In my opinion, a fisheye belongs in every well-stocked photographer's household. Not only because it's a wonderful party lens and creates incredibly great effects, but because it's much more versatile than some people think.
I've always been a fan of fisheye lenses, especially Nikon's AF-S 10.5mm f/2.8G. An incredibly sharp thing - but unfortunately for DX cameras, i.e. the crop cameras from Nikon with the smaller image chip. But there is also a full-frame fisheye that has a focal length of 16mm. It is one of the older lenses, but of course still achieves excellent results on current FX cameras.
My history with fisheye lenses is a checkered one, because my 10.5mm lens, which I still had for my old D200, was stolen from the set including the D200 during a photo shoot. Well, I wanted a D3 back then anyway...
For perhaps understandable reasons, there wasn't enough additional fisheye back then. And when I saw an inexpensive 16mm lens on eBay, it was in front of me my best friend snatched it away! Luckily only for 3 euros and as a “punishment” he has lent it to me now and again 🙂
I now have access to a D200 again, which I can thankfully use as a behind-the-goal camera, so it made sense to buy a 10.5mm fisheye again. I recently came across one that was cheap and still had a remaining warranty and I snapped it up.
However, I would also like to use the lens on my D3. The problem: the lens looks like this on full format.
Of course, I could set my camera to use the lens as a DX, but then I would "only" have 5 million pixels available. I also know that the outstanding optical qualities of the lens allow for more. So I moved the lens around the built-in lens hood - simply shaved it off.
Now the lens looks like this and you may realize that I am not a gifted craftsman.
I used a kind of Dremel to plan away the sun visor, which is made of plastic anyway. Now the image field looks completely different.
When I took the picture I was standing about 20cm in front of the bookshelf.
By the way, various programs can correct the distortion later. I like to use this with my back goal camera because then the inexperienced viewer doesn't get completely confused. Here is an example with the D200 and the fisheye corrected by the software from a parade by Frank Rost at HSV's last home game.
You can also do it here for €50
http://360pano.de/tokina-sigma-nikon.html
have his fisheye shaved. After shaving it looks like it has never looked the same and you even get a new lens if the shave goes wrong...
Well, I think €50 is a bit excessive, as the procedure is really easy to do.
I once borrowed a Zanitar with a Canon bayonet for a few days. However, it took me a while to really get to grips with it - because with blnede 2.8 the thing was completely overexposed.
but is a cost-effective alternative.
When I get back from my current vacation, I'll show you a few pictures with the 10.5 Nikkor and you'll see that there is no cost-effective alternative. The thing is just so sharp right down to the edge that everything else is just cheap. 🙂
For comparison, can you include the original recording (rust parade) before the correction? I would be interested to know what the software corrected.
50€ is not a small amount, that's right. But you have some kind of guarantee if something goes wrong.
If you do it yourself, it can quickly become obvious...
I was also cautious about shaving the sun visor at first, but it's really very easy. But of course you're right: if you're not sure, it's better to spend the 50 euros.
Yes, that was really bad luck with the eBay auction back then 🙂 at least we didn't outbid each other by many euros...
And if I can lend you anything else, then of course I'll continue to do so! 🙂
It's actually good that you outbid me back then, otherwise I wouldn't have a 10.5 now 😉
A Nikkor is certainly easier to shave than a Tokina 10-17mm or the Sigma 10mm. But the appearance after a shave could also be an important point. 🙂
Gruss Tobias
PS: I am the one who offers this service.
Hello Tobias,
It's nice that you identify yourself. And I understood the hint about appearance very well 😉
[…] But even with that (assuming a circular fisheye), you need at least 4 shots. Since I use a fisheye lens for cameras with a smaller sensor on a full-frame camera, I use 8 shots, compensating for the loss in pixel count with an additional […]
Did you also “planed” a protective cap for it? Or what do you use for transport?
The original doesn't fit anymore, or does it??
The original protective cap still fits easily :)
If it's been a while...
For the sake of completeness on the subject of fisheye, this:
http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/F%C3%BCr-Fotos-der-besonderen-Art-Fisheye-Objektive
I use the 10-17mm Tokina fisheye zoom, which runs on both DX and FX. In the latter case, it is a 17 mm full format fisheye - in this case the 24×36 mm format is fully distinguished - which then makes no difference to the 2,8/16 mm FX Nikkor Fisheye in terms of image capture/playback.
Ralf Jannke
[…] I grabbed my camera and my shaved fisheye lens, slid somewhere in the middle of the Alster, selected the interval timer function on my D3 […]
As a “newbie” I have a slightly different question about the fisheye.
I still have a Russian fisheye replica of an old analog Pentax camera (Zentitar 2,8/16) with a Pentax Pk connection.
Is there any way to use this lens with my new Nikon D90?
Thank You
Andreas
Hi Andrew,
I'm not an adapter professional, but this looks like you could use it
http://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B004UUELUQ/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1638&creative=19454&creativeASIN=B004UUELUQ&linkCode=as2&tag=stefagroen-21
Regards
Stefan
And which fish eye is better? The 10.5 or 16?
What do you mean by "better"?
By better I mean the imaging performance or the quality of the images as well as the autofocus.
For football, do you tend to use the 10.5 Fisheye on the D200 or a UWW?
The 10.5 is better, but can only be used on the full format with the fretsaw work described. I now use the 16mm on the D800 as a back goal camera :)
Hi
I own the Nikon Fisheye 10,5mm and would like to buy a small system camera for this fisheye. I would like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 best, for which there is an adapter so that I can use the fisheye on this camera.
Does that work or do you have experience with fisheye and system cameras?
Thanks LG
Daniel
Hi Daniel,
I have no experience with this, but for purely technical reasons I can't imagine it working. The lens on the Lumix has a focal length of 21mm - that's too long for a fisheye.
However, Panasonic has a fisheye for the small sensor. But that's not exactly cheap.
Regards
Stefan
hello stefan,
First of all, thank you for your quick answer.
I've now looked at the technical reasons and thanks to your help I've become smarter.
I still have one question: the focal length will then be 21mm. But the angle of the fisheye remains 180°, right?
The Samyang 7.5mm fisheye would otherwise be a cheap solution - but unfortunately it doesn't have autofocus.
thank you for your help.
thank you daniel
Hi,
No, you also lose the 180 degree viewing angle!
AF is not that important with fisheye because the focus range is quite large even with a small aperture value.