So I have been told by my employer that one of the tools I will need to add to my bag is fisheye lens. Now I have been worried about how much money I am going to have dropped by the end of the summer in terms of equipment. So I see these attachement style fisheye lenses. It seems that you can hook one up to the kit lens or similar. Does anyone have any experience with these screw-on style fish eyes? I know canon makes a 15mm fisheye, But I would love to get away cheaper if this thing performs ok.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
fisheye questions?
- Thread starter Cloud9
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Who makes that thing? Is the company name "Titanium"? I'd read user experiences with that thing before you buy it. I mean, so what if it can shoot fisheye if all the results look bad?
Make sure it's good.
Make sure it's good.
I don't remember now which you shoot, Nikon or Canon, but Nikon makes a 10.5mm (DX) fisheye which is not all that horrendously expensive. It's a fun lens! It doesn't do a complete circular fisheye but comes pretty close.
A wide-angle converter won't give you the quality of a dedicated fisheye lens (from my experience, at least, which is not much). Are you shooting FF or APS?
Seeing that you probably already have the 18-55 that came with your camera and you still want wider, that narrows down the choice a lot. I only found one cheaper than the canon 15mm, and that's the Sigma 10-20. It's not going to get much cheaper than that...
Oh, and as you use APS, you can use the canon 10-22, but it's expensive
Oh, and as you use APS, you can use the canon 10-22, but it's expensive
Have you tried approaching said employer about a lens? I don't know what type of photography you do, but I've *rarely* seen folks who shoot more than six or so times a year with a fisheye. It seems to me that if they require it, they'd get more use out of a lens that anyone could pick up when they needed it but was high-quality than everyone bringing their own Coke bottle to the mix. If it's for 360 degree architecture shots, then I can't imagine you'd get the kind of light indoors you'd want with a cheap lens, but maybe a pano head would be a better idea.
Its for weddings. I think the idea is that they want me to have in case I come accross a situation that can justify it's use thus increasing the value of the customers product.
Its not that I need a wide angle really. I have the 18-55 kit lense and it does that job for what I need it to do. My big purchases this year are to replace my Tamrom 28-75 with some L series glass and pick up a Telezoom. I am also probably gonna get an imac once leopard comes out. The employer I work for has me second shooting and this summer I will be leading some second tier weddings. I could rent a fish eye form them, but that feels like throwing money away. If I can slap something on the front of my 18-55 and it works ok sweet! IF I have to drop 200 dollars thats not the worst thing that can happen. But I am shooting on an APS and so the fisheye effect is going to dampend anyway. If someone here has shot with one of the fisheye attachments I would love to know how it went. The Sigma 10-20 that was mentioned earlier I do not believe is a fisheye, so I am not sure how that is helpfull. I actually would love a wider lense then what I have though so I will look into it anyway.
Its not that I need a wide angle really. I have the 18-55 kit lense and it does that job for what I need it to do. My big purchases this year are to replace my Tamrom 28-75 with some L series glass and pick up a Telezoom. I am also probably gonna get an imac once leopard comes out. The employer I work for has me second shooting and this summer I will be leading some second tier weddings. I could rent a fish eye form them, but that feels like throwing money away. If I can slap something on the front of my 18-55 and it works ok sweet! IF I have to drop 200 dollars thats not the worst thing that can happen. But I am shooting on an APS and so the fisheye effect is going to dampend anyway. If someone here has shot with one of the fisheye attachments I would love to know how it went. The Sigma 10-20 that was mentioned earlier I do not believe is a fisheye, so I am not sure how that is helpfull. I actually would love a wider lense then what I have though so I will look into it anyway.
Oooh, a twice a year lens! I'd resist given that your plan to spend money on L series glass will give you much, much better impact.
Congratulations!
It's not- rent it twice a year, you'll likely never use one when you're out on your own.
It's not, it's supposed to be fairly soft in the corners, but it's w-i-d-e for sure. I'd get that before a fisheye, at least if you're going to do strange perspective shots that shot looking up should be pretty interesting. Not that it or a fisheye is going to make or break a wedding album.
Looks like Tokina just introduced a fairly interesting option:
http://www.thkphoto.com/products/tokina/atx107afdx-a.html
If you're not in a rush to purchase, you may wish to wait and see what reviews have to say about this lens, especially on crop factor bodes, as it's a FF lens.
http://www.thkphoto.com/products/tokina/atx107afdx-a.html
If you're not in a rush to purchase, you may wish to wait and see what reviews have to say about this lens, especially on crop factor bodes, as it's a FF lens.
Then you don't want a Canon fisheye. I have a fisheye on the list of things to get, after the underwater kit that I want (which means the fisheye is probably around eight to ten years away), but unless I buy the 5D (or other full frame body), the Canon fisheye isn't worth it. Why spend that much money on a lens, only to have the most interesting part of the image cropped out automatically?
Your best bet would probably be to look at the Sigma fisheye. Fisheyes in general are highly specialised lenses, though; I'd strongly recommend renting rather than buying, unless you know you're going to use it a lot.
Does anyone have any experience of the Nikon 10.5mm fisheye? It seems a pretty pricey lense to me, but I've been shooting a cheap lomo 35mm fisheye for years and would love to get the same effect on my dslr. Do you think it's worth the price?
At the moment I have the 18-200mm VR as my one and only lens and have started thinking about a prime lens for my second. I was originally toying with the nikon 35mm f/2 or the sigma 30mm f/1.4 as a fast standard lense but am not sure how much benefit I would get from the faster glass? So now I have started leaning towards the fisheye instead but it just seems rather expensive at £500+
I'd be greatful for peoples thought?
