Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Wide Angle/Fisheye Lens  
User currently offlineFighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1418 posts, RR: 22
Posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3551 times:

Hey all,
I'm looking to buy a wide angle or fisheye lens in the near future, I would mainly be using it for cabin and cockpit shots but also for other photography uses like landscapes. I currently own a 40D but am looking to buy a full frame sensor camera in the future as well (1-2 years).

I've come down to 5 main lenses:

1) EF-S 10-22mm. Good reviews,very wide, non-fisheye, moderate price, EF-S mount only.

2) EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye. Older, moderate price, decent reviews, EF mount, fisheye.

3) EF 8-15mm Fisheye. Good reviews, "L," Expensive, EF mount, fisheye.

4) Samyang 8mm Fisheye. Decent reviews, inexpensive, EF mount, fisheye.

5) Sigma 8-16mm. Moderate price, Decent reviews.

Any recommendations, or past experiences?

Thanks
Cal   


*Insert Sound Of GE90 Spooling Up Here*
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6451 posts, RR: 38
Reply 1, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3522 times:

Quoting FighterPilot (Thread starter):
I currently own a 40D but am looking to buy a full frame sensor camera in the future as well (1-2 years).

The fisheye effect is much more pronounced on a full frame camera; although Canon has tried to cater for the crop sensor too with the 8-15mm fisheye. The 'problem' with this (if you call it one) is that it's only f/4 and not 2.8 like the 15mm fisheye. If you're wanting a lens for landscapes as well, I suggest going for a non-fisheye but of course that depends on what type of landscape stuff you want to do. Maybe you want to look around for the Canon 16-35mm mk I (mk II would probably be out of your price range) considering that you're looking at full frame. Unless you plan to keep your 40D and use that solely for your UWA shots.

Ask yourself if you like the fisheye effect enough to want to get one. Maybe rent one and test it out. Fisheye doesn't suit everyone.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlinephotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2809 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (1 year 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3513 times:

The first thing you really must decide is whether you want a lens that produces a result with LOTS of barrel distortion (fisheye) or a lens that's very wide but rectilinear. Each is a distinctly different visual effect, so the lens you choose should be predicated by the result you're looking for.

User currently offlineyerbol From Kazakhstan, joined Feb 2010, 228 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3418 times:

I am a Nikon guy and use a fisheye on FF camera a lot when possible and do love it. I think this lens is very specific and gives you unique view. This is a lifesaver in tight places/spaces. I had a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 lens in the past but I didn't like it. This is just my personal experience. Perhaps you'll like wide non-fisheye. You decide  


With best regards from Almaty
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2929 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3333 times:

Quoting FighterPilot (Thread starter):
Any recommendations, or past experiences?

The Sigma 10-20 EX is pretty good. It's my lens of choice for wide angle on a crop body. It's pretty sharp.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 765 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3323 times:

It is possible to de-fish the fish-eye effect in PS fairly effectively, (though you may lose some corner detail), so a fish-eye lens may give you the best of both worlds.

The fish eye lens will certainly get you shots which may be impossible any other way - though personally I find the look gets old fast!

I very much like the Canon 10-22mm, but the fact that it only works on a crop body is an issue. If you are planning to go full frame soon, I'd consider hanging on and consider the Canon 17-40 which gives a similar POV on a full frame body, and is an excellent lens at a reasonable price for L glass. One of my favorites.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinephotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2809 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3301 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 5):
It is possible to de-fish the fish-eye effect in PS fairly effectively, (though you may lose some corner detail), so a fish-eye lens may give you the best of both worlds.

Except that none of those images, no matter how stunning would be acceptable at A.net due to image manipulation.


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 765 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3289 times:

Quoting photopilot (Reply 6):
Except that none of those images, no matter how stunning would be acceptable at A.net due to image manipulation

Really?! So is the lens correction facility available in PS not allowed? What if the lens correction is built into the camera?

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinemoose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2382 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3254 times:

Quoting FighterPilot (Thread starter):
Any recommendations, or past experiences?

I'm using the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 on my Canon 7D and am very happy with the image quality, however it is only for crop bodies.



KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
User currently offlineFYODOR From Russia, joined May 2005, 661 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3250 times:

Hi Cal,

Two cents from me.

I guess guys already told you (I didn't read all the messages) that there is a certain difference between clasic wide angle and fisheye. There are diverse kind of lenses for rether different purposes. At least they give you very different pictures - more volume but more distortion with fisheye. Preferably to have both of them in the bag.

