Fisheyes

[David]

I've been wanting a fisheye lens for about 20 years. Sure, I could have gotten one instead of lots of other things I've picked up, but never did. So I'm probably going to get one or two next year. For sure I'm going to pick up a Pentax Takumar 6X7 1:4.5 35mm Fisheye. That's an almost certain purchase (to celebrate paying off one of my large student loan portions.) But I'm working out what to do for my second.

Here are some options.

Pentax DA 10-17mm zoom
M42 fisheye (Pentax 17mm f4, Takumar 15mm f3.5, Peleng 8mm, or Zenitar 2.
SMC PK 15mm f3.5 or SMC PK 17mm f4 or Rokinon 8mm
SMC-A 16mm f4
I know that Bower, Vivitar Series 1, and Sigma also offer competitively priced fisheyes, and I'm also open to one of them in K.

I like the M42 idea because I can get an adapter for other systems than Pentax. That said, I'd likely use it most on my Pentax. For Pentax, the SMC-A is the leading contender as it can communicate with my K-7.

Is cost a factor, yeah sure, but I want to make sure I get a good lens that I will enjoy using and take good photos with. Would I love to get the Zeiss Distagon 15mm 3.5? Of course, but the Pentax is a very similar optical design and meaningfully cheaper.

Am I forgetting any obvious choices?

Any experience with the Pentax lenses or the new Bower, Vivitar, or Sigma lenses?

[iangreenhalgh1]

There's a Samyang too, don't know much about it but some speak highly of it.

[Lloydy]

I'm on the same search, with little joy at the moment. I had a Vivitar 16 from Ffordes in Scotland, and it was obviously de-centered so I sent it back ( they didn't refund my return postage when they said they would, and it was re listed for sale within days. If they fixed it for re sale, why wasn't it checked and fixed before the initial sale ? ) but I digress, although the point is - the lens looked perfect, it came from a reputable dealer, but it was no good.
I also have a Sigma Filtermatic 16 on loan with a view to buy from someone, and once again the lens looks perfect, it has all it's cases and boxes and has hardly been used. But I can't seem to get any sharpness from it. So I'm not buying that one either.

Are fish eye's and ultra wides more fragile than other lenses? am I expecting too much from them ? Certainly not from the Vivitar, I tested that relentlessly and took over 300 pictures, all on a tripod with the 10 second timer, and not one was sharp, every picture worse on the right side as well. The lens was junk.

Perhaps I'm unlucky, but this experience is leading me towards buying a brand new lens, something with a warranty, and something that has been designed in the digital era. I'm thinking Samyang, PK mount for the K10 and the NEX.

[dnas]

The Samyang 8mm F3.5 fisheye is very, very good, but is made for APS-C cameras. i have one, and it's very nice.

It's manual focus only, but personally, I think manual focus is better on Fisheyes, as you choose the aperture, then set the focus at the hyperfocal distance..... If a fisheye autofocuses, then you may not optimise the depth of field. (if it focuses at infinity, you will lose some DOF at the close end, rather than focusing at, say, 10m)

You have a mix of 35mm film and APS-C digital SLRs, so it's good for thr DSLRs, but you would need to crop on the film SLRs.

The price vs performance is excellent, as the performance is similar to Canon/Nikon fisheyes, but at a fraction of the cost.

[hifisapi]

the pentax fisheye are the 17mm and they are full frame on on film.
the pentax 15mm are not fisheye, they are rectilinear and they are full frame on film.

[tao]

I used to love my Peleng when I shot film. It was the only fish-eye affordable to me at the time and the IQ was good enough. I tried it again last year and found that it did not age well in the digital era, to say the least. No where near the IQ of my new Samyang 7.5mm for micro four thirds, which I understand that its big brothers also have good reputation. Sorry I've never tried the big names since I did not want to pay too much for a lens that I would used only a couple times a year.

[soikka]

I can recommend the DA10-17. It may not be as sharp as modern 10mm primes, but it is versatile.
Have you checked Sigma 10mm fisheye, that should be good also.

The 16 to 17mm lenses give only partial fisheye effect on crop body like K7.

Similar to my DA10-17 on m43 body. Last image in this thread http://forum.mflenses.com/olympus-e-pm2-samples-t61255.html

DA covers full frame from 15mm, but it doesn't have manual aperture setting.

It really depends what kind of a view you want.
Full 360 degrees is also available for crop body with Sigma 4.5mm.
Or if you settle for 180 degrees there are many 10mm alternatives.
DA10-17 is the most versatile.

[hoanpham]

Sigma 4.5mm circular FE hsm.
pentax da 10-17 is fine too. OK sharpness.
Zenitar 16 m42, works fine with pentax and canon FF.

Pentax/Takumar 15/3.5 and Zeiss 3.5/15 are not FE, but also not the right lens to play due to price and weight.
My fav 15mm is voigtlander heliar leica M on nex: super compact very good IQ.

Also consider add-on-wide lens. I have a few add-on lenses, but never got time to play with them.

[DR.JUAN]

The minolta 161 is good.

My dream? The m42 takumar 11mm.

Not very good lens, unsharp and low contrast, but i like it since 1966/7.

[SonicScot]

The Samyang 8/3.5 comes in several different names, Bower, Rokinon, Pro Optik, Vivitar and Walimex to name a few. It's the same lens despite the different names.
I thought I read somewhere that the Walimex had contacts on the Canon mount but I haven't been able to confirm that.
I bought mine new for my 7D, it's a great performer and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it.

[Aanything]

for what I saw, considering price tag, the zenitar is unbeatable, imho. Also, you can get it both in pentax k or m42 mount.

As for m42 ones, I gathered some information because I really wanted to get one some time ago, and the two that looked better after seeing like a million pics are the mamiya sekor sx 3.5/14 and the ebc fujinon fisheye 16/2.8.
Both fetch quite high prices (mostly due to rarity or collector value I think - around €450 for the mamiya, slightly less for the fujinon iirc), and, given the price factor, a modern lens like a samyang (both 14 and 8mm) would probably be a wiser choice.
Also the adaptability problem are to be considered, since neither the mamiya nor the fujinon will mount on m42 adapters without slight modification of the lens or adapter.
Then I get a zenitar for €80 and lived happily with it.

[SonicScot]

Yeah the Zenitar 16/2.8 comes in Nikon, Canon and M42 mounts, maybe others too. At £125 new it hard to beat.

[hifisapi]

[soikka]

[DR.JUAN]

[hifisapi]

the pentax A 16mm is a F2.8 lens I believe, and its a full frame fisheye on 35mm film

[SonicScot]

[guardian]

[David]

Thank you all for the insights. The Samyang is definitely back on the list and a serious contender. I'd get it in straight-up PK mount. Not having it for Nikon or Canon isn't the end of the world, and I wouldn't likely use it on my spotmatic anyway.

I'll let you know which I go with (largely depending on what's available when I make the purchase.)

[james]

Nikkor 16/3.5, even a pre-AI if its destined for an adapter. Optically superior to the newer Nikon iterations.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I also recommend the Samyang 8/3.5 for an APS-C camera (as all Pentax DSLRs are so far). I reviewed it here. I compared it to a friend's Pentax DA 10-17@10mm and I prefer the Samyang - a bit sharper and less CA; also, it has a more interesting projection.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/laurentiucristofor/6974998367

The newer Samyang designs for mirrorless cameras are even better:


http://www.flickr.com/photos/laurentiucristofor/8195625222

[mfkita]

Found this at a pawn shop for $8...




Not the sharpest but it is fun...

[dnas]