Looking to get a fisheye lens- need help.

[Cannibalized]

I'm looking to get a fisheye. Not the kind that makes the full circle but like an ultra wide. I'm looking up the adapters and theres .65, .5, .45, .42, and .2 something. I guess the smaller the number = wider. I don't know much about these things, obviously the prices vary though. Which would be good for shooting buildings, cityskapes, and skateboarders? I want to be able to use it regularly, too. Something that won't be too curvy at the edges but will still be super wide. Could I get a recommendation of a brand, or which width would be the most adequate?

I'm just generally looking on ebay for something that's not too costly.

Also is there some sort of program that somewhat straightens the edges?

[studio206]

yeah you can use photoshop to correct the bending at the edges. use your transform tool and i believe u hold alt o.O i don't remember... I'd have to be in photoshop to tell u lol. but it sounds to me that you are looking for a ultra wide angle lens o.O all of the shots from fisheye lenses make that full-circle, bubble look o.O i dunno. in all honesty, it depends on what type of effect you are trying to achieve.

[savona]

What kind of camera do you have?

[Cannibalized]

Don't want the 180 bubble. Do you know if these adapters I speak of do what I am looking to do?

[Cannibalized]

Canon 20d.

[Hikariphoto]

Adapters? You mentioned adapters -- is the one you're talking about those things they sell on Ebay that you screw on the end of a lens and it's supposed to make it a fisheye? Do NOT go there. I promise you you will not be happy with that route -- the glass quality is always inferior, and anyway the last thing you need to be doing is adding more glass to the end of a lens that already has a bunch of elements. You don't need more diffraction and diffusion in your lens. What you need is an actual ultra-wide-angle lens.

Sigma makes a 15mm fisheye that's really quite nice and fairly affordable at $500. Canon's version, 15mm 2.8 fisheye, is listed at B&H for $579.95, so if you're anal-retentive about the brand of your lenses, look at that one.

That said, if you don't want the "fisheye" look (bending in on the corners){, you can get an ultra-wide aspherical lens like the Sigma 10-20 or the 12-24 or Canon 14 2.8L; Canon's EF-S 10-22 is a nice lens too. The only drawback to EF-S lenses is you can't stick them on film bodies or on EF bodies like the 1D series, the 10D or the 5D.

Keep in mind that all ultrawides will distort to some degree. My 17-35 2.8L lens distorts on the edges, so I can't use it at the wide end for formals at a wedding.

I've shot with all the lenses listed above and if you're looking to do some wide stuff any of them will work.

[Cannibalized]

Thank you. That will help me a lot when I have 500 bucks to spend on a lens but as of now I'm not doing anything professional and I just like to take pictures. That being said is the screw on adapter all that inferior if I'm not planning on using it for anything fancy? Obviously it's not going to look like photos from a 10-22 canon would, but do you really think I'd be unhappy if I spend 40 bucks on one of those just for something to play around with? It can't be THAT inferior, can it?

[Hikariphoto]

Your definition of "inferior" and my definition of "inferior" are likely very different... :) But then I make my living with my lenses so I can't afford NOT to own the best, if that makes sense. I have to take image quality into consideration every time I purchase a piece of glass because I can't afford to have a clear paperweight in my camera bag. But hey, out-of-focus and funky-colored images have been called "art" for years, and it might be worth the $40 to turn your 20D into a Holga. :D

For $40, it won't kill you to try it out, but I know a couple of photographers who have been suckered into those things, and after playing with them once or twice they put them away and haven't touched them. The primary reason was that regardless of what the Ebay auction says, the quality of the glass is generally inferior and in some cases the lenses simply don't allow your primary lens to focus correctly. Combinations of lens coatings and center points can create nightmares of chromatic aberration, flare and sharpness issues. Whatever happens, you could always just turn around and put the thing back up on Ebay.

KEH.com currently has a Sigma 15/2.8 manual focus fisheye on their site for $310; autofocus is really sorta wasted on a fisheye anyway, what with hyperfocus and the ultra-wide-angle phenomenon. If you bought the kit lens with the 20D (the 18-55), then you won't see much more wider with a 17-35 Sigma or Canon, although your image quality will be significantly better with those than with the kit lens.

