| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/02/2005 11:44:41 AM · #1 |
Geez, am I crazy???
Just got the IIN and I'm already thinking about a new lens for this thing. The Tamron at 17 isn't wide enough at times. I've also a Tokina 12-24 on my 300D, but started to think about a 15mm fisheye. I'd prefer a Sigma over a Canon b/c it's $400 vs $600 and both seem good.
I've a Tamron 17-35 but want wider. (FOV 104 degrees on FF & 17=22 with 1.3 crop)
I've also a Tokina 12-24 on a Rebel (FOV 99 degrees max and 12=19 with 1.6 crop)
The 15mm fisheye (OFV 180 on FF, 15=19.5 with 1.3 crop)
Anythoughts on the difference in the FOV between the Rebel at 12mm vs. 15mm fisheye on a II N would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
10/02/2005 11:48:29 AM · #2 |
i just found a great sample today about 8 vs 10 vs 12... all to 100. let me find the link right quick.
|
|
|
|
10/02/2005 11:49:07 AM · #3 |
note that these are on a 20D no a 1.25x crop factor camera.
//ttv.paksut.net/photo/WideComparison/
edit: also note that the fisheyes will be significantly wider on 1.25x
thanks to kirbic for this chart i always refer to :-)
//img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/kyebosh/FoVComparo_v3.jpg
Message edited by author 2005-10-02 11:51:12.
|
|
|
|
10/02/2005 12:07:18 PM · #4 |
Ah Thank you for the info.
Looks like in DFOV, Tokina is 99, Tamron at 17 is 88.8 (on a IIN), 15 fish is 140 on IIN and 108 on Reble.
For the IIN going from DFOV/HFOV 88.8/78 to 140/114 seems like quiet a bit.
I guess my next decision is to see if I want to spend $400 for the Sigma fisheye, which I'm starting to lean towards buying.
Or should I make the decision easier and buy the Zenitar 16mm? It's about $150 and unfortunately MF and 16mm, if that makes any difference.
Message edited by author 2005-10-02 12:11:46.
|
|
|
|
10/02/2005 12:17:31 PM · #5 |
The 1st 3 pictures in this thread was taken with a 1Dmk2 and Sigma 14mm f2.8
//dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=282092
|
|
|
|
10/02/2005 12:28:38 PM · #6 |
| the zenitar is a risk, there are plenty of bad copies floating around, and good ones still aren't that good. Your camera meter also might not work with it. The sigma isn't really that great. Fisheye on the 1.3 crop is still pretty fishy, a lot better than the 1.6. If you want to know what lens is the best bang for your buck, I have a nice canon brand answer for you. |
|
|
|
10/02/2005 12:32:11 PM · #7 |
I know this is probably immaterial, but if you are thinking of going second hand at all, make sure you get a chance to test it for compatibility with whatever you want to use it on. My friend shot an EOS 5 for a few years, and had the Sigma 14mm rectilinear. When he went to the Rebel, he was able to use the Sigma for a few months, but it was terrible 50% of the time and after a little while all he got was Err 99.
Sigma lenses sometimes don't have the right chips for compaitibility with newer cams. The local shop told him it might be rechipped, but he has opted out of that due to price and he took it back to canada last month to get his brother to try to sell 2nd hand.
I know you know this, but just thought I'd throw it out there. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/19/2025 06:22:44 AM EDT.
