NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Bjørn Rørslett on July 08, 2017, 22:04:12
-
As more NG members gain experience with this new 'fishy' zoom Nikkor lens, it might benefit all of us sharing those experiences here in this thread.
I got my lens earlier today. Will post later.
-
First impressions: this is a fairly compactly built lens. It extends ever so slightly during zooming and reaches the minimum length around the 10mm focal setting. The maximum is at 15 mm. We're just talking about an additional 4-5 mm in overall length, though.
The rather shallow hood is useful when the lens is operated around the long end to prevent impacts to the bulbous front and should be removed otherwise, unless one shoots the lens on a DX format system in which case the hood can stay down to some 10-11 mm focal length. It also acts as a mounting foundation for the lens cap. For DX shooters there is a special mark showing the approx. 11 mm setting that provides "full frame" without any dark corners.
Either FX or DX users will enjoy the very sharp images this fisheye zoom is capable of delivering. As expected from an ED lens, colours are crisply and vividly rendered. Like any modern lens the image contrast is outstanding. Fluorine coating on the front (hopefully) helps keep dust removal simple and efficient.
No sun today. so no idea about the propensity for flare and ghosts.
-
A quick sequence 8-10-12-14-15 mm to show the field of coverage as the lens zooms over its designated range For FX use I'd guess one either sets the lens to 8 or to 15 mm, whilst on the DX format the intermediate focal range can be utilised better.
Getting your feet included is easy :D
All photos shot at f/5.6 with my Df.
-
from what i've seen.. the old circular fish seems sharper further toward the edges... that is, less of that bluish/blur band around the circumference. while it may be a consequence of the fish design, the old one is quite narrow compared to this.
IR??
-
The 8-15 apparently does IR quite well, but only cursory testing conducted so far.
-
The amount of vignetting at 14mm is very small, if the sides of the image were to be cropped for a squarer format, I imagine shooting at 13mm or 14mm would be quite possible on FX. Maybe even 14.5mm would be possible without cropping, if a very slightly wider angle of view is desired.
-
from what i've seen.. the old circular fish seems sharper further toward the edges... that is, less of that bluish/blur band around the circumference. while it may be a consequence of the fish design, the old one is quite narrow compared to this.
IR??
This lens will require a round crop to remove this unpleasant blue halo. Yes, bigger than that of the older 8mm f/2.8.
-
Is there something wrong with me; I like the blue fringe?
Dave
-
The "blue fringe" is the hallmark of a true fisheye design so nothing wrong with it per se.
One is of course free to make a circular mask to remove the fringe during post processing, if deemed necessary.
Vignetting will, by the way, depend on focused distance. The image circle expands slightly towards infinity focus. Thus, one can get by with the lens at 9.5 mm setting for remote subjects with a DX camera, instead of the ~11mm "safe DX" mark on the lens barrel.
As to focusing, the close focus is 0.16m thus only leaves about 3 cm free space in front of the glass; with the hood on there is just 2 cm of working distance. Don't fall into the trap of mixing up "close focus" with "macro" -- as the focal length is short, magnification isn't that large even at the near limit unless the lens is operated at 15 mm focal length in which case one gets around 1:3. Scaring away insects is easy :D
-
The "blue fringe" is the hallmark of a true fisheye design so nothing wrong with it per se.
but it appears to be that the "halo" is greater = thicker on the new lens.... "i am at a loss for the correct terminology"..
-
The 8-15 apparently does IR quite well, but only cursory testing conducted so far.
this is a good sign.. if you find that the lens is truly IR friendly i may purchase one..
albeit, having to circularly crop more than the old lens
-
What is the situation with defishing of these zoom fisheyes, is it possible to do at the longest setting? This kind of functionality is provided in software for the 10.5mm. However, I guess the zoom feature would complicate things.
I'm just thinking I might use this lens in some contexts where it would be useful to provide the standard fisheye rendering and something that approximates an image made by a rectilinear wide angle without actually making separate shots with two lenses.
-
I used to defish photos from a 16/2.8 AIS with PS CS2. The cameras were DX, D2H and D300s. There is a penalty paid but sure it's less than for FX. Once I got a D800 I had real wide angle lenses at my disposal.
I'd carry an AF-S 20/1.8G ED unless the format is DX. The 20/1.8 is mostly bulk rather than weight. Maybe a defished 15mm is a little wider but doubt it's worth the loss of image quality.
