Fisheye?

B

blueiron

New member
Anyone with practical experience with the 16mm fisheye? I keep considering it for nature work to supplement my 20mm and would appreciate any experiences.

DxO software will be used to correct linear distortion.
 
P

Phiggys

Senior Member
Hi I have owned a number of fisheye lenses over the yrs and still have the Nikon AFD 16mm f2.8 which I use on my FX bodies.
I would never be without it.
Both small and light fits into your pocket and is razor sharp.
Can easily be de-fished if need arises.
 
K

KennethHamlett

New member
blueiron said:
Anyone with practical experience with the 16mm fisheye? I keep considering it for nature work to supplement my 20mm and would appreciate any experiences.

DxO software will be used to correct linear distortion.
Click to expand...

Have you thought about the 15mm rectilinear or a Sigma 14mm rectilinear? Or do you specifically want a fisheye? If not, the rectilinear lenses require less post correction.
 
J

johnwartjr

Senior Member
I've debated over whether to get the 16mm fisheye (I own the 10.5 DX fisheye, just switched to FX), or go for the 12-24 2.8.

I am keeping my D90 as a backup, and the 10.5 still works fine on it, so I'm not rushing into anything.
 
K

Kamper

Senior Member
I just bought a Nikon 10.5mm and like the results. Fisheyes are a lens that can offer dramatic results or can turn a photo into something crazy. I wasn't too sure if I was going to like the results until I started correcting linear distortion in LR3. I now see alot more uses for the lens, but as others have stated it requires post editing. I would think that the 16mm range would be a nice range, so many choices. I have spent alot of time in Yellowstone which there is always lots of other photographers around, many times a person could try lens owned by others to see what they think about it. Also there is a camera shop in Bozeman Montana (Bozeman Camera Repair) that rents and sells both Nikon/Canon products. A place that will allow you to mount and play with the lens before you buy. Good Luck with your choices. Ken
 
V

vertrider

New member
the AF 16/2.8 is in my bag since about 10 years, lightweight, sharp. it is only beaten by the 14-24/2.8 which has incredible sharpness on open aperture (for available light landscape and wide field astrophotography). this is where the 16 mm got into its ages a little bit, try to use it with at least 5.6, than it is fine.
 
Top