Author Topic: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX  (Read 2720 times)

Bjørn Rørslett

  • Fierce Bear of the North
  • Administrator
  • ***
  • Posts: 8248
  • Oslo, Norway
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #30 on: February 23, 2018, 11:48:54 »
The panorama head (PH) equation

PH = f(mass ^(geekiness))

Amazing. I don't even deduct anything by the device not (yet) being finished in flat black :D

Seapy

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 739
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #31 on: February 23, 2018, 12:55:11 »
I like the equation!

Thank you Bjørn, for not deducting any points for lack of anodising.  I MIGHT even anodise it myself yet...  ;D   I understand the chemistry is fairly straight forward, given a decent power supply it could be possible.  I think less current is needed than for plating.

All I need now is a 10.5, shaved.   ::)
Robert C. P.
South Cumbria, UK

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 4823
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #32 on: February 23, 2018, 20:47:15 »
Very nice!
Erik Lund

Seapy

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 739
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #33 on: February 23, 2018, 21:17:38 »
Me thinks the circular (or semi-circular) Arca Swiss rail may have many tricks around the corner...  More than I dreamt of when I created it.
Robert C. P.
South Cumbria, UK

Jakov Minić

  • Jakov Minic
  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 4816
  • The Hague, The Netherlands
    • Jakov Minić
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #34 on: February 23, 2018, 21:27:53 »
Robert, you are a true treat to our community :)

Ah yes, Erik and I went shooting globes once upon a time. I haven't done one in ages.
I believe that this image was taken then on the beach in The Hague...
Free your mind and your ass will follow. - George Clinton
Before I jump like monkey give me banana. - Fela Kuti
Confidence is what you have before you understand the problem. - Woody Allen

Seapy

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 739
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #35 on: February 23, 2018, 21:43:04 »
Thank you Jakov, I am really enjoying being back here.  At least we can discuss gear, as well as the images the gear produces.

I particularly like the circular panoramas in post 27, there is so much to look at. Each time I look I see more.

I very much like that if I missed something or it doesn't quite make sense, I can go back to my post and improve it.
Robert C. P.
South Cumbria, UK

Erik Lund

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 4823
  • Copenhagen
    • ErikLund.com
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #36 on: February 26, 2018, 12:48:30 »
Yes Jakov that's at the beach in front of the lighthouse ;) I recall it was impossible to edit those images together to make something useful. One has to be really up close to the main subject,, actually goes for most fisheye images.


Here is another Planet from same trip now in Queens garden, The Hague
_EGL4927 Planet3 by Erik Gunst Lund, on Flickr
Erik Lund

Kim Pilegaard

  • "Nikea"
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 127
  • Copenhagen
    • Profile at Nature Photographers in Denmark
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #37 on: February 26, 2018, 17:30:12 »
Wow! Such a "Planet" image is really great! How is it actually made?
Kim

Seapy

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 739
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #38 on: February 26, 2018, 19:27:27 »
Thank you Erik, I like these pano's,  would make an amazing jigsaw puzzle!

It seems for now I will have to content myself with my 16mm f2.8 but an 8mm or a 10.5 are definitely on my horizon.

The only real FX single shot contender which doesn't require surgery, seems to be the Sigma 8mm f3.5 EX DG Fisheye Lens.

http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,7118.50.html

The Samyang 8mm seems to be DX and even shaved doesn't seem to get the entire image circle within the 24mm width of the FX frame.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/8mm-f35.htm

The edge compression is something I am looking at.

If I were to get a fisheye with flats I think it would be the Nikkor 10.5mm because you will get a larger overall image with more usable pixels and a more graceful fall off around the periphery.  From the 10.5mm images you have kindly posted here, the edges seem to gracefully compress the outer circular boundary nicely.

Perhaps there are other contenders for a full circle FX fisheye?  If I have missed one please correct me.  ;D  I don't particularly want or need AF, I don't see the point with such a short lens.  It slightly amuses me and puzzles me in equal measures in the blurb for some of these lenses they say the AF is especially important because the depth of focus of fisheyes is so wide??? 
Robert C. P.
South Cumbria, UK

Asle Feten

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 248
  • Hovet, Norway
    • Fjell og foto, my mountain and photo blog in Norwegian
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #39 on: February 26, 2018, 20:21:01 »
It's pretty easy, just do everything like other panoramas, but also take care of the right down. Insteed of a cylindrical projection that is normal for panoramas, one use stereographic projection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereographic_projection

This one is made with D700 and 16mm/3.5 fisheye.