[savona]

Thank you. That will help me a lot when I have 500 bucks to spend on a lens but as of now I'm not doing anything professional and I just like to take pictures. That being said is the screw on adapter all that inferior if I'm not planning on using it for anything fancy? Obviously it's not going to look like photos from a 10-22 canon would, but do you really think I'd be unhappy if I spend 40 bucks on one of those just for something to play around with? It can't be THAT inferior, can it?

Hikariphoto is absolutely right, BUT, I think for $40 and just to play around with, they may be an option. I never used any on my 20d but I did use them on my old sony f828. They get the job done, but dont be suprised if the image quality suffers.

BTW, Something else you have to worry about in vignetting (http://focusfaction.com/forums/faq.php?faq=v#faq_vignetting). Because it screws on to the end of the lens you sometimes have to zoom out a bit not to get a peep hole effect. Meaning it will look like your looking through a tube until you zoom out a little bit to get past it.

Which lens do you plan on screwing them onto?

[Cannibalized]

18-55 kit lens. it's the widest thing i have.

[Hikariphoto]

Do us all a favor -- if you do get one, post some images shot with it and let us know your impressions.

[mswebb]

If you have a point and shoot you can work with you might get better results with an adapter. Obviously, the best picture will come with an SLR with a wide prime lens. Next best would be slr with a tele lens with good wide end (ie. 10-20mm). If cost is a factor (when isn't it) and you are just looking for something to poke around with and practice then an adapter might be a good choice.

I recently picked up a Raynox .5 WA adapter and it is decent enough for a point and shoot. There is a good amount or perspective distortion and a decrease in sharpness at the image edges but you can get in quite close to subjects and crop out some of the trouble spots. With my adapter the recommendation is that you are at maximum wide with close-focusing (picture of the little flower on a point and shoot) activated. For the S2IS point and shoot that I have, Raynox provided an extension tube with 52mm threads.

Some day I will try it with my SLR but I don't really think the results will get much better than with the point and shoot.

I'll try to throw together a page with some example shots for you.

[mswebb]

I have posted a page of pictures that demonstrate the difference between my Canon S2IS with and without the Raynox .5 wide angle adapter.

A couple of notes.

The lens needs lots of light to get best results. Anything outside of the sweet spot will get fuzzy without enough light.

The shots of the two houses are across 4 lanes of traffic. The jeep is one parking space away and the school was shot across about 40 feet.

Here's the site address (let me know if it doesn't work).
http://www.schiedel-webb.com/photos/adapter/adapter.html

[Adaptive]

The widest lens you can get for the 20d is the Canon 10-22.

But if you really want fisheye canon also makes a 15mm fish, and sigma also has a 15mm flsh.

Both canon and sigma fisheye lenses are about the same price. The canon might be maybe a few dollars more expensive but If you had a choice I would say to go with the canon fisheye.

But if it were a choice between 15mm canon fisheye and canon 10-22, I would say go with the canon 10-22, you get a wider zoom lens for about the same price as the 15mm prime.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Ahem...you can get a Sigma 8mm fisheye that will fit APS-C. ;)

[TX_Gulf_Coast]

But if it were a choice between 15mm canon fisheye and canon 10-22, I would say go with the canon 10-22, you get a wider zoom lens for about the same price as the 15mm prime.


The major difference between these two is going to be the FOV. You will not get the "fish-eye" affect with the 10-22mm as it has only a 107 Dgree FOV. With the 15mm Canon, Sigma or 8mm Sigma, you get 180 Degree FOV and a very good "fish-eye" effect.

Fish-eye lenses have limited uses, thou really cool. I use them in skater/BMX work all the time, as it allows me to be RIGHT up on the subject and get the action. Have even used them for a bridal or two, but have never had a bride buy off of the photos, other than what I used in the album as a background.

