there isnt really an affordable wide angle for me, besides the 17-40 but i am selling it because it is slow, for the 10D. So now I am wondering about the fisheye. Is canon better than the sigma and how do they compare? And is it possible to not only shoot scenery, but also people with the fisheye and then perspectivily correct it in software? Anyone have thoughts on this? thanks.
i have, but they arent fisheye. I left the part where i also like to use it for what it is, a fisheye. oops! And i prefer quality over wide angle, thats why i bought the 17-40.
the 14 is not cheap. more expensive than the fisheye. and we ARE going off topic I WANT A FISHEYE and asking if anyone has experiences using the fisheye of sigma and canon. not the 12-24, 15-30 or 14. the first 2 is too slow for me btw. thats the reason why i sold my 17-40 hence i need a replacement.
I've shot with the Sigma 8mm fisheye and enjoy the effect. On my 10D it isn't a circle but the edges don't get completely exposed either so you will have to crop or accept the black edges around the corners. I can't say whether it is common to all Sigma 8mm lens but mine shows quite a bit of CA. There are PhotoShop techniques to clean this up but it does require additional time and energy. On the other hand, its fun to play with and next to impossible to achieve some of the effects outside of PhotoShop.
tuannie wrote:
there isnt really an affordable wide angle for me, besides the 17-40 but i am selling it because it is slow, for the 10D. So now I am wondering about the fisheye. Is canon better than the sigma and how do they compare? And is it possible to not only shoot scenery, but also people with the fisheye and then perspectivily correct it in software? Anyone have thoughts on this? thanks.
It seems that the sigma is sharper but a tad slower at AF................
that is cool!!!!!!!!!!! but is it in any differs than an image made with a true wide angle that is not fisheye? Like objects, or people a bit distorted?
tuannie wrote:
that is cool!!!!!!!!!!! but is it in any differs than an image made with a true wide angle that is not fisheye? Like objects, or people a bit distorted?
I believe you will get distortions with any wide lens..........
I have the Sigma fisheye and the 14mm. The 14mm makes a great wide angle lens for my D60 (or your D10). The fisheye doesn't really give you a true fisheye image on the D60 (or D10) due to the cropping factor. I use my fisheye on my Elan 7E and love it.
I recently purchased the Canon 15mm fisheye. Great lens. Very sharp, even after distortion correction. Much better than my previous Canon 14mm/2.8 L lens, especially on a 1Ds. I personally haven't seen a side by side comparison between the Canon and Sigma fisheyes, so I can't comment on equivalencies. The build of the Canon is solid, so I can't see how the Sigma would be that much better (haven't checked one out, however). The only reason I went with the Canon over the Sigma was due to my personal experience w/ other Sigma lenses having slower and/or less precise focusing than similar/same Canon lenses. This is definitely my own personal, anecdotal bias...and I'm not presenting it as fact. Either lens will likely give you everything you want. Just be certain you purchase from a source that allows reasonable returns, so if you do get a dud, you can either exchange for a different copy of the same lens, or the alternative lens if you're so inclined.
I have tested both and purchased the Sigma. I have 20 by 30 inch enlargements from it on my wall. It is best at f16 and on 100 ISO and image size of 44 by 66 cm is critically sharp. On 10D this lens is better than ny 16-35.
it's not likely that *any* front mount filter will work without needing some serious cropping because the 15mm fish gives you 180 degree FOV on the diagonal (on FF at least)...
-c
I have the Zenitar. Mine is pretty sharp. I just leave it at infinity and shoot.. focusing closer is hard b/c you have to close the apature down to get really sharp pictures, so its hard to see (viewfinder gets darker). .I've shot 2.8 and it was decent.
I have the sigma 15mm fisheye and love it. It's sharp opened up a bit, but acceptable wide open. Here's a link to a picture of my daughter at a game with it that is not defished.
And i prefer quality over wide angle, thats why i bought the 17-40.
I WANT A FISHEYE and asking if anyone has experiences using the fisheye of sigma and canon. not the 12-24, 15-30 or 14. the first 2 is too slow for me btw. thats the reason why i sold my 17-40 hence i need a replacement.