I'd want to k ow the angle of view was really wider with the defished image. I don't have any direct comparisons and my brain is too hot to wrap around the angles.
Dave Hartman
-
Defishing can be done against a grid as I did with PS and DX photos. It can also be done by eye. I think I used the spherize tool.
Dave
-
I'd carry an AF-S 20/1.8G ED unless the format is DX. The 20/1.8 is mostly bulk rather than weight. Maybe a defished 15mm is a little wider but doubt it's worth the loss of image quality.
What I want to do is use a remote camera on the back of the church to capture a few overall view shots of a ceremony and the fisheye would allow me to do that in a small church without making the people sitting at the outer parts of the back rows too large. I don't want to emphasize the back row corners since the people probably chose to be there not to be the center of attention. ;) I think a fisheye would allow me to reduce the emphasis of the people in the corners of the back rows and put more attention on the couple at the altar while still showing the whole space or as much of it as possible in a single image. But this would only be used if the venue is small and packed with people basically.
I would be firing the back side camera with two WR-R10's (one on the camera I'm using the other on the remote) and I would be focused on capturing shots from the altar side. This way I would avoid having to physically move to the audience side. By staying in one area I would then hopefully be less noticeable.Yes, I understand that a fisheye is not how the guests would see the event ;) I would then retain the option of defishing some shots if the out of the camera look of the images is too much. :)
My alternative choice would not necessarily be a superwide angle lens but one that shows the center corridor and altar.
-
I'd test with a few test subjects. One can always semi-defish a photo.
-
Interesting relevant thought as usual, Ilkka. Thank you
-
Estimated Delivery: Friday, July 14, 2017 By 22:00 .... Could mean: it is DHL Express and I should get it before my holiday!!!!
Updated 4:24 a.m.
The package was processed in Cologne Bonn airport. That is 15 minutes drive from here....
With delivery courier COLOGNE - GERMANY 07:36
-
It's like Christmas again, Frank ?
-
It's like Christmas again, Frank ?
;D ;D ;D congratulations Frank!
Looking forward to all your samples and opinions
-
Birthday. On 27th I turn 3*17....
-
Birthday. On 27th I turn 3*17....
I spoke of the perceived feeling, not age per se. But congratulations are obviously in order nonetheless either for yourself or getting the fishy lens. Just 7*7 to go for the first centennial celebration :D
The fisheye is a good performer.
-
ready for some holiday snapshots.
I did work so much, now it is time to switch off my smartphone and sit in the forest for a week.
Who is who? 8-15, 20, 24, 50, 58, 60, 85, 105, 300 ...
-
mywoooorrrlllddd starts bending ....
-
mywoooorrrlllddd starts bending ....
Beter late than never, always good to doubt one's thoughts and beliefs ;)
-
Fons: The fish I knew to date was stinking. Each in its own way: one was large and heavy, one was expensive and heavy, one was this and that and low res. I feel that now with this small and neat, easily handled optical wonder with both end fish targets and the upcoming D850 on my shopping list ....
IT IS TIME TO GO FISHING IN THE FOREST!
-
Pink Floyd blasting from the stereo while I edit
"THE LITTLE RED CAR"
-
And my first bubble self portrait in the blue phvase...
-
Enjoy your new lens Frank, it seems to have landed in good hands :)
-
And my first bubble self portrait in the blue phvase...
What's going on around 5:00 in that image?
-
What's going on around 5:00 in that image?
That is the entrance from the balcony to my office, Carl.
-
Enjoy your new lens Frank, it seems to have landed in good hands :)
I have to thank you again for pointing me to the source of shipment. Next round on me, what is your poison?
-
congrats!... do you have an FX infrared conversions you can try it out on???
-
We rule the world by accident and happenstance
-
You're too modest, Frank.
-
occasional flower shot
-
You're too modest, Frank.
Not a trace, Bjørn
-
Tonight we met Alphonse and had some stale fun with that cool Fenchman. But we hat another very rewarding bottle before that, so....
-
Lovely samples! I can't wait to get one too :)
And Frank, we happen to be born on the same day ;D
-
Frank, these are very nice examples indeed :)
I will NOT buy this lens!
-
.....
I will NOT buy this lens!
Yes you will. :D
It's a replacement for 3 fisheye's (8, 10.5 and 16). So only one lens in the bag and not having to choose.