Dølden by Asle Feten, on Flickr

There is no illusion, it just looks that way.

mxbianco

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2019, 17:25:57 »
...
Perhaps there are other contenders for a full circle FX fisheye?  If I have missed one please correct me.  ;D 

You could use the old 7.5mm f:5.6.
I have one, I even chipped it. It provides a 23.5 mm circular image on an FX sensor, almost fills frame entirely on a DX sensor.
Being a retrofocus lens, in order to mount it you have to do a MUp operation (battery has to have at least 75% charge or it won't operate).
Afterwards, when you turn camera off, the mirror sits gracefully on top of the retrofocus tube. There is nothing on the tube that will harm the mirror.
Naturally you have to work in LiveView, although you could use its own finder mounted on camera's flash shoe
I have used it on my IR-converted D70, and on a D600 and a D810.

Naturally, to dismount you have to have a fresh battery (75% or more), or you are stuck with the 7.5mm until you get one...

It will be quite handy on Z6 and Z7 with FTZ adapter, no MUp to do, the old 8mm f:8 comes into play as well, although being 1 f-stop darker...


BTW, this is my first message here, take this as a preliminary presentation. Maybe I'll do a proper one in the appropriate section.

Ciao from Massimo
Since evolution has given us TWO ears and ONE mouth, we are supposed (me included) to be doing more listening than talking.

mxbianco

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #41 on: April 09, 2019, 14:10:14 »
I tried it once (not mine) and thought that the resale value will take a very big dip and the just decided that purchasing a used Sigma fisheye would be a better decision for me since I can keep the resale value of the lens somewhat  :o :o :o

anyway, that's just my personal thought.

I keep asking myself: why shave the hood off of the 10.5mm and not remove the entire part (keeping it uncut) and maybe replace it with an appropriate size ABS ring? Nowadays 3D printers make miracles...
[But then, maybe there are more technical problems in removing the whole hood. I haven't put my hands yet on a 10.5mm fisheye service manual. Anyone have one?]

In case of a resale, you could sell it with both the DX hood and the FX ring, and it will have -maybe- a higher value than the shaved or the unshaved fish...

Ciao from Massimo
Since evolution has given us TWO ears and ONE mouth, we are supposed (me included) to be doing more listening than talking.

Øivind Tøien

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 1061
  • Fairbanks, Alaska
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #42 on: April 09, 2019, 23:36:37 »
I keep asking myself: why shave the hood off of the 10.5mm and not remove the entire part (keeping it uncut) and maybe replace it with an appropriate size ABS ring? Nowadays 3D printers make miracles...
[But then, maybe there are more technical problems in removing the whole hood. I haven't put my hands yet on a 10.5mm fisheye service manual. Anyone have one?]

In case of a resale, you could sell it with both the DX hood and the FX ring, and it will have -maybe- a higher value than the shaved or the unshaved fish...

Ciao from Massimo

On my (unshaved) copy the "hood" look like it is part of the body. It extends all the way from the focusing ring...
Øivind Tøien

Birna Rørslett

  • Global Moderator
  • **
  • Posts: 1381
  • A lesser fierce bear of the North
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #43 on: April 10, 2019, 00:15:25 »
My copy ("shaved") appears likewise.

mxbianco

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye on FX
« Reply #44 on: April 13, 2019, 18:40:58 »
On my (unshaved) copy the "hood" look like it is part of the body. It extends all the way from the focusing ring...

True, I confirmed this by downloading a copy of 10.5mm service manual. The hood extends up to the MF ring.
But then, with a carefully balanced cut (approximately 3 mm above the golden ring), I was able to keep the four hood petals together. It is even possible to slip the hood back on for DX shooting.

Care must be taken not to lose it, as the front element slides inside the hood as you focus.

Anyway, the advantages brought by shaving the hood exceed the disadvantages.

For example, cleaning the front element, which is essential with fisheyes, is much simpler than with the unshaved lens.

Naturally, the big advantage is the ability to make a full circle shot in FX by combining two exposures, one taken in portrait mode and the other one in landscape.

Ok, another nerd task to cancel from the -long- todo list

The todo list has just been extended by one: I'm working on a symmetrical L-bracket which will enable to take two perfectly aligned shots, I need a portable solution; Seapy's beautiful accomplishment has the only defect of being hardly portable...

The key word here is symmetrical, that is the distances of the mounting rails from the optical axis of the lens should be equal.

Ciao from Massimo
Since evolution has given us TWO ears and ONE mouth, we are supposed (me included) to be doing more listening than talking.