Just a question for you all. Will the 16mm have a wider view than my 14-24? I do miss having a fisheye lens but since I got the 14-24 I thought it isn't necessary in terms wide coverage (except the fact that it does not have the fisheye effect).

Tuan,

it really is a question without an answer , apples and oranges. A fisheye well is a fishy lens and the 14-24 even though the FOV in the horizontal is a bit wider the rectilinear design can sometimes be Less usefull as it enforces its rules on th scene and can really really make people in the scene look like munchkins if they happen to be close to the camera and near the edge of either the left or the right , a fish eye tho it is fishy and distortion does not enforce the straight lines at all cost as the rectilinear designs do and consequently it can be a much more interesting lens i think when the subjects are people. Just be sure to not have the lens tilted and the proportions will be much better and the effects of the fisheye tamed somewhat


J

I'll have to check if the view is wider. I have the impression that the view is wider with the fisheye. The effect is totally different anyway...
I'll try to post comparison pictures if I have time in the coming days.

Here is a recent example with the 16mm fisheye on the D3:
in a shopping mall in Kowloon, Hong Kong

Guy: that's brilliant. The curvature is really working for you here.

Big different price 16mm vs 14-24mm.
I do not know what kind of camera, do you have?

Look at gugs's sample picture.... nice super wide from D3.

I tried 16mm f/2.8 AIS on my D1h. (16mm x 1.5 = 24mm)