I've looked so many photos on pbase, here and flickr. Everytime I think I'm decided, I see some picts made by the other lens and I'm swayed over the other side
I'm looking at taking landscapes and large buildings (interior and exterior) (esp on tour). It seems that the fisheye can do landscapes with some good composition (ie. center point of interest; horizon in the centre), some interior, but would be real iffy for buildings. I really like the large FOV as well.
The plus for the rectilinear 10-20 is of course the rectilinear
Seems like its a better all rounder with cost and narrower FOV as the only (slight) cons.
Anyone care to share their experience with the 10-17 fisheye, esp on the narrow end (16-17mm)?
How wide is it VS the 10mm at 16-17mm?
How acceptable are the straight lines (@17mm)?
thx
I'm looking at taking landscapes and large buildings (interior and exterior) (esp on tour). It seems that the fisheye can do landscapes with some good composition (ie. center point of interest; horizon in the centre), some interior, but would be real iffy for buildings. I really like the large FOV as well.
The plus for the rectilinear 10-20 is of course the rectilinear
Seems like its a better all rounder with cost and narrower FOV as the only (slight) cons.
Anyone care to share their experience with the 10-17 fisheye, esp on the narrow end (16-17mm)?
How wide is it VS the 10mm at 16-17mm?
How acceptable are the straight lines (@17mm)?
thx