Sigma 15mm f2.8 Fisheye - First Impressions

I got my Sigma 15mm Fisheye yesterday and have been itching to get out and shoot, so rainy day or not I took a drive to Easton, PA which I figured would present me with some interesting opportunities to shoot with it.

Before going, however, I will admit to becoming a little perplexed, and then disappointed to learn that for some odd reason Sigma decided they could not put a Manual/Autofocus switch on the Nikon version of this lens (there is one on the Canon and Sigma versions). So, this becomes my first lens with no automatic override for the autofocus, and also the first lens that drives me to the switch on the body. That's going to be confusing for a while. I find the lens to be nice and sharp, with a little CA at the edges, but I almost expect that from a fish. If I have a complaint it's that the autofocus is pretty darned noisy. A lot noisier than any other lens I have. Noisy enough to be distracting in a dark room. If I get a chance I'll shoot video of it.

After taking some test shots and loading them into Lightroom last night it became immediately apparent as to why so many of the photos I've seen taken with this lens don't exhibit fisheye characteristics - it's because Adobe's Profile Correction for this lens removes all distortion, rendering a rectilinear 15mm image from the fisheye shot. I was originally a little annoyed by this, but then I realized that the reason profile corrections exist are to remove distortions, and a fisheye is all about them. So, what I get with Lightroom is a quick jump to a 15mm ultrawide with the touch of a button, which makes the lens very flexible.

To give you an idea of what I'm talking about, here are 3 edits of the same photo.

Version 1 - Straight Out Of The Camera



As you can see, there's plenty of barrel distortion, and the 180 degree view on the horizontal is fairly easy to see (I was about 12-15 feet from the wall).

Version 2 - Same Photo with "Auto" correction for Vertical & Horizontal skewing



This is kind of cool and allows for a lot of options with shooting architecture provided you provide room for cropping. With that in mind, I decided to see just how good Photoshop's Content Aware Fill did with the open areas, so I selected them one at a time, expanded the empty selection by 3 pixels and invoked Smart Fill. I have to say, I'm pretty impressed.



This is exactly what Photoshop gave me, no additional touch ups.

Version 3 - Original Photo with Profile Correction added



Here you have the rectilinear profile correction straight out of Lightroom. No additional horizontal or vertical adjustments. Essentially, this turns the fisheye into a 15mm f2.8 at the touch of a button. Pretty good job. And for giggles, I decided to also invoke the Auto correct to adjust vertical and horizontal lines. I have to say, I was slightly blown away by what I got...




That's a complete, 3 story facade from less than 15 feet away!!

I think I'm going to have a lot fun with this lens, I just know it.

Good! Perspective corrected almost completely, with losses in both axes being quite acceptable. Corners are kinda softer, but it might be normal with such a wide angle (or is it just a consequence of a correction?). Good lens, anyway.

Here's a shot around the corner from there with more compelte editing. A lot of CA in the upper reaches, but I believe some of that is exacerbated by depth of field.

http://url.ie/kkj6 Playing the game of perspective and horizon...

Looks like a very fun lens Jake. Curious, so the final shot of your first post was corrected only in LR?

Also were you shooting at 2.8, wonder if the corners would sharpen up at f8.

Not happening Jake!
My eyes are already sore getting set on soooo many things already & you go post these
Awesome pics

Rick M said:

Looks like a very fun lens Jake. Curious, so the final shot of your first post was corrected only in LR?

Also were you shooting at 2.8, wonder if the corners would sharpen up at f8.

Click to expand...

Outside of the content aware fill that I did in PS, the only edits on the shots in the initial post are LR corrections in the Lens Correction module only, and then it was just a matter of hitting preset buttons and not using any of the manual correction sliders.

Prior to getting this lens one of my default corrections when pulling things into LR was to invoke Lens Profile Correction and Chromatic Aberration Removal. I believe in the street shot I may have ignored the latter when I ignored the first. I've since processed several others and LR does a fine job of getting rid of the CA distortion in the corners. The photo in question was shot at f8 actually. Here's another similar shot. It had bad CA in the upper left corner until I checked the box in LR.

And since I'm posting examples, here's another shot taken yesterday. This has the Profile Correction option invoked...