It's at least better than the Sigma 8/3.5 and Nikon 16/2.8. I'm not sure on the Nikon 10.5
And it's cheaper than those 3 together.
For me it was an easy decision. :)
-
How does the-15mm Nikon compare in sharpness to the earlier Nikon 16mm Fisheye f/3.5 version?
-
This is my first fish catch ever. ;)
8mm setting, f/5.6. Academic Bookstore in Helsinki.
I really like the handling of the lens, there isn't the usual slop in the manual focus ring as far as I can tell and both rings operate smoothly. The hood is attached with a lock at the side of the hood which is excellent - unlike the 70-200/2.8 FL's hood lock the fisheye's lock has to be pressed before the hood comes off. I view this as an important security measure.
Unexpectedly I find the circular fisheye views more pleasing than the frame-filling ones. I find that the intersection of curved lines and the curved image boundary is more natural than when the curved lines meet the rectangular boundary in the 15mm setting. But I'm sure I will find use for both settings.
-
So how you see the future use of this lens - mostly DX or FX? Or both equally? LZ
-
Perhaps a silly question, but if you have an FX and a DX camera why would you use it on DX?
I will only use it on an FX body. It gives me more options.
-
I see a great potential for this zoom to be used on DX, intermediate settings especially. 15 on DX will act as an extra wide one, with relatively less de-fishing, if needed. A lot of interesting things could be done, on FX and DX. Let us see the owners opinions! THX! LZ
-
On an FX camera the 8-15 is one of two things: either an 8mm circular fisheye, or a 15mm full-frame fisheye. I don't see much scope for zooming in between, unless you like truncated circular images. Zoomed just a little wider than 15mm you could crop for a squarer format and still get a full-frame image, but I'd say the majority of photographers would use it almost exclusively at one end or the other.
On DX it's a bit different. At the widest settings from 8-10mm you can get a truncated circular image, similar to what can be achieved on FX between 12-15mm. At 11mm it becomes a full-frame fisheye like the DX 10.5mm fisheye. Zooming further it remains a full-frame fisheye but the angle of view and "fishiness" is reduced. I imagine this could be quite useful if a less extreme fisheye effect is desired. It would also be handy for landscape photography, allowing for more precise cropping or framing of the scene. After all, just because it is a fisheye, there is no reason it has to have a 180° field of view.
-
If you want to do square or less rectangular (I commonly use 4:5) aspect ratios then it makes sense to zoom in as much as possible to get the most detailed image without leaving relevant parts out. There is even a 4:5 crop mode in some Nikon models that can help find the right setting. However, I suppose one can also just shoot at 8mm and decide on the exact framing in post-processing.
-
I repeat my question for those who know. Is this new zoom lens as sharp (or sharper) than the early 16mm Nikkor f/3.5 lens?
-
Here is your answer, Michael. From underwater shooters, whose workhorse lenses are fisheyes. http://wetpixel.com/articles/review-nikon-8-15-mm-f-3.5-4.5-fisheye-lens/P4
-
Here is your answer, Michael. From underwater shooters, whose workhorse lenses are fisheyes. http://wetpixel.com/articles/review-nikon-8-15-mm-f-3.5-4.5-fisheye-lens/P4
I still don't see where the new zoom fisheye is compared to the the earlier nikon 16mm f/3.5. There were two earlier Nikkor fisheye lenses, one at f/3.5 (sharpest) and one at f/2.8 (less sharp). Perhaps I missed it in that longish article, but If did not find the new zoom compared to the earlier f/3.5 Nikkor fisheye for sharpness.
-
I still don't see where the new zoom fisheye is compared to the the earlier nikon 16mm f/3.5. There were two earlier Nikkor fisheye lenses, one at f/3.5 (sharpest) and one at f/2.8 (less sharp). Perhaps I missed it in that longish article, but If did not find the new zoom compared to the earlier f/3.5 Nikkor fisheye for sharpness.
You need a direct comparison - copy to the copy. Your own copies, of course. The rest is a wordings only. My last copy of the Sigma fish was better, of any respect, than my best copy of Nikkor 3.5 fish, and way better than 2.8 one. This new zoom looks like delivering better color/contrast ratio than any of them, mentioned here, equal to my former Leica or Rollei one I'd say, but your direct question needs direct comparison of the 100% crops. This way or that, the info, sensitively touching all of us, will be released soon, I believe. LZ