p.2 #1 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
I have not used the Nikon. Color and contrast are quite good. Honestly, the only knocks I have against the lens given the price is that it's more a 170 degree fisheye rather than a 180, and a little bit of CA. Also, I would not use past f/11, with f/8 as optimal.
p.2 #6 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
I paid 230€ for the lens from amazon.de, including shipping to Finland. I wish the built-in hood had protection in side areas too, like EF 15/2.8 and ttartisan's own 21mm f/1.5 has. Also the clickless very stiff aperture ring is very annoying. I should dismantle the lens, remove the thick grease, file some notches and install a ball with a spring to serve as clicks, if possible.
The lens seems to be sharp. It is better than EF 15/2.8 at every aperture. The lens has some flare but it's not too bad. Value for money, considering it is probably the only available mirrorless fisheye lens.
p.2 #9 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
I was curious about this lens. I have the samyang E mount (just has the adapter built in) and I use it quite a lot (for weddings and for personal work)... Maybe I'll give this one a try.
Also super interested in how easy the Hemi plugin is to use. I have a photoshop action I made that does something similar but probably not as good.
p.2 #10 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
I went to a student party to take photographs. I tried to use a 35mm lens first, but then people wanted to take group photos in small spaces.. not possible. So I switched to TTartisan, it was wide enough for everything. It took a while (at least an hour) to find decent settings. f/8, flash, manual everything. Hyperfocal Focus (I should have taped the lens focus ring, but didn't have tape). I tried to underexpose background by 2 stops but still get a somewhat long shutter time.
The "funny" part was that since the tt-artisan lens is fully manual, I had to turn the aperture down to f/8 and keep it there. Basically only a little light arrived at the camera sensor before exposure, so I shot the photos from the hip without really much framing or composition :v: A small flash pointing directly forward gave enough light to get proper exposures.
Also seems that at nightclubs the fisheye distortion isn't that distracting.
p.2 #11 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
Since this seems to be "the thread" on FM for this lens, I figured I'd add some info even though I have the Nikon (shudder) Z version.
So first of all, the focal length isn't correct at all. It is actually about a 15mm lens which is why 15mm FE profiles work so well with it. It appears that TTArtisans decided to label its focal length as the shortest rectilinear equivalent focal length you can defish it to - and the math works out for that about perfectly.
Also, it appears to be equidistant projection based on fitting by PTGui with a fitted focal length of 14.7mm. See this thread:
I sort of stumbled on this when comparing my defished 11/2.8 against the Laowa 11/5.6 rectilinear. Now if the TTA was in fact 11mm it should defish to a rectilinear way the heck wider than 11mm. Instead it defished to just about match the Laowa which was a big hint. Also measuring pixel dimensions of objects at the center of the frame I could calculate the focal length ratio of the two lenses was around 1.27.
So that's the answer to the projection mystery. If it was truly a 11mm lens it simply couldn't have an equidistant projection and cover only 180 degrees diagonally, one would have to have something more like a stereographic projection for the coverage and focal length to make sense together. The truth is that it isn't an 11mm lens, it is a 15mm lens with an equidistant projection.
As an aside, I found that the TTA 11/2.8 is so dang sharp that defished it is actually sharper over the outer part of the frame (including the extreme corners) than the Laowa 11/4.5 rectilinear! At least when using a 45 MP sensor. The Laowa in fact just never gets sharp on the short edge or corners even stopped down to F/16 while the TTA even at F/8 and defished is easily outclassing the Laowa.
To be fair the Laowa is a more compact lens and a crazy wide rectilinear, so compromises to be expected, but let this be a lesson to all the "quality lenses don't do SW correction, boo-hoo about my 3% distortion" troglodytes. The TTA with ridiculous distortion ends up better than a purpose designed recti-linear lens.
Now - if only one of these mirrorless camera manufacturers would let you load a distortion correction profile for "dumb lenses" so we could better frame and compose the TTA as an 11mm rectilinear (as apparently the lens designers half intended given their "fake" focal length designation).
p.2 #13 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
Noticed that the lens now should have a clicked aperture ring for mirrorless cameras. Did they change they design? Anyone bought a mirrorless version recently?
Mine is declicked and stiff and very annoying to use. If they now ship with a clicked aperture ring I'd buy a new sample and sell my old one.
p.2 #14 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
I have an OM zuiko 16mm 3.5 fisheye 308g with caps and om-nex adapter. Backup for in cities where it captures more than the canon 17L, particularly when stepping back is not on.
p.2 #15 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
I was wondering about the 11mm focal length and why it is different to the more usual 15mm, so the explanation with defishing is interesting. I am a fan of fisheyes, but I never defish them, the distortion is what makes them special IMO.
p.2 #16 · First Impressions: TTArtisan 11mm f/2.8 Fisheye
Ttartisan makes fisheye for mirrorless, so you don’t need an adapter which adds to weight and size. Also 3.5 is quite a bit darker than 2.8.
I paid 230€ new from Amazon.de in August 2022. Prices have gone up since then.
Different fisheye lenses have different projections. I think the 11mm Ttartisan may have less bulge/emphasis in middle of the image, and outer areas are pinched less. So the images look quite “natural” when compared to regular 15mm lenses.
I also may be imagining and there is no difference. Would have to get a traditional 15mm fisheye to compare.