It was post processed using CS6 (light levels and sharpening) and Nik Viveza and Analog Efex. I really like what Analog Efex does with a wet cityscape. Here's the unprocessed before photo straight out of the camera...

It looks like the profile correction is softening the corners more than the lens itself. It would be interesting to see a corrected image from this lens compared to 16mm on your 16-35.

Rick M said:

It looks like the profile correction is softening the corners more than the lens itself. It would be interesting to see a corrected image from this lens compared to 16mm on your 16-35.

Click to expand...

It's not so much softening as stretching. If you look at the amount of horizontal room taken up by the window in the upper right corner and compare it to the same window in the original photo you can see there's a lot of interpolation going on here. The more details there are to stretch the less sharp it will appear. Were this a monochrome wall or something will less detail I it wouldn't seem as soft. And to be fair, the use of Analog Efex here may have introduced some additional noise. It's by no means a substitute for a lens that does the rectilinear correction itself, like the 16-35mm, but the idea that LR does the correction at the touch of a button is nice.

You can see the same type of softening in the Crayon box in the upper right corner of the finished image of the Crayola factory from my first post here in this thread.

wow kick ass! I like it. it gives you options for different perspectives. pretty nice. what version LR does this? btw, this is the DG fisheye? how much paper did it cost you? I think the sigma fisheye is better than the nikkor. just the cap is so much better.

rocketman122 said:

wow kick ass! I like it. it gives you options for different perspectives. pretty nice. what version LR does this? btw, this is the DG fisheye? how much paper did it cost you? I think the sigma fisheye is better than the nikkor. just the cap is so much better.

Click to expand...

I'm using LR 5, but I'm assuming the lens profiling hasn't changed much, so the distortion correction should be in LR4 as well, and possibly 3.6. The Automatic perspective correction was introduced in LR 5 and is one of the main reasons I upgraded.

It is the DG version, but remember "DG" is Sigma's designation for "Digital Glass" (whatever that means) and is often confused with "DC" which is their cropped sensor designation. I'm shooting full frame with it, which is the primary reason I purchased it - I'd been using the Rokinon 8mm DX fish before that. It was listed at just under $600 when I purchased it, but I had bonus dollars from B&H at the time so it ran me less than that.

My only criticism of it thus far is that it does not have an AF/M switch on the Nikon version of the lens as they do on the Canon and Sigma mount versions, so I have to use the one on the body. AF is a little noisier than I'd expect as well, but I'm picking nits.

BackdoorHippie said:

I'm using LR 5, but I'm assuming the lens profiling hasn't changed much, so the distortion correction should be in LR4 as well, and possibly 3.6. The Automatic perspective correction was introduced in LR 5 and is one of the main reasons I upgraded.

It is the DG version, but remember "DG" is Sigma's designation for "Digital Glass" (whatever that means) and is often confused with "DC" which is their cropped sensor designation. I'm shooting full frame with it, which is the primary reason I purchased it - I'd been using the Rokinon 8mm DX fish before that. It was listed at just under $600 when I purchased it, but I had bonus dollars from B&H at the time so it ran me less than that.

My only criticism of it thus far is that it does not have an AF/M switch on the Nikon version of the lens as they do on the Canon and Sigma mount versions, so I have to use the one on the body. AF is a little noisier than I'd expect as well, but I'm picking nits.

Click to expand...

I had the non DG lens years ago. I killed that lens I shot with it so much. I cleaned it so much there were marks on the main element that was replaced. never had an issue with the AF/MF switch. my fingers go straight to the camera and flick it up. I NEVER EVER use the switch on lenses. but I guess thats just me and my work habit. in fact its a pain in the ass to use switches on lenses because its just too slow of a process. every lens has it in different places so I just got used to doing it on the body.

I was shooting it in weddings before it became popular. I have the rokinon (the chipped version) and shoot it on FF then crop later. I do want to move to the sigma. nikkor is overpriced IMO. dont remember what version LR I have thats whay I asked. I dont use it much but should install it just to see the different options it gives.

I will try to find a mint used one come march. now is not the time to invest in equipment when theres less work with weddings. cheers BDH

rocketman122 said:

I will try to find a mint used one come march. now is not the time to invest in equipment when theres less work with weddings. cheers BDH

Click to expand...

