More with the Nikkor 10.5 fisheye lens

[Chip NoVaMac]

There was a questioned raised about some images I posted in this thread about my travels to Reykjavik and London about a month ago:

https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2271179&posted=1#post2271179

Thought I would post the before and after pictures from the de-fishing option in Nikon Capture.

These quick conversions just confirms to me that the 18-200VR and the 10.5 is a perfect travel combo.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

The next couple of posts are also from my trip. What these showed me is the need for a bubble level for the hot shoe in order to eliminate over cropping on corrected images. Overall, very happy with what the 10.5 and Nikon Capture can give the photographer.

Is it perfect? Based on my limited use of the Voightlander 15mm lens on my Leica M6TTL, probably not. There is a certain unpredictability of distortions in the corrected image. Not a killer IMO though.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Here is the next set.

There is also the "artistic" difference that needs to be looked at too IMO. For does the distortion of the fisheye give something more to the image, or does the reticular image say more.

 

[ksz]

The photo of Harrod's department store is the best example here (imo) of the fisheye perspective. Compared to the flat perspective of the 18-200 VR, the fisheye version of Harrod's is much more interesting!

Obviously, a fisheye is not suited to all situations such as the first one with the hot dog stand, but if used in scenes with lots of detail that is spread out horizontally and vertically, it can provide very interesting images.

Most of my travel lately has been on business, but whenever possible I try to capture moments that reflect "a day in the life of..." This means taking photos of a crowded subway, pedestrians on a sidewalk during lunch hour, the local markets, and other images of daily life. Of course I will take photos of the usual tourist attractions, but those photos don't capture the essence of the culture and its people.

 

[Abstract]

When you use the fisheye, are the edges more blurred than the middle? Is there a negative side to using the fisheye and then straightening it out later? I'm very interested in getting this lense for myself, but can't decide between this and the 12-24 mm wideangle.

Weird though, because I've never used or seen anyone use a fisheye before really, and thought you'd get much wider photos than that. It's supposed to be 180 degree perspective, but not really sure how wide it really is, or whether that 180 is the 35mm equivalent and is diffferent on Nikon dSLRs.

 

[ksz]

The 10.5mm fisheye becomes a 15mm lens on a DX sensor. Those extra 5 millimeters make a lot of difference, and the full effect of the fisheye has been lost on the smaller sensor, so you're not quite getting a 180-degree field of view.

I have the Tokina 12-24 lens for my D200. It's half the price and 90%+ the performance of Nikon's version. Rumor has it that Pentax engineers had a hand in its design. For wideangle lovers like me, this is a wonderful lens.

 

[ksz]

Sorry to hijack this thread for a moment, but here's a photo with the Tokina 12-24 lens.

 

[Abstract]

Thanks.

I really desperately need a wideangle lense of some sort, and either a 12-24 or the 10.5 mm fisheye are great. I don't need 180 degree shots, but wide is good. I'm just trying to think of what the drawback of the fisheye is. Are the edges really soft or unsharp or something, because why would anyone buy a 12-24 mm if they could get a 10.5 mm fisheye, straighten out the image, and get a wider shot than they could with a 10.5 mm fisheye?

The Princess Diana and Al Fayed shot shows just how wide the fisheye can shoot even using a camera with a DX sensor, but then the Chips other shots don't seem as "wide", particularly the one looking down at the escalators.

Love that photo ksz. I would love to be able to get a wider angle shot like that. And not to hijack the thread either, but I have a shot from the road like yours taken with a simple P&S ultraslim camera, but if I took it using a wideangle of any sort, I would have been thrilled with the result.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Thanks.

I really desperately need a wideangle lense of some sort, and either a 12-24 or the 10.5 mm fisheye are great. I don't need 180 degree shots, but wide is good. I'm just trying to think of what the drawback of the fisheye is. Are the edges really soft or unsharp or something, because why would anyone buy a 12-24 mm if they could get a 10.5 mm fisheye, straighten out the image, and get a wider shot than they could with a 10.5 mm fisheye?

The Princess Diana and Al Fayed shot shows just how wide the fisheye can shoot even using a camera with a DX sensor, but then the Chips other shots don't seem as "wide", particularly the one looking down at the escalators.

