. but dang... u've suckered me into the 8mm :S oeii! !!!!

[Hacker]

Originally Posted by Heartshape Are you sure that's the case? I wan thinking "hmm...smooth Photoshop user".

Quite sure as I see no reason to have the beautiful foilage underexposed. But this is my guess and artistic expression can be rendered in many forms.

I have the 7-14mm lens and I have to use the Lightsphere over the Omnibounce as the Omnibounce can cover down to 14mm (35mm format). I guess I have to ask the photographer if that was indeed the case. No point speculating.

[nightpiper]

fish eye not my cup of tea. no thx. can't really appreciate the distortion & weird colour at the corners.

[ortega]

the problem is that your compositions will start to look the same after awhile

then you must BBB another lens

[Raptor1]

then there will be a SSS craze going on too ^_^
chips is selling his 11-22mm Maybe you guys might be interested to get.