15mm lens on NEX-7 body

[Virco]

Hello fellow enthusiasts.

I have recently decided to take on the challenge of using a NEX-7 body with an array of MF lens. Hope it will bring me joy...
Has anyone on this forum tried a 15mm full-frame fish-eye on this body? I appreciate that some might have tried such lens on a NEX-3 or a NEX-5 but due to the particular nature of the NEX-7 sensor I'm interested in reports using exclusively this camera body.

Looking at what's on the market (except the Leica & Zeiss lens which are shamelessly expensive) I was thinking at getting a Canon FD 15mm f1:2.8 but seeing it's not exactly cheap either I would very much welcome some feedback if any of you nice ppl on this forum might have tried this body/lens combination. Thank you in advance.



Cheers,

[Attila]

[Attila]

Welcome ! Nice to see you here ! I heard only super wide angle RF lenses has trouble on NEX-7 , SLR lenses just fine.
I have Konica 15mm f2.8 finish looks similar than this Canon lens and it makes awesome results on NEX-3.
http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-hexanon-uc-15mm-fisheye-sony-nex-3-t44951,highlight,%2Bkonica+%2B15mm.html

on film

http://forum.mflenses.com/konica-15mm-uc-hexanon-konica-autoreflex-t-fomapan-100-t49694,highlight,%2Bkonica+%2B15mm.html

[Virco]

Thank you for your reply Attila.
I almost purchased the Konica 15mm lens after seeing your pictures online but the price went a bit high for me on eBay so I lost it.
On NEX-3, NEX-5 most MF lens give good results but my concern is about how they work with the very pixel-crammed sensor of the NEX-7

[poilu]

welcome Virco
check also the samyang fish eye

[fermy]

I don't think Canon FD (or any other) legacy fisheye makes sense on APS-C unless you can get it at about 1/3 of market price. Samyang just announced 8mm APS-C fisheye and if anywhere close to m4/3 version, it will be superb. Alternatively, look into adapting the m4/3 Samyang fisheye, I've seen reports of people doing that by shaving a bit of a hood, so the coverage must be decent.

[Virco]

[fermy]

1) Because 15mm full frame fisheye on APS-C wouldn't be really fisheye as the image is cropped. You'll end up with field of view of 22mm on FF and massively distorted image. IMHO 16mm Sony pancake is a better option in this FL and it will be cheaper.
2) m4/3 sensor is smaller, so m4/3 lenses have smaller image circles. If you try to use m4/3 fisheye on APS-C you might get dark borders. You'll have to research this, I think knallberto on dpreview adapted his m4/3 fisheye to NEX.

[iangreenhalgh1]

16mm Sony pancake is awful, not comparable to a good MF lens like the Konica or Canon 15s.

[Rolf]

[iangreenhalgh1]

[Rolf]

Thanks because I tought to buy such a lens

[iangreenhalgh1]

A couple of samples, I forget aperture settings now.

If stopped down to f8 it was okay and it is a nice small lens that makes the NEX fit in a jacket pocket, but it's not a lens for landscapes, buildings etc, and at f2.8 and f4, the edges are poor. Maybe okay for casual street shooting, AF was fairly fast.

#1

#2

[rbelyell]

fyi but a tad OT, i used and loved the not expensive zenitar 16mm contax mount on my ep2. no distortion, very sharp, not a very big lens. now thats 2x crop vs 1.5 on nex7...

also, couldnt you buy the really great cv 15mm RF lens but shoot it at 16mp? i bet it would perform great and its small as a thimble.
tony

[fermy]

Well, I don't know what this is all about. 15 mm fisheye simply don't work on APS-C as intended, so 16mm pancake is miles better, no contest.

One can argue about rectilinear lenses such as 17mm Tokina v that pancake till the cows come home. Yes the corners on 16mm pancake are not any good, center is good. Obviously such lens works well for certain type of pictures, does not work for some other types of pictures. Agree that it's not great for landscapes. Overall, I don't think Tokina is any better to be honest. The assessment depends on price paid.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Er, there is no Zenitar in Contax mount, it's a fisheye SLR lens. It had quite a lot of distortion, it's a fisheye after all.

The Tokina 3.5/17 is a hell of a lot better than the Sony pancake, the two are not comparable at all.

[Attila]

[Virco]

Thank you guys for your input. Unfortunately nobody (yet) to have actually tried the combo I am talking about. Patience...

Regarding the 16mm pancake lens, I'm not even considering it as most of the reviews that I trust indicated it as a crap lens (well, curtesy requires words as "average" or "mediocre" at worst, but we all know what that means).

I know full well that a 15mm will not give me 180 degrees diagonal coverage (that's in simple words the definition of a full-frame fish-eye) but I was hoping for good to very good quality as a 22.5mm equivalent, even at full aperture (just like the splendid 17mm f:4 - equiv. 25.5mm - is giving me)

[ManualFocus-G]

[iangreenhalgh1]

[rbelyell]

some people dont know how to read or understand the queens english. what i said is true in all respects, contrary information is simply wrong. the zenitar 16mm DOES exist in contax mount. it showed NO distortion on my ep2. period.

you may not want to use it, and as i said previously, it may behave differently on apsc 1.5 crop vs my experience on m4/3 2x crop, but you can rely on the information i provided.
tony

[iangreenhalgh1]

I'm sorry, no desire to denigrate in any way but the information you are putting out about the Zenitar is completely wrong.

It is an SLR lens, has never been produced in Contax RF mount, but it has been available in the mount for the Contax/Yashica SLRs.

Distortion, it is a fisheye lens so it has a good deal of distortion, please stop claiming otherwise, it is misleading to people.

Rockwell hated it, he obviously had a crappy copy though:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/zenit/zenitar-16mm.htm

Here is a distortion test of the Zenitar 16 on a Canon 1.6x crop camera:



Here is the zenitar on a full frame Canon:



http://masochismtango.com/2010/08/14/zenitar-16mm-fisheye-on-full-frame-5dmk2-distortion-examples/

That should end this silly debate, it is a fisheye, it has distortion, period.

[ManualFocus-G]

Chill pill guys, Tony never mentioned that the lens was in Contax RF mount, he meant SLR mount.

Agree with Ian on the fishiness, the 1.6x crop factor must show it more than on a m43 body, but obviously it's not as pronounced as on full frame.

[iangreenhalgh1]

I'm chill, really don't want an argument, just want to be clear that the Zenitar is a fisheye, many people who don't know better lurk and read this site so it's important imho to try to be accurate on info.

[DanielT74]

I think Samyang 14/2.8 if you are not put off by the size is an awesome lens. It's only flaw is strange moustache distortion that is sometimes visible but mostly correctable. Otherwise it is sharp as sharp can be (insanely so) and extremely good with CA. A surprisingly good lens.

Old Pentax 15/3.5 supposedly designed by Zeiss and optically identical to them, is a good lens. Not for pixel peepers wide open but good with distortion and colours. Nice rendering.

Another option which is very nice but expensive is the Zeiss 18/4 ZM. Works very well on NEX-5n with very very occasional slight colour cast, not sure about NEX-7 though.

I once did a comparison of 8 ultra-wides in Pentax K mount:



http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/146188-comparison-8-ultrawide-lenses.html