Love that photo ksz. I would love to be able to get a wider angle shot like that. And not to hijack the thread either, but I have a shot from the road like yours taken with a simple P&S ultraslim camera, but if I took it using a wideangle of any sort, I would have been thrilled with the result.

I don't think that the questions and comments on the Tokina 12-24, or commenting on photos posted are thread hijacking. I also have the Tokina and it is a very sharp lens, with low distortion.

The 10.5 and Capture will not be better than the 12-24. There is some softening on the edges, and issues with CA. But for a fun lens with the ability to provide a 14mm FOV when needed, and being small and fast - a good compromise lens IMO.

The Tokina will give a 18mm FOV, and for most that is all that is needed or desired.

 

[fradac]

you need to try this

http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/oxfordtour/canon5dworkflow/

and make a panoramic VR

 

[iGary]

you need to try this

http://www.chem.ox.ac.uk/oxfordtour/canon5dworkflow/

and make a panoramic VR

The Precision 360 head is indeed a fine pano head, but the 8mm Sigma would be a better lens.

Anyway - nice pics Chip! I hope to get out and play with my wide angle tonight and tomorrow down at the Tidal Basin.

 

[ksz]

I was looking through some scanned slide film today and noticed the difference between "analog" and digital. Digital is, of course, very clean -- almost too clean. Analog images seem to convey more warmth and emotion, whereas the cleanliness of digital seems to produce a slightly sterile effect. I'm not sure many will agree, but here are two analog photos to consider, both shot in Venice.

 

[fradac]

The Precision 360 head is indeed a fine pano head, but the 8mm Sigma would be a better lens.

Anyway - nice pics Chip! I hope to get out and play with my wide angle tonight and tomorrow down at the Tidal Basin.

iGary,

ya it would definately be better with the sigma 8mm lens. and a 360precision head. but it works very well hand held too and with a less wide lens.

look at this guy.

http://www.panoramas.dk/d60/index.html

now only if i had a nice digital SLR and a nice fisheye else.

grr..

 

[Subiklim]

My shots with the 10.5/2.8

I love the lens, here are a few of my 'uncorrected' shots.

 

[Pistol Pete]

i hate all of you! you have been to some beautiful places....or just live there....damn san diego

 

[Abstract]

The 10.5mm fisheye becomes a 15mm lens on a DX sensor. Those extra 5 millimeters make a lot of difference, and the full effect of the fisheye has been lost on the smaller sensor, so you're not quite getting a 180-degree field of view.

Wait, isn't the 10.5 mm fisheye made specifically for Nikon dSLRs, who don't even produce a FF dSLR? Why wouldn't you be able to get the full 180 degrees?

Anyway, I'm definitely going to consider the Tokina 12-24mm, but I might just get the fisheye to be different. But maybe I'll change my mind since I think I'd rather have the "normal" wideangle first, then get a fun 10.5 mm fisheye later.

 

[iGary]

This is an 8mm lens on a 1.6 crop factor camera...you see where the crop is, and yes you still get 180 degrees.

 

[ksz]

Wait, isn't the 10.5 mm fisheye made specifically for Nikon dSLRs, who don't even produce a FF dSLR? Why wouldn't you be able to get the full 180 degrees?

Anyway, I'm definitely going to consider the Tokina 12-24mm, but I might just get the fisheye to be different. But maybe I'll change my mind since I think I'd rather have the "normal" wideangle first, then get a fun 10.5 mm fisheye later.

Right you are.

The 10.5 is a DX lens whose image circle has been reduced to fit the DX sensor. It's equivalent to 16mm on FF according to the Nikon website, but on a DX sensor it should still provide a 180-degree FOV.

 

[Abstract]

^^Haha, yeah, contradictory to what you said before, but I guess it doesn't matter either way because I don't really need 180 degrees anyway. I wouldn't have even minded if my image was cropped by a 1.6x factor because lets face it......100 degrees would have been plenty.

 

[Clix Pix]

Down at the Tidal Basin in DC, I was shooting with several other photographer friends, and one of them had the 10.5mm fisheye, so he let me try it out...