NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Seapy on February 20, 2018, 23:23:43
-
I have read several threads about the 10.5 fisheye, shaving it etc. Tomorrow I am going to the Nikon Roadshow at Manchester, I am hoping to try a 10.5 on the D3, I don't suppose they will let me shave it but I'm hoping to get a feel of the image circle on FX. Not knowing what to expect, will the image circle be contained within the FX frame or does it clip the edges of the circle on the 24mm edges?
Last year I got my 16mm fisheye and it's almost been glued to the D3 since! I am hugely fascinated by Bob's wonderful application of his 8mm Nikkor, I am wondering if I can get a similar effect with the 10.5.
Sorry to start another 10.5 thread but I didn't see clear answers to my question in the discussions I have read.
Is it possible to add an external rim which restricts the image circle to within the 24mm boundary of the frame?
Perhaps I will have to go down the 8mm path to get a clear circular image. I suppose it isn't impossible to crop the circle in pp. but I particularly like the image compression at the edge of the image with the 8mm.
-
Robert, here is a quote of Bjørn from this thread (reply #1).
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,5189.msg81984.html#msg81984
If the 10.5 is put on an FX camera and its hood removed, it will cover about 200 degrees on the long axis. Still, top and bottom will be masked off, but by quickly rotating the camera for another exposure and later combining the two frames, a circular image results.
-
Probably you also have referred to this thread, but, FWIW, Erik also needed to combine the horizontal and vertical images to get the fully circular image shot with his hacked 10.5 fisheye on FX:
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,2948.0.html
-
Thank you Akira, OK, I understand, my stupidity and bad memory. I had read that from Bjørn and also Eric's remark but they had't registerd in my mind. ::)
While I can see that two 90º rotated exposures are a good workaround and will result in a slightly larger image than FX would allow, it might not always work if the images don't line up reasonably well. So I think if a purchase is to be considered, with full image circle intended, the 10.5 is a miss for FX. I had been under the (false) impression that shaving the 10.5mm lens shade was to allow the full image circle on FX, not just 'almost' a full image circle.
IF I already had a 10.5, but I don't. So I need to consider alternative 8mm lenses...
-
Here is a 10.5 on a D3s. Not fishy enough.
-
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.
-
Maybe this thread can spark some more interest in Full Frame Fish :)
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,3011.0.html
-
Why not sell the 16mm and get the 8-15 Fisheye zoom. You have all in one lens and it’s a good one.
-
There is a question is fisheye 8-15mm zoom sharper than the 8mm f/2.8?
-
There is a question is fisheye 8-15mm zoom sharper than the 8mm f/2.8?
My unscientific response is yes, but take that with a grain of salt as no stringent A/B shooting has been conducted by me (so far).
A shoot-out is on the to-do list after my move out of Oslo has been completed.
That being said, the 10.5 Fish is no slouch in terms of its optical qualities.
-
I thoroughly enjoy using the 10.5 shaved off fish eye on FX.
It reminds me, more or less, of the times I used the circular 8mm fish-eye on DX.
The chopped off areas improve the framing in my honest opinion.
If you take a look at the majority of full circular images, you could have done without the full circle anyhow :)
I have randomly selected a few 10.5s...
-
Here is a 10.5 on a D3s. Not fishy enough.
Is that not with the D3S switching to DX mode?
I seem to have opened a good can of fish here! Thank you all for your replies. I have just walked through the door after my trip back from the Manchester Nikon Roadshow.
The coffee was good, so was the reception and help from the Nikon staff, who finally managed to clean my D3 sensor and fixed the viewfinder on my D3300 which my son somehow managed to fill with mud...
Unfortunately they hadn't brought a 10.5 fisheye with them but they DID have the 8-15mm AF-zoom. ;D I haven't had time to offload the images I took with it yet but I found it spectacular. Not sure I will be able to afford it at the moment but maybe in the not too distant future?