[Adaptive]

Ahem...you can get a Sigma 8mm fisheye that will fit APS-C. ;)


original poster specified that he didn't want to see the big round ring in all of his shots. :D

[Adaptive]

oh and like I said earlier, a 15mm fisheye isn't that great unless you are using a full frame camera. The original poster said he has a 20d.


well here are some sample pics I took of my 30d with my old sigma 15mm fisheye that I sold shortly after purchasing it.








Crazy Racist Watermelon Soda

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Fisheye without fisheye? You get some vignetting that can be cropped away. Full frame is where you get the circle in the middle. The 15 fishy isn't very fishy on a crop camera. Just really wide.

[Adaptive]

Fisheye without fisheye? You get some vignetting that can be cropped away. Full frame is where you get the circle in the middle. The 15 fishy isn't very fishy on a crop camera. Just really wide.


yes fisheye on crop camera has little effect. That's what i've been saying since my first post in this thread. I wasn't trying to show off any photography skills with these pics, I was merely testing the lens.

a 15mm fisheye on a ff camera will not have the circle in the middle but the corners of the pic will be black.

8mm fish will have the circle in the middle and the whole pic will be outlined with black on full frame and will be severely distorted on crop camera.

here are a few canon 15mm fisheye pics for comparison to the sigma fisheye pics.

[Hikariphoto]

I don't see how you can NOT see the fisheye effect on the posted images -- large center, tapering out towards the edges; it's just not a wide-angle a fisheye as you can get on a ff. You can have a 15mm lens that isn't a fisheye, and a 15mm fisheye lens. The difference is how the lens is shaped and how it bends the light, not the focal length. A fisheye lens will have the same effect on a crop camera as on a ff body. It's just that it doesn't use the entire lens area, so you can't see it as MUCH. If you were to shoot that with a standard aspherical lens, you wouldn't see as pronounced a distortion as you do with the Sigma. Likewise, if you were to take that 15mm fisheye outside and use it to shoot landscapes or architecture, you'd have a heck of a time with the Perspective Control tools in Photoshop correcting the images.

With the portrait, you're too far away from the subject to get much fisheye effect. It only is very pronounced close up.

That Sigma is a great lens. I used one on the Fuji S2 for a long time. I will get one for my Canon gear as soon as it's financially possible.

[Cannibalized]

Thank you I would love to see them. I have an sd500 point and shoot as well as the 20d. Was wanting to get one for the 20d though.

[Cannibalized]

Looks to me it's worth the few bucks just to have something to play around with. Thanks for the examples.

[Adaptive]

yep no problem, I might have some examples of shots that I've taken with the 10-22 but I'll have to dig for them later.


Yea I wasn't saying that fisheyes are pointless for crop cameras I was just saying that they're effect isn't very noticeable. And the 10-22 might be more fun to play with

[Cannibalized]

Yes I would loooove to get a 10-22, but I can't afford it right now.

[Adaptive]

:) 10-22 is the same price as canon or sigma fisheye :)

[Adaptive]

actually get the canon fisheye so you can take advantage of the canon double rebate deal, also the 10-22 is an EF-S lens so if you ever go full frame the lens will be useless.

[Hikariphoto]

It seems that there's some confusion as to what exactly a fisheye lens is. An ultrawide angle lens is not necessarily a fisheye. The 10-22 is a NOT fisheye. Yes, it's an ultrawide (16mm equivalent on the crop factor) but it's not a fisheye lens.

The difference is between the spherical glass and the aspherical glass; the aspherical lenses correct the distortion that a fisheye enhances. Canon's 14mm L lens is NOT a fisheye, while the 15mm 2.8 is.

If you WANT a fisheye, then by all means get a fisheye. Meaning of you want the spherical distortion that can only be gotten via a fisheye, get a fisheye.

If you do NOT want the distortion, if you want to do nice landscapes and architecture and so on with a minimum of correction, then get an aspherical lens.

[MillerPhoto]

I have one of those filters they are reffering to that can be bought off the net for about $50 which screw on the end of the lens. also doubles as a macro.

