Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 11, 2007, 6:24 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi All,

Though I usually live towards the long end of the focal length spectrum, 500-700mm, I've been filling in the short end with my last two lens acquisitions, first with the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5, and most recently with the P DA 10-17 f3.5-4.5 Fisheye - Wide zoom. This really takes a big shift in one's perspective just to envision what the lens will take in. . .

I picked up the lens from the FedEx facility, unpacked it in the car and took this shot of the dashboard -- from the driver's seat, leaning over the console to center it. The shot as posted is defished to a 135 degree FOV, but it still includes both the windshield columns, and I combined two layers to get both the inside and outside areas reasonably exposed.
. . . And yes, I need to dust my dashboard. . .:shock:




I then played around out by one of the picnic tables by the lake in my complex

at 10mm, unprocessed except for resizing.


defished


Then I shot this telephone pole from about 7 feet away at 53mm


Then standing in the same place, at 10mm FE unprocessed, tilting the cam up a little.



Same shot defished


I just used the PSP X fisheye correction tool set to 135 degrees FOV -- it's pretty quick and seems to do a good job.

I'm probably overly impressed because I've never done a lot of wide shooting, and having all this coverage and almost unlimited DOF is just unreal.

Bottom line, if you want something REALLY wide -- this would be a lens to consider -- it's reasonably fast, and if you don't mind processing out the distortion to get a rectilinear view, this lens will give you about 35 degrees (going by what the software stated) more coverage than a 12mm rectilinear (@99 degrees) after defishing. I think the results are pretty good. I'm feeling that this will be more than just a novelty lens for me as I learn how to utilise it's capabilities.

It comes with a soft case, push on metal lens cap, and the whole front end of the lens, with the fixed hood, is made of metal -- you can feel the precision fit of the cap as you pull it off the lens -- almost like you're creating a vacuum behind it
. . . pretty nice quality . . .

The best part for me was that Buydig has the lens at $399 + free shipping, and with the $100 rebate, the lens was less than $300 delivered -- a superb deal IMO on a brand new lens with these qualities.

Scott





snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 11, 2007, 10:03 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

Scott - you shouldn't post these, especiallyincluding the priceyou paid for it at buydig. I mean, really - I've spent way too much money on lenses in the last 30 days, and I told him that the next lens he could buy (for me) at Christmas. And I had decided on the 12-24 as being the lens I would use more. And then you go confusing me all over again! Love the pictures.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2007, 10:17 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Posts: 1,381
Default

Scott, I too have the FE lens, and indeed it is a bit different to use - having to make sure that your feet are not in the frame is an actual concern. Its a fun lens, and I still find it difficult in how close to the subject you have to get to get the image you intend. I am very pleased to see how well your images defished - that is exactly what I was hoping for.

One of the reasons why I acquired the lens was for interiors of cathederals and museams on vacation. Also, been too busy at work to make it up to the Grand Canyon to see what it would do there.

I also find that the maximum curvature at 10, but the vast majority of it appears to be removed at the other end of 17. This lens is a very different creature to use.

There is sort of a joke here in Arizona - for several years straight, there has been accidents up at the Grand Canyon of German tourists falling in over the side while their spouse is taking a picture. I.e., the one with the camera is telling the spouse in the picture to back up a bit more and in doing so falls in. With this lens, its just the opposit, to get the picture, the one with the camera would keep walking towards the edge to get the picture....

I am saving my lunch money for the 12-24 to complement the 10-17.

Keep the pictures coming.....
interested_observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 6:02 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Gumnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 1,259
Default

oooooooh
i want one
i like both results, the before and after
i doubt i could get one over here for that price though

i am looking forward to seeing more photos

Gumnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 10:25 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Ritro again's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15
Default

For those who cannot afford that kind of money.

This one is made with a Zenitar fisheye. tree in a row. No editting, just stitching.



Richard.


Attached Images
 
Ritro again is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 10:34 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
bigdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Thach Alabama
Posts: 14,981
Default

I don't know about the fisheye. Gives me vertigo looking at them. The PP works really well though. Nice for those indoor I can't back up enough shots though....By the way...Grand canyon can be shot well with anything 50mm and under....Too huge for even a super wide to get it all. Better with a wide angle and panno stitching!

Richard does the road turn there or is it a distortion. Wonderful colors.

Dawg
bigdawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 11:43 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Ritro again's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15
Default

Richard does the road turn there or is it a distortion. Wonderful colors.



It's a distortion, I had just three pictures. When you take more it's possible to correct the image. I do not use it very much, but sometimes I really like it.Next one is a tower, second one corrected with paint shop, lost some of the top.

Yes, the colors of the fish-eye are very nice, I agree.



Richard.





Attached Images
 
Ritro again is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 11:44 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Ritro again's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 15
Default

the second one, corrected.


Attached Images
 
Ritro again is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 4:59 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Villages, Florida, USA
Posts: 128
Default

Can Photoshop Elements 4.0, 5.0 or 6.0 "de-fish" photos? As well as Photoshop?
gfmucci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 14, 2007, 5:44 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi gfmucci,

I don't know about Elements, as I don't use it, but there are a number of standalone programs and PS plugins available to defish images. PT Lens is one that I don't personally have, but has been noted as a good one from users on different fora.

I'm sure that one way or the other you could get it done with Elements.

Scott
snostorm 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 8:13 PM.