I had a line on one at a shop near my brother (about an hour drive) and it sold 2 days before I planned on going over to check it out. Would have saved me $100, but now I have a 4 year warranty (manufacturer + 1 from my credit card) so it's all good - and with the B&H bucks it didn't hurt too much more.

Woooow! Amazing how much you can correct in the first post. Very cool lens and great images.

Hmm now I just need to be sure, it really is the samyang 8mm I should go for...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@wud, the Samyang 8mm is the same thing as the Rokinon 8mm that I have (though you can get the Rokinon chipped), but it's a cropped sensor lens and gives you very little beyond the crop. I've used it with my D800, which yields a very workable 16MP's, but I longed for being able to use it with the D600, so I opted to drop the cash on the 15mm Sigma. The D3's 12MP sensor will be dwarfed shooting in DX mode or cropping (you'll get, what, 4-5MP's?!), so pay 2x the price for the more usable, and fully automated lens (the chipped Rokinon will meter, but not focus).

I promised to try and show comparison field of view between the two, and I will do so tomorrow. I suspect the Rokinon may give you a little more, but not much.

wud said:

Woooow! Amazing how much you can correct in the first post. Very cool lens and great images.

Hmm now I just need to be sure, it really is the samyang 8mm I should go for...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

samyang, rokinon, bower. they are all the same. its a great lens. here's some things you should know. focus is very nice (but a bit too damped for my taste-meaning, not fast enough. the sigma is very loose in manual mode by comparison)and build is very nice. its a very chunky lens. not tiny like the nikkor 10.5/16mm. its a bit like the sigma 15. quite heavy too. no aperture tab lock like the nikkors. mine is the chipped lens. the one with the pins on the mount so I dont need to play with the aperture itself. I can lock it to the smallest aperture and use the dials to make adjustments and it will close it down by itself. its sharp from 5.6. I shoot at 7.1 because its a cropped picture and since its small, if I can get it sharp it wont look bad. the dx 10.5 nikkor looks better IQ wise. I will get the sigma 15 in march and sell mine. now the biggest problem, when you focus, you can hardly see any change of what is and isnt. very weird. as if the focus is doing nothing. if the person is close then you can but if you were to shoot what BDH did with the building, the difference would be so minute (except when at the closest end) you cant see it. so I always put it to the furthest focus and just shoot that way. close subject, close focus on the lens, otherwise I always use it at the furthest and shoot stopped down. the cropping is a PITA for me. its an ok lens. also, I didnt notice lately but the af lock indicator doesnt seem to do much or isnt as accurate when I got it and played with it. today I prefocus and just stop down and shoot.

User Media - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

User Media - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

User Media - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

User Media - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

some examples.

Funny, but until you said something I didn't realize that the Rokinon was bigger and heavier than the Sigma full frame. I never would have guessed.

I agree that manual focusing with a fisheye is, for me at least, one of the most tedious of experiences. I have "floaters" in my shooting eye that have worsened with age, though are in no way debilitating, but the idea of relying on my eyesight without the aid of an old style focusing screen is a horror for me. The difference in price is easily justifiable for me - and would be easier if I didn't already have the Rokinon (which actually works fairly well with my IR converted D7000).

BackdoorHippie said:

Funny, but until you said something I didn't realize that the Rokinon was bigger and heavier than the Sigma full frame. I never would have guessed.

I agree that manual focusing with a fisheye is, for me at least, one of the most tedious of experiences. I have "floaters" in my shooting eye that have worsened with age, though are in no way debilitating, but the idea of relying on my eyesight without the aid of an old style focusing screen is a horror for me. The difference in price is easily justifiable for me - and would be easier if I didn't already have the Rokinon (which actually works fairly well with my IR converted D7000).

Click to expand...

yes, how weird that the DX lens is bigger than the FF and its f/3.5! I too need AF but I need it because of speed (I work fast) and to get the full resolution of the sensor. plus I need the 2.8 brightness. the rokinon isnt dark really but brightness is always welcome.

I may be mistaken but the last might have been taken with my friends 10.5 but I cant remember because it was from a few months ago. meh.

Hmmm. Thanks for info.

My camera can switch to DX mode, I was kind of hoping for images like these: Full-size sample photos from Samyang 8mm F/3.5


​