I shoot with Canon 20D and with these shots i have added i was using my 18-55 lens.

the uncroped coin was at 18mm and 2 inches from lens.
the croped coin was of the same image, not using a tripod, 1/40 @ f:5.6, 800 ISO under florescent lighting.

the image of the time delay shot was in my car, on tripod above passenger seat. Same camera, lens and fisheye adapter @ 22mm 2sec shutter @ f:8, 200 ISO

My opinion... Its a excellent adapter to own to practice with and to figure out if you really want to spend the money on a proper fish eye lens. As for the quality of the glass in the adapter.. under birght subjects you will see distortion and blemishes in the lens. but excellent for low light and medium light situations. Great adapter to keep in the camera case. Can have alot of fun with some shots. expecially close up of animals.

Also... I have taken shots at 18mm with the fish eye adapter and cropped and printed panoramic photos of 10x30

[Adaptive]

It seems that there's some confusion as to what exactly a fisheye lens is. An ultrawide angle lens is not necessarily a fisheye. The 10-22 is a NOT fisheye. Yes, it's an ultrawide (16mm equivalent on the crop factor) but it's not a fisheye lens.

The difference is between the spherical glass and the aspherical glass; the aspherical lenses correct the distortion that a fisheye enhances. Canon's 14mm L lens is NOT a fisheye, while the 15mm 2.8 is.

If you WANT a fisheye, then by all means get a fisheye. Meaning of you want the spherical distortion that can only be gotten via a fisheye, get a fisheye.

If you do NOT want the distortion, if you want to do nice landscapes and architecture and so on with a minimum of correction, then get an aspherical lens.







You are correct, but just because the original poster mentioned "fisheye" doesnt necessarily mean that is what they want. Not all people know the terminology like you or I.

Here is the original post




I'm looking to get a fisheye. Not the kind that makes the full circle but like an ultra wide. I'm looking up the adapters and theres .65, .5, .45, .42, and .2 something. I guess the smaller the number = wider. I don't know much about these things, obviously the prices vary though. Which would be good for shooting buildings, cityskapes, and skateboarders? I want to be able to use it regularly, too. Something that won't be too curvy at the edges but will still be super wide. Could I get a recommendation of a brand, or which width would be the most adequate?

I'm just generally looking on ebay for something that's not too costly.

Also is there some sort of program that somewhat straightens the edges?




After reading everything that I underlined and noticed that they were using a crop camera (20d) I automatically thought 10-22. Because the Fisheye on a crop camera is not an ultra wide and one woudl not beable to used a fisheye prime regularly.

But she said she wants something that's not too curvy at the edges and something good for shooting buildings, cityscapes and skateboarders. Yes a fisheye on a crop camera is good for shooting all these things and it's not too curvy at the edges. But the 10-22 is also great for shooting buildings, cityscapes and skateboarders, also it's a zoom lens not a prime so beginners will have more flexability with the 10-22.

[Cannibalized]

I have one of those filters they are reffering to that can be bought off the net for about $50 which screw on the end of the lens. also doubles as a macro.

I shoot with Canon 20D and with these shots i have added i was using my 18-55 lens.

the uncroped coin was at 18mm and 2 inches from lens.
the croped coin was of the same image, not using a tripod, 1/40 @ f:5.6, 800 ISO under florescent lighting.

the image of the time delay shot was in my car, on tripod above passenger seat. Same camera, lens and fisheye adapter @ 22mm 2sec shutter @ f:8, 200 ISO

My opinion... Its a excellent adapter to own to practice with and to figure out if you really want to spend the money on a proper fish eye lens. As for the quality of the glass in the adapter.. under birght subjects you will see distortion and blemishes in the lens. but excellent for low light and medium light situations. Great adapter to keep in the camera case. Can have alot of fun with some shots. expecially close up of animals.

Also... I have taken shots at 18mm with the fish eye adapter and cropped and printed panoramic photos of 10x30











Very helpful. Thank you. For 50 bucks, it looks worth it. Evetually I will save 600 for a 10-22.

[mommymomo]

Thanks for this information as I recently purchased one of these adapters. I figured for the low cost, I would try it out. It actually is a gift for my hubby. He wanted one and I have no idea about purchasing lenses. I am so green that I shine. I am learning and now happy that I am here. This site gives me a plethora of information to work with!