Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 22, 2008, 6:23 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
longside1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 693
Default

Hi guys,

I'm in a bit of a dilema, I'm really into shooting the interiors of churches, Cathedrals etc and really like the dramatic distortions caused from a fisheye. However, as I shoot with a Nikon D300 which has a cropped sensor, how dramatic will the effect be, as I know to get full 180 degrees in your shot you need a full frame sensor.

In addition, i already have a 12-24mm wide angle lens so is really worth it getting the fisheye??

Thanks for the help guys.

Check out my photoblog at:

http://www.imagespike.wordpress.com
longside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 22, 2008, 10:41 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Nagasaki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 897
Default

The Nikon 10.5 mm fisheye and the Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye zoom will both give you a full 180 degree corner to corner shot just like the Nikon 16mm Fisheye did on film or will do on a full frame sensor.

I have the Nikon 12-24 and the Tokina 10-17 and they are very different lenses. At 17mm the Tokina field of view is about the same as the Nikon on 12mm. But with that you get the fisheye distortion.

I shoot mainly underwater where the fisheye effect tends to be less noticable. Since I bought the Tokina I've not used the 12-24 underwater.

This was shot with the fisheye but I don't think you can really see the effect very strongly.

http://www.ksbyrne.f9.co.uk/Red%20Se.../giannis-d.jpg

Ken




Nagasaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2008, 12:34 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
longside1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 693
Default

Thanks for the response Nagasaki.

Your obviously very knowledgable on the old fisheye front, in particular with Tokina lenses, so you may be able to help further.

If I understand you correctly, despite my cropped sensor, the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye will offer a wider angle of view compared with my existing Tokina 12-24mm?

Do you think their is sufficient difference to warrant purchasing the Tokina fisheye?

Thanks for all the help!
longside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2008, 1:06 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Nagasaki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 897
Default

This page shows a comparison of the fisheye at 10mm and a rectilinear lens at 10mm. As you can see there's quite a difference in the field of view and also in distortion. http://www.tokinalens.com/products/t...dx-sample.html

Your 12-24 would give a slightly narrower field of view than the 10mm rectilinear used in the example.

The 10-17 zoom is a DX lens so it is made to give a full 180 fisheye on a cropped sensor. On a full frame sensor it will give a circular image as it won't cover the whole frame.

Here's the product page for the fisheye http://www.tokinalens.com/products/t...107afdx-a.html

Hopefully this info will help you decide.

Ken



Nagasaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2008, 12:09 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Posts: 1,381
Default

Hi Longside,

I like your delima. I too like the wide end of the view and have the equivalent of the Tokina 10-17, the Pentax DA 10-17 FE. I am also just about to purchase the Pentax 12-14 which is essentially the Tokina 12-24. There is a bit of discussion as to just who really designed the lenses - Tokina or Pentax, however they are effectively the same (also Tokina does not sell the lenses in the Pentax K mount). It has been reported that Pentax did the optics for the 10-17 with Tokina doing the optics for the 12-24, then swapped, with then each company did their own barrel packages. Where I am going is that performance they are the same, and I have a lot more information on the Pentax, so that is the basis for the rest of this post. In the end Hoya now owns both Tokina and Pentax.

Your question on crop factor, the Tokina lens is designed for digital, thus with the 1.5 crop factor you will get the entire 180 degrees.

Here are the spec sheets on the lenses...

http://www.tokinalens.com/products/t...107afdx-b.html
http://www.pentaximaging.com/product...ital_35mm_zoom

http://www.tokinalens.com/products/tokina/afl-00b.html
http://www.pentaximaging.com/product...ital_35mm_zoom

Here is a site that compares both lens along with other FEs

http://panopticus.altervista.org/fis...hlist_apsc.htm

One item that may make a difference on the FE is that you can not use a filter. It appears that you might with the way the flanges around the lens are situated, but there is not enough clearance for one.

In that they are really the same set of lenses (Pentax adds their SMC coating to theirs), you might want to visit the Pentax Photo Gallery that has sets of user submitted images indexed by lens. This may help a bit...

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home

Use the image data then the lens index to select the approperiate lens (DA 10-17 or DA 12-14)

My experience with the lens (FE) is a bit different, as I do not have a lot of interior shots (as of yet). However, I would put the FE in somewhat of a hybrid category. It can be more rectlinear that one would think. Its all in the photographer's hands. You can certainly push the fisheyed effect as shown in the Tokina image sets that were posted in earlier responses. Conversley, you can also use the lens to produce very rectlinear like results, even at 10mm. Here are some examples...
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...t=pentax+10+17

I did a comparison at the 16, 17, and 18mm focal lengths and came up with the following. It does not include the 12-24, but the 10-17 at 17 is much wider that the Pentax 16-45 at 16mm.
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=94

Here is an interesting comparison between the Pentax 10-17 and the Sigma 10-20, that may help you, since at the wide end they are both 10mm (however you have to remember one is FE and the other is rectlinear - thus the difference)

http://www.pbase.com/alinla/1017_vs_1020

One aspect of the lens is that it is somewhat of a macro lens with a reasonably short minimum focusing distance of about 6 inches, which produces a very deep depth of field. Here is an example...
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...t=pentax+10+17

Here is a thread on the Pentax forum where there are a number of posts discussing the FE lens.
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=94

Getting back to your original question about potential overlap between the two lenses, there are a couple of ways to look at them. First of all take a look at the Field of View as expressed in angle coverage. There is essentially no overlap when you compare them in this manner.
DA 10-17 180 - 100 degrees
DA 12-24 99 - 61 degrees
Next consider the focal length. At the widest end 10mm and 12mm respectively, you essentially gain 2mm in focal length or a bit over 20% additional coverage. This would be a fair comparison if you were not comparing a FE against a rectlinear lens, since its essentially apples to oranges because of the dramatic difference in the FOV as expressed as an angle coverage (the first comparison).

The largest reason for getting the FE is due to the FE effect in terms of field of view. In order to gain the larger field of view, the lens effectively pushes the object of interest back. Thus in landscapes, you can effective have the feeling of pushing the horizion way back (take a look at some of the landscapes linked to earlier in this post. The horizion is pushed back quite a bit.) However, for closer objects - ie statues or room interiors, where your limited in just how far back or away you can get, the lens affords you the ability to get incrediability close while still pulling in the entire object. You can effectively stand a foot away from an object - say a statue and get the entire shot (just make sure you keep your feet out of the frame when composing). The same effect holds true for room shots. Even at 16mm I have found that there might not be enough room to back up, so as to get the full room or the part of interest. With the 10-17, you will not have that problem. Another concern is in crowded situations, effectively the closer you get, the better the shot - again, due to the field of view. Here is the first day I had the lens. I used it all day, for everything.... Note, that at most I was just a couple of feet away from the tractors...

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...t=pentax+10+17

Another way to go is the Zenitar 16mm fisheye which is faster at f2.8 rather than f3.5, much better for indoor shots. You give up the zoom, however you gain in speed. Its FOV is 111 degrees. It is also cheaper at around $100 (see ebay). Its DOF is even larger at infinity. There are quite a few shots with this lens on the Pentax forum (here at Steves).

http://mac.tidings.nu/PinkyPentax/Z16mmFE.shtml
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...718238#p718238

Hope this helps...

interested_observer is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:25 PM.