10D with 15mm - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

05/23/2003 08:10:46 AM · #1

For those interested, I was in NYC this WE and rented a canon 15mm2.8 from alkit (no pb, competent and good service). Here are some of my shots with it, it was very interesting to use.

10D with 15mm

I have been interesting with manequins in windows and would like to know what you think of my 'mixed worlds' shots, how the real world and the manequin world intricate in each other. Charles bukowski has a novel in 'south on no north' about a 'amost alive' manequin or at least a manequin becoming alive in the eyes of somebody. I have heard about a twilight zone episoe with manequin being alive in a department store ... if anybody have references of thins like that .. I am interested !

Anyway ... the 15mm was fun
LIonel

Konador

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

05/23/2003 08:16:30 AM · #2

i really like the way the buildings become distorted, specially in the shot with the flowers.

Jacko

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/23/2003 08:20:21 AM · #3

Lionel,

That is totally awesome. I love perspective distortion (fish-eye effect). OK, add that one to my wish list. :)

Thank you so much for sharing.

Go team 10D :)

OneSweetSin

Nikon D3000

05/23/2003 08:21:48 AM · #4

The maniquin shot is great. I also find them to be very interesting. The buildings are also neat with all the distortion on them. Looks like you also enjoyed yourself.

05/23/2003 08:43:51 AM · #5

Yes I had fun with the lens! I guess a 15-30 like the sigma would be very very sweet .... I am just concerned with the front lens buldging. I read good about the cheap 19-35 cosina/tamron/tokina at 180$ but I am afraid that the difference between 15 and 19 will make loose the potential 'fisheye-kinda' effect.

With the manequin shot I always have problems to find out if I am the only one interested or not. I will build a page of a selection of my shots about them.

joshua

Canon EOS-500D Rebel T1i

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

05/23/2003 09:05:11 AM · #6

i love the tulip shot...well i like them all but that's my favorite.

magnetic9999

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX Aspherical DF for Canon

05/23/2003 09:15:14 AM · #7

very cool!

i got the vivitar 19-35, only $150 !

here's a couple shots (test shots only!) comparing 28 mm (*1.6) with 19 mm (*1.6) - both taken standing in exact same spot. the 19mm makes it seem like i moved back!

28 mm

19 mm

decent quality, esp for the price!

Morgan

Nikon D800

Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8D IF-ED

05/23/2003 09:20:11 AM · #8

Great images - lots of fun to view the world from this unique prospective.

Would you be so kind as to tell us what software you used to create the wonderful web site album. I have been struggling with the new Photoshop Album, and it is great. But, I have not been able to achieve any results as good as your album. It would really help me to know as I need to do something very similar for my work. Cheers, Michael

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

05/23/2003 09:24:33 AM · #9

Originally posted by Morgan:

That's a breesebrowser template (its in the page source)

www.breezesys.com The HTML generation features are great - very customisable too.

05/23/2003 09:30:32 AM · #10

Originally posted by magnetic9999:

very cool!
i got the vivitar 19-35, only $150 !
here's a couple shots (test shots only!) comparing 28 mm (*1.6) with 19 mm (*1.6) - both taken standing in exact same spot. the 19mm makes it seem like i moved back!
28 mm
19 mm
decent quality, esp for the price!

Thanks for the post mag ! I read good things about it for that amazing price. It's a sure bet in that range of price, even if it looks like between 15 and 19 we loose the rounded/fisheye effect. But the sigma15-30 is int the 500 range I think.

Morgan, BreezeBrowser is very nice. You can create your own template but the one they provide are already good. I like them .. no fancy stuff but stil nice. You can create your own templates.

05/23/2003 09:42:18 AM · #11

The middle image of my triptych shot was taken with my new Sigma 15mm fish. It's a fun lens for any camera, but for a DSLR, it offers the opportunity to get a wider angle than almost any other. Even with the 1.6x crop, it approximates a 17 or 18mm lens! That's nice.

And with that smaller sensor, the really, really bad distortion at the edges never even gets captured. Really a fun, fun lens to use.

Message edited by author 2003-05-23 10:32:08.

Froober

05/23/2003 09:48:21 AM · #12

Those are awesome Lio!! I want that lens!!!!

