Upload & Sell: Off
| p.1 #19 · Is your 8-15L Fisheye suffering from neglect AND 8-15L vs ??? |
On another note, for those who used ultra wides prior to using the fishes, did you find that the fish replaced the ultra wide, especially with the plugins like that Hemi. To date I have been using the Tokina 11-16, and will most likely keep it as it is a really nice piece of glass. But I just anticipate the 8-15 stealing most of its playing time. Or based on you all's experience... perhaps not..
What say ye?
My personal experience - and that may be well different from others - is that I have abandoned extreme wide angles (12, 14mm on full frame) in favor of the fisheye. This started long long time ago when I got the Sigma 12-24 on my 1Ds (that's when most of the people here were shooting film, or weren't shooting at all ). I have found that the 12mm "normal" look wasn't as powerful at conveying the scale, the extreme angle, as I'd like it to be. In other words, if I wanted to deliver the experience of extreme perspective, the 12mm didn't deliver nearly as well as the 15mm fish. This realization dawned on me in Antarctica when I was using both side by side, and the picture below was the nail in the 12-24's coffin as it was simply not attainable with a rectilinear lens.
I got the 8-15 "just because" and sold the 15mm fish, but even so I stay now mainly at 15mm.
Without even time with the fisheye yet I am coming to this conclusion. From the examples you guys are giving, it seems the distortion adds something to these shots that straight lines would have lacked.
Taking in to account that there are plugins that can straighten shots out when desired, I think my Tokina 11-16's days may be numbered. I am thinking of putting it on the trade block for maybe a 28 1.8 to go with the 85 1.8 and eventually another 135 2.0 to make a nice little low light trio.
Thanks for your insight guys.