I also had a play with the 180-400 supposedly the only one in the UK accessible to us, but more on that later.
Will post images as soon as.
-
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3290.0;attach=12229;image
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3290.0;attach=12090;image
-
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3290.0;attach=12229;image
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3290.0;attach=12090;image
OK, thanks, I get the picture! Easy to visualise the extended image circle of the 10.5 without the lens shade petals.
-
OK I have loaded the images I took at the Manchester NPS Roadshow.
This is the scene with my D3, and the NPS 8-15mm fisheye zoom at 8mm, all images taken at f6.3.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4757/25535903357_69404648e9_b.jpg)
This is taken close up of the D850 at 15mm
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4670/25535902667_1b4948e450_b.jpg)
This was at 12mm.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4700/25535902127_7bfc0dafd2_b.jpg)
And 8mm.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4670/40363024292_97cdf0f462_b.jpg)
These pictures are of the cup which was in the second set of windows from this end in the first image, near the man slightly crouching.
At 15mm, all taken straight into the sun.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4757/39697153274_d45fe58a2f_b.jpg)
At 8mm, notice my jacket intruding, Sun peeking through the handle.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4762/39511199695_8de22dbcc1_b.jpg)
At 8mm again.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4676/39511198645_7cebbff625_b.jpg)
All images basic processed in Lightroom using the new auto adjust, with a very quick individual fine tune.
I can post unprocessed versions but directly into the sun, out of the camera not ideal. I took no trouble to check the exposure, just took the shots without bothering too much about niceties like that.
-
Is that not with the D3S switching to DX mode?
Yes, I have checked and you are right.
-
Thanks Anthony.
Still a valuable contribution for comparison.
-
A Full Frame Fisheye like the 10.5 mm cropped on FX or a 16mm with a 1.4 TC on FX, is really useful as a super wide angle lens especially for groups of people close up, since there is less (almost no) distortion of peoples faces etc in the corners.
-
Interesting point Erik, had never occurred to me to combine the 16 fisheye with a TC, does anybody have any examples? I don't have a TC.
-
I'm not sure if Nikon has produced any 1.4x TC that doesn't interfere with the rear elements of shorter lenses including the fisheyes. IIRC, Kenko made one of such kind, though.
-
They did in the old days, that's why I stated it,,, TC14A and TC16A for instance :)
-
The nikon afs 1.4 teleconverter doesnot fit ;)
"unnecessary comment by now".
-
They are not AFS lenses,,,
10.5mm is AF-G screw driver type,,, The 16mm is AF-D also Screw driver type,,,
The 16mm Ai and Ais, 8mm f/2.8 and even 6mm f/2.8 also take converters very well actually ;)
-
My instinct is that the zoom would not be my preference, I feel that I would only use it either fully in or fully out, the mid range would miss out except for rare occasions.
Also I am very happy with my 16mm f2.8, I don't want to loose the speed which this lens provides for astro photography.
I don't want AF because it's a pain having to correct it all the time to get the focal plane where I want it.
I need to look at either Sigma or the Rokinon/other Chinese lenses at 8mm to give me a full circle. I don't completely dismiss the 10.5 but would want to think hard before going that route.
I am surprised how I have found the 16mm fisheye so useful, indispensable even. I bought it out of curiosity and because I wanted 'something different', it's that in spades! It has opened up a whole new vista for my photography in a way my Sigma 10-20 DX never could. I have hopes an 8mm fisheye may take this to another level, especially for garden photography.
-
They did in the old days, that's why I stated it,,, TC14A and TC16A for instance :)
Oh, yes, you are right! A was for the 200mm and shorter, and B was for the longer... Thanks for the correction!
-
I have all 3 fish-eyes that you are mentioning. 16/3.5 - 10.5/2.8 and 8/3.5 Sigma.
I thoroughly enjoy all three, and wouldn't want to get rid of any.
They all have their own character and application.
