| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/16/2007 07:40:06 PM · #1 |
I'm looking for a fish eye lens for my 30d, I have found cannon's 15mm f2.8, I like the speed of that lens, but not sure it's short enough. I shoot bands, that is how I make my living, so I need something shorter then 15mm. can anyone help. I need it to be 2.8 at least
|
|
|
|
06/16/2007 07:42:17 PM · #2 |
I just found the sigma 8mm circular fisheye, but it doesn't appear to be very sharp.
ohh whats a boy to do?
|
|
|
|
06/16/2007 07:53:17 PM · #3 |
| Tokina make a 10-17mm fisheye zoom... can't comment on it but it may be worth looking at. |
|
|
|
06/16/2007 08:00:36 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by shalrath:
Tokina make a 10-17mm fisheye zoom... can't comment on it but it may be worth looking at. |
I just read a review for it, and it sounds like a solid lens. does anyone have any experence with it?
|
|
|
|
06/16/2007 08:03:43 PM · #5 |
Sigma makes a non fish eye 10-22, its smooth and distorition free if your lookign for a non fisheye wide zoom.
I looked around cant find any reviews that include real test shots. The peleng 8mm looks wicked but nothing youd want to use for decent work. |
|
|
|
06/16/2007 08:10:09 PM · #6 |
Peleng has a manual focus 8mm circular fish.
Sigma has an AF 8mm circular.
Nikon has a 10.5mm rect. fisheye. |
|
|
|
06/16/2007 08:52:36 PM · #7 |
you are pretty much outta luck with a 30d wanting a fisheye.
the peleng lens is a crapshoot, lots of copies are garbage.
same with the sigma.
both 8mm lenses will also have a lot of vignetting.
your only solutions if you want a true fisheye on a digital camera is to switch to nikon and get the 10.5 mm, or get the 5d and the 15mm.... or you can try that tokina 10-17 ...which is probably your best/only option if you want real fisheye and want to stay with the 30d.
I used to shoot a lot of skateboarding so I exhausted researching all the fisheye options. There aren't any more besides what's been mentioned. |
|
|
|
06/16/2007 09:59:16 PM · #8 |
I have the 10-17 tokina. I love it. A lot sharper than I expected, not as fishy as I expected. Here is a shot I took last week at 640 ISO, 10mm F3.5, 1/800, no editing RAW shots (I was standing about 6 inches from the railing:
actual pixel crop of center, no editing or sharpening:
edited 10mm shot at 100 ISO (I was about 10 feet from the building):
edited at 10mm at 100 ISO (I was practically under the tree):
The lens is a lot more than I hoped for. At 17 it is barely fishy, more of a barrel distortion similar to what I got with my tamron 17-35 at 17mm.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2026 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 01/02/2026 05:32:10 AM EST.
