View Full Version : Any suggestions on "fisheye" lenses and such???

10-08-2010, 12:49 AM
Looking at getting one for my Sony, but just wanted to see what kind of input people had on them.
Any one better than another? Or, which one would be the best bang for my buck?


10-08-2010, 04:16 PM
I have a Sony 11-16mm and use it frequently on my Minolta. The prices have risen sharply over the last two years. Check out Ebay, if you are patient, you can find some deals. Good Luck

Capt. Dan
07-13-2011, 10:34 AM
Last summer I picked up a Tokina 12-24 lens for my Canon and have loved it, here are a few representative shots that i have on my office computer. I shoot in JPEG and these are saved to lower res. The great thing about the lens is that you can get right uop in the action, I mean two feet away, and capture a huge amount of the background as well.

07-17-2011, 12:46 PM

First, I think you need to define what you mean by "fisheye". The lens people have mentioned above are wide angle zoom lenses a "fisheye" is something very different. Fisheye is a term erroneously but commonly used to describe a wide angle lens. While a fisheye is a wide angle lens; it is a very specific type of wide angle. The reverse is not true - a wide angle lens is not necessarily a fisheye lens. I have Canon equipment so I will refer to Canon lenses, but other manufacturers have similar products.

A true fisheye is a fixed focal length lens, for instance my Canon EF 15mm fisheye. On my full frame 5D body. It gives me an approximately 165 degree field of view. My Canon 7D has an APSC sensor with a .6X crop factor, so my Canon EFS 10-22mm lens is effectively a 16-35mm wide angle zoom on my 7D body. You might think that at the 10mm end it would give me a similar image as the 15mm fisheye on my 5D. It does not; the images are very different as the effectively 16mm image on my 7D is only about a 120 degree field of view roughly only half of what the true fisheye on my 5D gives me.

I have tried some shots using my 15mm fisheye on my 7D body which makes it the equivalent of a 24mm fisheye (15mm + 9mm(15x.6)). That combo yields a truely wierd image because it is not designed to be used on a crop sensor camera.

You would think that a 15mm lens and a 16mm lens would give you a virtually identical image. But, they do not as the optics in a "fisheye" lens are very different than the optics in a wide angle lens. A fisheye gives you that classic looking through the bottom of a coke bottle roundish image while a wideangle lens is more like a panorama where more of what your eye sees in a scene is included on the left and right edge of the image but not what would be the top or bottom of the image. In other words my 15mm fisheye gives me a 165 degree field of view left to right and top to bottom in an image while the 16mm wide angle might give me a 120 degree horizontal field of view but only a 90 degree field of view vertically ( the numbers aren't quite correct but you get the idea).

If you are looking for a true fisheye, the Canon 15mm is very good, Nikon makes a similar good lens, while Sigma makes a series of fisheyes, all the way down to a 6mm which I think gives virtually a 180 degree field of view resulting in a circular image. But, I am guessing you are looking for either a wide angle zoom similar to my Canon EF 10-22mm or a fixed focal length wide angle. Pretty much all of the companies make a good wide angle zoom with the Nikon or Canon and probably Sony at least that was the case with Minolta which Sony bought and sell under the Sony name. And,they are somewhat argueably better than the aftermarket Sigmas, Tokinas or Tamrons which are less expensive. My experience has generally been the aftermarket lenses can be quite good but not quite up to a Nikon or Canon. I had the Tokina version of my Canon 10-22 and while my Canon is a slightly sharper lens the Canon has noticeably better color saturation and contrast and that has been the same for every Sigma, Tokina and Tamron lens I've replaced over the years with a Canon lens. However, the differences would probably not be noticeable to the average person unless identical shots with each lens are compared side by side.

Hope this helps. All of Capt. Dan's shots appear to have been taken with a wide angle lens rather than a "fisheye". I don't have sample images from my different lenses to illustrate what I've said. But, if I've totally confused you and you would like to see sample images of a fisheye vs. a wide angle lens let me know and I will take some to post.


Capt. Dan
07-19-2011, 10:43 AM
Spilunker -- Nice post, but you, like i, didn't catch that the post is two years old!

07-31-2011, 08:33 PM
Eh, who cares if it is a 2 year old post...Your pics are still super Capt. Dan! Remember, a true fisheye will really bend that horizon quite a lot. Some people don't like it but I sure do - that's why I use the fisheye. I have a Canon 15mm fisheye on a 5D mkII and it is a joy to use. If i can figure out how to post a few I'll get them up. (just joined TF a few days ago)


Figured out the image upload! 15mm fisheye on a 5D MKII

Capt. Dan
08-01-2011, 04:48 PM
Wow Finao, that image is stunning, nice work!

08-03-2011, 09:49 PM

HI Surf Fisherman
08-28-2011, 01:48 PM
Any possibility you could shoot a photo of something with both lenses from the same location so that the difference could be seen visually in a much easier fashion? I'd really like to get either a wide-angle or fisheye lens to shoot my friends with their catches at the back of the boat.