fisheye


Status
Not open for further replies.

Terence

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2003
4,751
0
36
I'm a Llama!
I use the Sigma 15mm FE. Not bad for its price (about $600).
 

EiRiK

Senior Member
Mar 2, 2003
1,234
0
36
North
www.eiriktan.com
Terence said:
I use the Sigma 15mm FE. Not bad for its price (about $600).
thanks for the feedback terence...
i dunno much about fisheyes, but when u said, "not bad for its price($600)", are u saying that other fisheyes out there are alot more expensive?
 

ReSpawN

New Member
Jun 15, 2004
212
0
0
Tam pines
Belle&Sebastain said:
i orginal canon cost abt $1250 first hand i think, $900-$1k 2nd hand
yep...the Original Canon 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye cost S$1,230 by order from MS Color...juz got their e-quote on 180604 :)

Hope this helps
 

ReSpawN

New Member
Jun 15, 2004
212
0
0
Tam pines
EiRiK said:
respawn, looking for fisheye too?
ya .... considering whether to get the fisheye or 17-40 f/4L. :think:
May need some advice from u and all the pro out there.

I'm think to get the 1st set or the 2nd set....pls advise

1st Set
- 10D + Grip
- 15mm f/2.8L Fisheye
- 24-70mm f/2.8L
- 70-200mm f/2.8L IS

2nd Set
- 10D + Grip
- 17-40mm f/4L
- 50mm f/1.4
- 70-200mm f/2.8L IS

Of Cos I will not be getting the whole set at one shot :sweat: :sweat: else pocket burn big hole sia. Most probably be getting the 10D+grip and one of the lens first, then slowly build up the collection.

I'm into Portraits, Wedding and some landscape.

Regards
Wong Weiliang
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,784
0
36
Singapore, Bedok
The 17-40 would definitely be more useful than the fisheye. More versatile, and usable in a much wider range of situations. i think the 2nd set more useful.

BTW the fisheye is not an L lens.
 

ReSpawN

New Member
Jun 15, 2004
212
0
0
Tam pines
ST1100 said:
The 17-40 would definitely be more useful than the fisheye. More versatile, and usable in a much wider range of situations. i think the 2nd set more useful.

BTW the fisheye is not an L lens.
:think: :think: hmmm....quite true ,but i was thinking the 17-40 and the 24-70 overlaps too much and i would most probably use the 24-70 as my main lens and the 17-40 as landscape.

So , if i will to get the 15mm f/2.8 instead of the 17-40mm f/4 for landscape,do u think it is advisable??

Any comments from anyone is welcome. Thanks :angel:
 

goering

New Member
Sep 5, 2003
434
0
0
ReSpawN said:
:think: :think: hmmm....quite true ,but i was thinking the 17-40 and the 24-70 overlaps too much and i would most probably use the 24-70 as my main lens and the 17-40 as landscape.

So , if i will to get the 15mm f/2.8 instead of the 17-40mm f/4 for landscape,do u think it is advisable??

Any comments from anyone is welcome. Thanks :angel:
The FE is more of a specialty lens as it isn't rectilinear and hence introduce a significant amount of intended barrel distortions

For using that as a landscape lens, you'll probably need to defish a lot using software and plug-in but it's a lot of work & you lose some resolution as well. It works well for some people - but I think a Sigma 12-24 would be a better landscape lens if you need it to be wider and no overlap in your lineup
 

DBehrens

New Member
Jul 20, 2003
36
0
0
Singapore
www.pbase.com
goering said:
The FE is more of a specialty lens as it isn't rectilinear and hence introduce a significant amount of intended barrel distortions

For using that as a landscape lens, you'll probably need to defish a lot using software and plug-in but it's a lot of work & you lose some resolution as well. It works well for some people - but I think a Sigma 12-24 would be a better landscape lens if you need it to be wider and no overlap in your lineup
I have both the 15mm and 17-35 f/2.8 and for wide angle landscape the 15mm on EOS 10D is a super combination - with no need to de-fish at least 95% of my shots. I've had both the Canon and Sigma and they are very similar in quality.

Some examples of Sigma shots can be found at:
http://www.pbase.com/image/30624774
http://www.pbase.com/image/30624770

and a 15mm Canon example is at:
http://www.pbase.com/image/24292747

In fact I am packing my 15mm on trips much more often than my 17-35.
Rgds,
Dave
 

ptwong

Senior Member
Nov 10, 2003
589
0
16
44
Yishun
after 10D 1.6 cropping, don't think there's much "fish-eye" effect already.
 

kcky

Member
Jan 29, 2004
74
0
6
46
Sembawang
Hi,
I'm using the Sigma 15mm fisheye. It's an interesting lens that can be used to produce pretty interesting shots. I believe it will be a lens that would not be used often but it will give good curvy 180 deg shots.
Go get one, you will not regret it. I believe it has a good 2nd hand value should you want to sell it. :D
 

laugh

New Member
Jun 2, 2003
285
0
0
Visit site
its true, after the 1.6FLM, you wont get your fish eye effect.
 

laugh

New Member
Jun 2, 2003
285
0
0
Visit site
oh? okie..but definitely not as 'fish eye' as with a full frame.
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,784
0
36
Singapore, Bedok
FWIW, i enjoyed using my fisheye on my 10D. It gave a 'super-wide' perspective, with curved lines at the side. It's *excellent* for people photography, bcoz unlike rectilinear ultrawides, they don't distort people's faces as violently.

The not-completely-fisheye effect can be a welcome relief too. Using a fisheye on fullframe can be rather difficult. It's almost impossible to exclude elements you don't want in the frame, like your own feet. I've gotten bits on my thumb in the picture too, without realizing it.
 

EiRiK

Senior Member
Mar 2, 2003
1,234
0
36
North
www.eiriktan.com
ST1100 said:
FWIW, i enjoyed using my fisheye on my 10D. It gave a 'super-wide' perspective, with curved lines at the side. It's *excellent* for people photography, bcoz unlike rectilinear ultrawides, they don't distort people's faces as violently.

The not-completely-fisheye effect can be a welcome relief too. Using a fisheye on fullframe can be rather difficult. It's almost impossible to exclude elements you don't want in the frame, like your own feet. I've gotten bits on my thumb in the picture too, without realizing it.
yup... my friend calls them feet-eye lens :bsmilie:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.