At the moment I have the 18-200mm VR as my one and only lens and have started thinking about a prime lens for my second. I was originally toying with the nikon 35mm f/2 or the sigma 30mm f/1.4 as a fast standard lense but am not sure how much benefit I would get from the faster glass? So now I have started leaning towards the fisheye instead but it just seems rather expensive at £500+
I'd be greatful for peoples thought?
Just curious who is your employer? The only reason for a fish eye lens on a digital is a wider angle. The add on lenses do a horrible job. I would recommend the Sigma 14 or Sigma 8mm lenses. These are cheaper than the brand name stuff. The sigma 14 is nor really a fish eye but gives a nice wide angle. KEH is selling 14's for $235. I think the Sigma 8 is the only digital fish eye that is around but there could be others. Do you really need the fish eye effect?
Ask him "why" not to challenge him but explain that there are several fisheye lenses and which one you should get depends on the subject and the desired effect
The first fisheyes were designed by Nikon for doing tank inspections. The idea was you'd lower the camera into some access port and get like a 270 degree view of the inside of the tank. Others were made for arial mapping. Only later did people try them for general photography.
Fish eyes do not render straight lines straight but distort everything. It is a very specialized lens and the effect is so pronounced that it "gets old" quickly and you have to use it sparingly
It could be he is confused and has misused the word "fisheye" and really meant just "extra super wide". Not everyone uses technical terms correctly. So ask "why".
I'm betting he meant "ultra wide".
Does he really like the distortion effect? If so could it be added later in Photoshop? Or does he just like the "in your face" wide angle style that is the current fad.
True circular field fisheyes are "way expensive". but a zoom that goes to 10mm is only moderately expensive and good to have.
Sounds like this might be tax deductable. If so you'll get an effective discount
Yikes. Buy a plane ticket to New York. Buy the lens there for $570 (B&H Photo) and have a lens AND a short vacation for the price of the lens in the UK.
LoL a friggen fisheye for WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY!?
what the hell are you talking about?
EDIT: maybe he just means like 20mm vs a 28mm WIDE angle lens?
in any case, wedding photos should have ZERO distortion in any part of the photo and anything less than 28mm is going to give you some serious bulging.
what the hell are you talking about?
EDIT: maybe he just means like 20mm vs a 28mm WIDE angle lens?
in any case, wedding photos should have ZERO distortion in any part of the photo and anything less than 28mm is going to give you some serious bulging.
Eh, I might disagree. Wedding shots can be quite creative - a fisheye might be something to add on to standard shots. I certainly wouldn't take more than 5% with a fisheye, but it might be neat to see a few photos with that kind of distortion.
wedding photography is a business unto itself, i know jack squat about it other than im not hiring one for my own wedding. so perhaps my assumption was a bit much, i just really cant see a regular Joe and Jill buying distorted photos.
Fisheye effects can be very cool, if used properly, and not overdone. You will see many wedding photographers use them for fun shots, and I know I love to use mine for something a bit different. The problem you will run into, is that on a crop body the 15mm Fish eyes don't give much of that effect. On FF, it is very pronounced with 15. You can pick up a sigma 8 mm circular or maybe on of the 10mm, or even the new zoom (I think is designed for crop) and that might give you the same effect.
Tidal Basin and Jefferson Memorial with the Nikkor 10.5mm fisheye
D200
10.5mm fisheye (Current Nikon DSLR cameras have 1.5 "crop factor")
D200
10.5mm fisheye (Current Nikon DSLR cameras have 1.5 "crop factor")
If you want to go the cheap but good quality way, there is a solution. I dont remember the name (Zentar?!?), but there is a russia made lens that fit on Canon EOS. It is totaly manual which means that you have to set the aperture on the lens and the EXIF data wont include any info on the lens but it does work well.
I have one at home but I havent used it much since I got my 17-40L. It costed me 70$ shipped. Its a 19mm lens. I am still debating if I should get rid of it or wait until I get a full frame body...
My step cousin shot my wedding with my 17-40 (on a 1.6 crop) and it was perfect. So my guess would be that you should get that lens before the fisheye...
And almost out of subject... If you are getting an iMac, be carefull with the brigthness of the screen. A lot of photographers are complaining about the 24''. I hope they fix this with the next release, it is just a software problem since it can be correct with an app. That is why I just got a 23'' cinema display and it is totaly worth it!
I have one at home but I havent used it much since I got my 17-40L. It costed me 70$ shipped. Its a 19mm lens. I am still debating if I should get rid of it or wait until I get a full frame body...
My step cousin shot my wedding with my 17-40 (on a 1.6 crop) and it was perfect. So my guess would be that you should get that lens before the fisheye...
And almost out of subject... If you are getting an iMac, be carefull with the brigthness of the screen. A lot of photographers are complaining about the 24''. I hope they fix this with the next release, it is just a software problem since it can be correct with an app. That is why I just got a 23'' cinema display and it is totaly worth it!
I think a fisheye is an essential tool for weddings, I use a sigma 15 (pretty inexpensive compared to the canon 15 and since I only use it for maybe a handful of shots at each wedding didn't want to fork over the extra $$$ for the canon).
Shots like a wide view of the church or reception hall the fisheye really come in handy. And since you have a 20d it wouldn't even be a true fisheye, just a pretty good wide angle.
Here are some I shot with a 20d, I do also use it with the 5d which then gives you a true fish and can look really cool
Shots like a wide view of the church or reception hall the fisheye really come in handy. And since you have a 20d it wouldn't even be a true fisheye, just a pretty good wide angle.
Here are some I shot with a 20d, I do also use it with the 5d which then gives you a true fish and can look really cool