I use full frame and have Canon 15 mm fisheye and 17-40 for wide angle (it is like 11-25 on crop matrix) and happy with both. I thought about 8-15 but didn't find enough advantages for its price. Some of my colleagues use 16-35 and 14 2.8 and happy with it as wellm but all it is price issue.

I used Sigma years ago, it is not bad but I left it and do not miss  

Regards,

Fyodor


User currently offlineJohnKrist From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1401 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3166 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting ckw (Reply 5):
If you are planning to go full frame soon, I'd consider hanging on and consider the Canon 17-40 which gives a similar POV on a full frame body, and is an excellent lens at a reasonable price for L glass. One of my favorites.

I agree, only issue is that the image is blurry in the corners at 17mm, but with a true fisheye you wont have the corners at all so I think blurry is better than black  
Only fisheye I have tried is the Sigma 8mm I bought in HK for a spotting buddy. On a 50D it produces black corners already on a crop body and is full circular on a FF. Image quality is not bad though, I've had 3 accepted on Airliners:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johnny Kristensen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johnny Kristensen


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johnny Kristensen




5D Mark III, 7D, 17-40 F4 L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, EF 1.4x II, EF 2x III, Metz 58-AF1
User currently offlineFighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1418 posts, RR: 22
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2977 times:

Thanks for the information so far.
I'm starting to lean towards the 10-20mm EF-S. The body upgrade is more of a want and not a need. I'm looking at going from my 40D to a 5D mk II or mk III but that wouldn't be for a while now. I may buy a samyang 8mm fisheye just for having a fisheye because it's so cheap. Once I upgrade to a full frame I'd sell my 10-20mm and look at getting the 16-35mm mk II

Thanks,
Cal   



*Insert Sound Of GE90 Spooling Up Here*
User currently offlinehrtsfldhomeboy From Djibouti, joined Oct 2007, 81 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2971 times:

I had the 40D & 10-22 but then upgraded to the 5Dm2 and sold the 10-22 and got a fisheye 8-15. I've been satisfied with both combos.

8-15 experiences more chromatic aberration on the fringes of the image, but its crazy sharp and the quality of a Full frame matched with a solid L quality fisheye is exactly what I want.

Canon 40D + 10-22 (@10mm)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © flightdeckimages



5Dm2 + 8-15 (@ 14-15mm)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © flightdeckimages



go beyond 14mm on a full frame with this lens and you start to see the circle of the lens casing in your frame.


User currently offlineconinpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 245 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2953 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

I use the EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM with a full frame sensor. Here is what it can give. Very sharp lense.
Cheers
Patrick

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Patrick De Coninck
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Patrick De Coninck


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Patrick De Coninck




Patrick De Coninck
User currently offlineFighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1418 posts, RR: 22
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2569 times:

Thanks for the help everyone. I've decided to go with the 10-22mm. I ordered it last week and should be here some time this week! Can't wait! I'm thinking I'm going to save for the Canon 5D MK III and purchase it some time in the new year, then sell my 10-22mm and buy the 16-35mm MK II. I'm also looking at buying the Samyang 8mm Fisheye seeing as it's so cheap, and it being a specialty lens I don't wanna spend too much on a fisheye.

Thanks again for all the help,
Cal   



*Insert Sound Of GE90 Spooling Up Here*
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Recommendations: Wide Angle/Fisheye Lenses posted Sun Jul 20 2008 03:59:53 by Flynavy
Help On Wide Angle Lens? posted Wed Jan 11 2012 06:16:53 by shufflemoomin
Wide Angle Lens With Budget posted Mon Nov 22 2010 16:45:02 by ThomasWarloe
Pick My Ultra Wide Angle Lens posted Fri Oct 8 2010 13:56:36 by RonS
The Perfect Lens For Perfect Wide Angle Shots... posted Sun Feb 7 2010 17:37:04 by SirThomas
Wide Angle Lens And In-flight Photo Success posted Mon Jan 25 2010 22:48:04 by TheCommodore
I Need To Pick A Wide Angle Lens posted Mon Nov 16 2009 08:05:58 by RonS
Wide Angle Lens posted Mon Jul 28 2008 16:42:17 by Calfo
Wide Angle Lens? posted Tue Jul 3 2007 23:22:10 by Fxfan
Canon 30D Wide Angle Lens Dilemma posted Thu Apr 26 2007 06:00:49 by LHB727230Adv