Hey and everyone has been complaining about the difficulty of getting filters on the 14-24mm... can you imagine the adapter that would be needed to place a filter in front on this one?
There is a time and place for everything mate... this is not the place for this type of comment, you may hurt somebody's ego
But... something comes to my mind... your mates show off their long 600mm lenses implying "mine is bigger than yours...", then you pull this one out implying "yes, but look at my COJONES..."
I am old enough to remember what one of these cost new... around $13,000 back in the late seventies or early eighties... Which is today about that much, I guess. It should be less than that. I would price it at maybe six to seven thousand, at best. Not a hell of a lot of demand for it. Cool collector piece though! Better off with a 10.5 for a cool 500 beans, and sharper too!
fishfilm wrote:
Funny how the world of still and video/film glass differs. That is truly a steep $$ piece of glass. But the totally mundane lens on my HD camera at work cost about that.
I know that some of the older fisheyes needed a full time mirror lock up to be used, since the rear element extends into the mirror box... even mounting the lens could destroy your mirror assembly....
Etienne Otero wrote:
There is a time and place for everything mate... this is not the place for this type of comment, you may hurt somebody's ego
Why the freakin' hell would I hurt somebody's ego I was referring to the lens not a person. WTF. To those who are hurt by my "jokingly" comment, get a life! What's happened to the grown-up minds now?
2nd version 6mm 2.8 AiS in 1990 cost $8,800 brand new via special order. Came in its own wooden case. Cool stuff. Very cool stuff indeed.
BUT $35,000 for a used one is ridiculous money.
I saw one sell on ebay like new in the trunk with snap on leather lens cap maybe 5 years ago for $12,000 out of California. Estate item inherited by the son, and as a seller he had zero feedback but numerous detailed pictures of the lens, but none taken from the lens.
I am not a fan of Sigma brand due to others occasional sad stories on forums from time to time, but since I recently got a D700 I re-read Sigma 4.5mm f2.8 specs. On nikon body its like 6.75mm! Thats better than 7mm and darn closer to 6mm than 8mm IF its accurately descibed in specs.
If 6mm = 220 degrees & 8mm = 180 degrees, then whats a 6.75mm =?
I know my new D700 is only 5mp aps-c mode but I've got great images with my old 6mp raw dslrs and a 6.75mm lens seems pretty appealing even though it has no tripod mount.
So I am Very Tempted to buy the Sigma 4.5mm f2.8 aps-c nikon mount lens and see whats up with this 6.75mm f2.8 HSM Circular Fisheye.
Now come on Lindy this would go great on your newly purchased D700, it would be a perfect match to go with the 14-24. All you need to do is remove the mirror and shoot Live View only. Just click on Buy It Now and its yours.
Alternately go and buy the the Sigma and report back to us.
ReyGay wrote:
Why the freakin' hell would I hurt somebody's ego I was referring to the lens not a person. WTF. To those who are hurt by my "jokingly" comment, get a life! What's happened to the grown-up minds now?
I was referring to the lens not a person. WTF. To those who are hurt by my "jokingly" comment, get a life! What's happened to the grown-up minds now?