I love the mannequin shots too. To me they are not so much pictures of two different worlds though. Seems more of a statement on social behavior. Mannequins looking out upon animate mannequins and/or their behaviors...people 'dressing and posing' themselves as they wish the rest of the world to view them. The looks on the mannequin faces seem almost scornful...like they're thinking 'so you think you're so different?!...'

Wow...after reading that I think I need to schedule an appt with a shrink...I must have some deeply buried childhood issues LOL. I still love the pictures Great job! :o)

Incarlight

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

05/23/2003 10:25:44 AM · #13

My two favourites are the first mannequin shot and the flower shot. The mannequin almost looks like she's looking out from a glass prison. And the flower shot looks like it's from the eyes of a small animal. Great work.

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

05/23/2003 11:46:27 AM · #14

Too much distortion for my taste. I have a 20-35 mm and that's enough for me. Anything below 20mm will have distortion like that.

Originally posted by lionelm:

05/23/2003 11:49:03 AM · #15

Originally posted by paganini:

Too much distortion for my taste. I have a 20-35 mm and that's enough for me. Anything below 20mm will have distortion like that.

That't the beauty of digital. It's a trivial matter to completely remove that distortion, and even with the lost corners, have a lens that comes close to 18mm, POST CROP. Your 20mm lens is close to 32mm post crop.

And regardless, one can get lenses below 20mm that aren't fisheye.

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

05/23/2003 11:51:50 AM · #16

Yup, the word is: you have to CROP (and could lose your original composition).

32mm is good enough for me. I'd rather save up for a lens like the 24-70 mm L and then get a full frame DSLR when it becomes cheap :) The 20-35 mm is sufficient for now.

Originally posted by welcher:

Originally posted by paganini:
Too much distortion for my taste. I have a 20-35 mm and that's enough for me. Anything below 20mm will have distortion like that.

That't the beauty of digital. It's a trivial matter to completely remove that distortion, and even with the lost corners, have a lens that comes close to 18mm, POST CROP. Your 20mm lens is close to 32mm post crop.

And regardless, one can get lenses below 20mm that aren't fisheye.

05/23/2003 12:04:41 PM · #17

Originally posted by paganini:

Yup, the word is: you have to CROP (and could lose your original composition).

Actually, when debarrellizing, all you lose is the extreme corners of the original shot. Not a big deal, and something that could certainly be taken into account when shooting.

But you're right. If 32mm is good enough for you, than 32mm is good enough for you! I just wanted to point out that that distortion wasn't a real big problem in the digital world.

Jacko

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/23/2003 12:07:24 PM · #18

The distortion is th beauty of that lens. Why do you think people buy that lens? for the wide angle?

[quote=paganini]Too much distortion for my taste. I have a 20-35 mm and that's enough for me. Anything below 20mm will have distortion like that.

05/23/2003 12:13:14 PM · #19

Originally posted by Jacko:

The distortion is th beauty of that lens. Why do you think people buy that lens? for the wide angle?

Actually, I bought it for both! Most immediately for the wide angle, to answer current DSLRs' most glaring shortcoming. But, I fully intend to learn how to put the barrel effect to good artistic use.

05/23/2003 12:24:54 PM · #20

I guess some people like it and some people not. I personnally do not think that the distorsion is a problem.

In that case, it's not a barrel distorsion because the lens would be bad .. it's a distortion 'by definition'. It does not bother me, I even like it.

The thing its that it should not be an excuse to make any shot 'artsy' because of that. Otherwise I think it open 'perspectives' he he he

paganini

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

05/23/2003 01:07:31 PM · #21

Actually most people who have 1.6x cameras buys 17mm lenses (i think Canon has 16-35 L and 17-40 L now, as well as Sigma) to compensate for the lack of 24 mm equivalent view points. Unfortunately at 17 mm, even with a 1.6x factor, you will get distortions that you don't get with 24mm @ full frame camera. I think I might be able to live with 17mm distortion, but 15mm is a bit extreme for me. The 20-35mm is nearly distortion free at 20mm and a bit of pinocushion @ 35mm, not bad at all so that's what I have.

Is it correctable? sure, do you lose resolution, yes, do you lose composition (original), yes unless you compensate it earlier. Not to mention if you take photos in the wide range, it's a real pain to do that for each photo. Guess i'll have to live with 32mm equivalent viewpoint for now.

Originally posted by Jacko:

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

05/23/2003 01:55:12 PM · #22

This is the main reason I bought a film SLR...

Jacko