You will most certainly enjoy a full circular fish-eye 8)
-
Thank you Jakov, It was Bob Friedman's fisheye pictures in forrest locations which aroused my interest in widening my fisheye collection to include a circular. I occasionally visit large gardens and arboretums, frequently I find it almost impossible to compose an interesting and worthwhile photograph because the scene is all encompassing almost spherical, the interesting views are often impossible with normal lenses. When faced wit 50 or 60 Metre tall trees and no way of 'standing back', one has to resort to other means of capture.
I noticed Fons seemed to be struggling with alignment with his Doorwerth Castle 10.5mm fisheye stitching, which I was a little sceptical about. I have a fix for that... My new panorama head can easily be adapted to rotate the camera around the lens axis, at 90º to the normal mounting for panoramas. Just needs a simple 90º block to mount the camera with the lens axis at the centre of the circular rail.
-
Ahhh yes with a pano-head it becomes really fun!
Here from a get together at Jakovs place ;)
These are with 16mm AF-D
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/746/23266081830_9eb9fa9f2f_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/BrWKxU)_EGL4938 Planet Holland (https://flic.kr/p/BrWKxU) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
Planet Holland
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5735/22933325374_e02671275d_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/AWxhDC)_EGL4924 Planet Small (https://flic.kr/p/AWxhDC) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
Umbrella Biker
-
Wow! Erik I love those... better than the 360-180º images even.
What a can 'O' worms!
-
I have made a little adaptor block to turn the Pano Head into a rotator for fisheyes, the 10.5 particularly but also could create collages of multiple partial circular images with the edges cropped.
Here are some pix of the camera set up for rotation in the pano head.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4673/38624921820_d0d5c3a757_b.jpg)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4603/40391862212_531cfbfb43_b.jpg)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4707/38624919430_d6a8147a63_b.jpg)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4753/26564553358_50edb1a54a_b.jpg)
-
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
-
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. ::)
-
Very nice!
-
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, 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...
-
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.
-
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
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1685/24986070451_9e88ad5578_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/E4W9f8)_EGL4927 Planet3 (https://flic.kr/p/E4W9f8) by Erik Gunst Lund (https://www.flickr.com/photos/erik_lund/), on Flickr
-
Wow! Such a "Planet" image is really great! How is it actually made?
-
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???
-
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.
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/539/19869848511_baf2025ff0_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/wgQaH2)
Dølden (https://flic.kr/p/wgQaH2) by Asle Feten (https://www.flickr.com/photos/afoton/), on Flickr
-
...
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
-
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
-
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...
-
My copy ("shaved") appears likewise.
-
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
-
I need a portable solution; Seapy's beautiful accomplishment has the only defect of being hardly portable...
I refute that! LOL At 71 I have carried it and a large heavy tripod to the tops of mountains and the bottom of large sinkholes on my own! But I agree for the average sensible person it's probably not pocketable...
Perhaps a lightweight version is begging to be made... Perhaps from 10mm thick metal instead of 25mm.
-
I refute that! LOL At 71 I have carried it and a large heavy tripod to the tops of mountains and the bottom of large sinkholes on my own! But I agree for the average sensible person it's probably not pocketable...
Perhaps a lightweight version is begging to be made... Perhaps from 10mm thick metal instead of 25mm.
I think you have quite some margin for a weight reduction, your 1.0 version is safe enough for the 6mm (which is already full circle), the 10.5 is really a diminutive lens, especially after its circumcision...
Ciao from Massimo
-
They are not AFS lenses,,,
10.5mm is AF-G screw driver type,,, The 16mm is AF-D also Screw driver type,,,
The 16mm Ai and Ais, 8mm f/2.8 and even 6mm f/2.8 also take converters very well actually ;)
I tried it out today: 10.5mm f/2.8 + TC-14A gives a 15mm f/4 (almost full frame). Here is an example (not a very interesting motive, but it shows that it works):