It looks like a truly fun lens to work with. :smile: & I see no issues with softness in any of your shots. All these make me feel a lot better about spending the money on a Fisheye as I see far more things I can do with it & then the expense seems less of a concern. Though my nephew having fun is the most important part to me.Yes, I use the 10.5mm on flowers quite a bit:
The 8mm (Sigma or the 8/f2.8 Nikkor AIS) is a circular fisheye. It produces a round image about 23mm in diameter on 35mm film. Its FOV is 180 degrees in a circle, meaning in all directions. Since the image is really a circle, everything outside the image circle is black on the slide. On a DX with a 23x15 sensor, you get this cropped, so it looks a bit odd. AndyE posted a few from the 8/f2.8 a while back.I still don't understand which is the difference. Fisheye, DX or FF means a 180° / 120° angle of view. I really can't link it correctly with focal lenghts, nor understand which kind of utility has the Tokina 10-17 fisheye zoom. I'm neither sure Lil got it completely.
Which is the REAL, practical difference between a 8mm, 10.5, 16, or 10-17?
I've downloaded PTLens in case I'll need it. Thanks for all this information.What I HAVE experienced is that about 30% of the time, Nikon Capture produces truly BAD results in the corners when one DEFISHES one of these images. I have not tried Capture NX, and some have told me that it does this better. Bjorn Rorslett says that PTlens also is more reliable. I do not defish much so I cannot comment on either of those options. But I did a fair amount of defishing when I got the lens while I was learning how to use it. The bad defished corners didn't take a critical eye to detect...
The 8mm (Sigma or the 8/f2.8 Nikkor AIS) is a circular fisheye. It produces a round image about 23mm in diameter on 35mm film. Its FOV is 180 degrees in a circle, meaning in all directions. Since the image is really a circle, everything outside the image circle is black on the slide. On a DX with a 23x15 sensor, you get this cropped, so it looks a bit odd. AndyE posted a few from the 8/f2.8 a while back.
The 10.5mm on DX, or the 16/f2.8 on 35mm are rectangular fisheyes. They have a FOV of 180 diagonally, something like 160 horizontally and about 140 vertically (but don't quote me on those last two). They fill the entire frame of their respective formats, leaving no black corners.
The 16/f2.8 yields the center of a rectangular fisheye on DX. I'd estimate that the FOV is around 95 degrees diagonally - that is, much less than the Sigma 10-20 does.
The Tokina 10-17 zoom yields a rectangular fisheye with 180 diagonal coverage at 10mm, and a mild "cropped like" fisheye at 17mm.
In all of these, any straight line that does not go through the exact center of the frame becomes curved, and more curved the further from the center. It's barrel distortion gone wild.
The Sigma 10-20, by comparison, tries to maintain straight lines as straight, no matter where they are. It does a reasonable job of that, but if you really want no distortion in a superwide lens, the one you want is the Sigma 12-24, which has functionally invisible distortion even at 12mm and even on 36x24.
There is a spot in northwest Beijing just inside the 4th ring road that could be a double of that location - except that I now notice that where I see parking lot, you've got beach! But the high-rises in the background and even the fruit stand could be dead ringers of each other - weird!This was shot on the beach in Rosarito Mexico
Picking nits, the two types of fisheye are circular and rectangular. By definition, fisheyes are not rectilinear, meaning that straight lines stay straight. The Nikon 14/f2.8 and Sigma 10-20 are rectilinear lenses, for example.Ok, NOW I got the point about the difference between CIRCULAR and RECTILINEAR fisheye...
Thanks Julien, I've sent you a PM, but..... it would reason that the Zenitar 16mm 2.8 would become a 24mm fisheye on the D200 just as much as a Nikon 16mm would.You could also look into the Zenitar 16mm 2.8 , they go really cheap on ebay :wink: