Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon 16mm fisheye versus Sigma 15mm fisheye lens  (Read 7336 times)
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« on: November 07, 2012, 08:43:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

Has anyone had the opportunity to compare the difference optically between the Nikon 16mm fisheye and Sigma 15mm fisheye lenses hopefully on a Nikon D800 and if so what was your thoughts?

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2012, 12:12:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

Iíve just read Lloyd Charmbers review on the Nikon 16mm fisheye lens where he is very impressed with the resolution stopped down but he does mention it has colour fringing (lateral chromatic aberration) which can be fixed in processing.

I used to have Nikon 10mm DX fisheye lens in the days when I had a Nikon D2x and the colour fringing was absolutely terrible.

Has any one used the Sigma 15mm fisheye and if so have they experience any colour fringing (lateral chromatic aberration) as it seems to be a more modern design optically I'm hoping it doesn't?

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
kers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 708


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2012, 04:24:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting to see that the 10mm fisheye that you mention works better on the d800.
the colorfringing is not only a lens problem but also a sensor problem...

I have had the little lenshoods removed an us it as a special purpose lens on FF.
it is very sharp in the central area




Logged

Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu
langier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 603



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2012, 02:39:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I've got the Sigma 15mm and 8mm fisheyes and use them regularly on my D800.

Just like all fisheye lenses (even my Nikkor 10.5mm and old 16mm 2.8 AI-s and the old NPS 8mm 2.8 from film days), you'll get fringing. With ACR, it's an easy fix and the current LR and ACR it's automatic if you check the box.

I considered getting the current Nikon 16mm a couple of years ago after going full-frame and lusted for the old 8mm 2.8, but after reading the experiences with the Sigma at Lensrentals.com, decided to save the money and got mine on eBay for about 1/2. I was happy using it on my D700, D3 and now on the D800 and the image quality is just fine.

For one of my clients, a client who is an old-world Orthodox iconographer requires the circular-view for his portfolio since curves, domes and arches are part of the Byzantine tradition. I don't use them every day, but when I do, nothing else will give you that nice curvilinear rendition and nothing but a circular fisheye can show the entire interior from floor to ceiling and 360-degrees in one photo.

Not all photos will benefit from the distortion from any of these fisheye lenses, but there are many images that will work with a little work and imagination.

As to working with the Sigma 15mm, I can highly recommend this lens on your D800.
Logged

Larry Angier
ASMP, NAPP, ACT, and many more!

Webmaster, RANGE magazine
Editor emeritus, NorCal Quarterly

web--http://www.angier-fox.photoshelter.com
facebook--larry.angier
twitter--#larryangier
google+LarryAngier
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2012, 04:10:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Larry,

Thanks for your info.

I think I will go for the Sigma as well.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2012, 11:16:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Larry,

From your experience with the Nikon 16mm and Sigma 15mm which lens in your opinion had the worst colour chromatics and colour blooming?

When I have a Nikon 10mm DX fisheye the colour blooming was terrible.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 546



« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2012, 10:23:47 AM »
ReplyReply

I use the Sigma 8mm fisheye on my Nikon D800 and find it truly excellent in every respect. I can't compare it with others, of course, as I only have the one fisheye and really don't use them enough to justify the cost of buying several.
Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
langier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 603



WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2012, 04:43:52 PM »
ReplyReply

All my fisheyes have had CA, even when I shot film. Not too much an issue back then since the images usually stayed small for publication and smaller prints for portfolios. Today we push the IQ limits with higher and higher res cameras. I simply clean it up in ACR and I think with the Nikon when in comes to jpeg files, CA and other similar issues are fixed during jpeg creation.

The thing I had to do with the older ACR was to always remember to clean up the CA. With ACR 7.x, it's a check-box and cleans up nearly all the problems automatically from the D800 files.

Here's a link to some pix with the 15mm Sigma: http://angier-fox.photoshelter.com/lbx/lightbox?L_ID=L0000zytv.ZEhQV4

The first ten images are with the 15mm, the last two on the lightbox are with the 10.5mm. The 15mm was used on my D700 or D3. The 10.5 were with with the D300 or D300s. I don't have side-by-side images taken between the 16mm and the 15mm. It seems to me in 2009 I was shooting the 16mm Nikkor on my D700 and other than it being a little soft they were fine though not spectacular. The 15mm Sigma seems to hold its own on the D3 and D700 and from the few I've shot on the D800 is fine.

Your results will probably very. If you can rent or borrow either fisheye, give it a try and see how it works for your specific application.

Logged

Larry Angier
ASMP, NAPP, ACT, and many more!

Webmaster, RANGE magazine
Editor emeritus, NorCal Quarterly

web--http://www.angier-fox.photoshelter.com
facebook--larry.angier
twitter--#larryangier
google+LarryAngier
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2013, 09:12:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

Well this is a little test I did between the Nikon 16mm and Sigma 15mm fisheye lenses.

Unfortunately they weren't taken at the same times as I rented the Nikon 16mm for a job last week even though it wasnít need but after taking a test shot in my car park I wasn't that impressed with the resolution on the outer edges. So I went on KEH and they had a Sigma 15mm for a very good price so I bought it. It arrived this afternoon so I stood in the same position as I did with the Nikon and took a shot.

The results for me are interesting from what I have seen the Nikon is sharper in the centre where the Sigma appears to be better on the outer edges and definitely has less chromatic abrasions which is important to me.

I have attached some raw files below. So please download as I would like to get other options.

https://www.yousendit.com/download/UW15Qk00eDM4Q1I3czlVag

Cheers

Simon
« Last Edit: February 10, 2013, 10:12:27 PM by HarperPhotos » Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
PhotoEcosse
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 546



« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2013, 01:40:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Not sure why you want such a long focal length fisheye.

I use the Sigma 8mm fisheye with my D800 and get quite spectacular (and competition-winning) results.
Logged

************************************
"Reality is an illusion caused by lack of alcohol."
Alternatively, "Life begins at the far end of your comfort zone."
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2013, 02:22:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

The simple answer is I donít have any use for a circular fisheye lens for the work I do.

Ciao

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
langier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 603



WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 13, 2013, 09:29:58 AM »
ReplyReply

The 15/16mm lens covers the full frame. used with foresight, distortion can be minimized for a wider than wideangle look. The 8mm will always be a circle on a full frame body.
Logged

Larry Angier
ASMP, NAPP, ACT, and many more!

Webmaster, RANGE magazine
Editor emeritus, NorCal Quarterly

web--http://www.angier-fox.photoshelter.com
facebook--larry.angier
twitter--#larryangier
google+LarryAngier
OldRoy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 408


WWW
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2013, 02:13:42 PM »
ReplyReply

Since the Nikon model wasn't specified I'll just add that my own experience with the AIS example, which I have, shows it to be a bit soft even in the centre unless stopped down - ideally to F8 - and notably susceptible to flare which is a big drawback for use on interior VR panos. It certainly compares unfavourably with the much more recent 10.5 version on a DX body. Both exhibit some corner CA which really isn't a problem as I always shoot RAW. Anecdotal reports from the VR pano "community" tend to favour the Sigma 15mm lens.

The excellent and inexpensive Samyang 7.5mm mf lens which I use on an M4/3 body is better than either of my Nikons.
Roy
Logged
arlon
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126



WWW
« Reply #13 on: February 13, 2013, 02:47:39 PM »
ReplyReply

I have the old Nikkor MF 16mm f2.8 fisheye and it worked great on the d700 but images really look "mushy" when used on the d800e. Down size them for posting on the internet and they are fine but don't try making a 20x30 print. I just got a 16-35mm vr and I think it's a bit sharper but the distortion is completely different and maybe a little harder to correct for. Since getting the 16-35mm, I haven't used the old 16mm fisheye at all. I'll live with the funky distortion when I have to use 16mm.. Just got LR4 and it supposedly does a decent job of distortion correction for the 16-35mm but I have not tried it yet.
Logged

Honey, did you bring an extra battery?
EdKings
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2013, 06:55:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello - I'm new here.

I have a 16mm Nikkor, have had for years and I use it rarely. Would I sell it? Nope, certainly not. I love what it can do for certain shots, the most common being at parties with the circle of heads shots (old stuff I know but still surprises people) with camera on floor pointing up at 15 to 20 heads all smiling and happy controlled remotely.

I can't comment on the Sigma 15 but I have not heard and negatives about that lens, I have used other Sigmas the best I found was the 10-20mm way back when I was using a then new D100
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad