[gilsouthwood]

I'm completely torn between a pentax 10-17 fisheye (fun, but quality is not so amazing), or the DA15 limited (a great lens, according to the reviews, but a lot pricier). If my price range is £150 max, maybe more if needed, are there any 3rd party lenses that anyone can recommend? I am already looking into Kiron, but can anyone suggest anything else?

Thanks

[RobA_Oz]

Getting something decent in that FL and price range is a little difficult, so I see your problem. Older glass in that order of FL is pricey, and quality newer glass is, too. Have you considered the Samyang (and clones) 14mm?

[jimr-pdx]

If you see a deal, the Sigma 15mm f/2.8 fisheye scores a perfect 10 in reviews here. No real $ advantage over the DA15 though, a bit faster and a bit fishy. Other options on the bargain list are the Samyang 14mm (rectilinear) and 8mm (fisheye), sold under names like Falcon in Europe and Bower/Opteka in the states.

[gilsouthwood]

I have briefly looked at samyang, oddly enough, yesterday. I have a list of every single lens manufacturer ever to have made a lens with a pentax fit, as I have a penchant for old, (and extremely cheap) glass, and they came up quite a lot. I'll check them out. thanks

[RXrenesis8]

Getting an old prime wider than 20mm is going to be a challenge. There's a Vivitar 20mm F3.8 clone in the marketplace right now though, if 21mm is wide enough for you.

[BillS]

The Samyang or Zenit 16mm 2.8 Fisheye will be your best bets. The Zenit is not very "fishy" on APS-C, and you can always de-fish it. The Samyang looks pretty nice, but is really big. The Zenit should be right in your range, and the Samyang used might not be too far off.

The Zenit looks pretty soft below F8, so don't get to excited about it being fast -- but it's still got it, and it will make the VF decent to look through.

MF at this wide angle is pretty trivial to deal with.

I don't have either -- but I see one of these in my future!

[VoiceOfReason]

You would have to spend a little more, but I have the Tamron 10-24 and I can definitely recommend it. You only get distortion from 10-13 or so, but it's easily fixed in PP, and the lens is reasonably sharp, but can be a little bit of a light hog at lower ISO settings of 80-400 or so on my K5. Still, it is a very awesome lens.

[mikeSF]

keep in mind that 17mm on the fisheye is still wider in field of view than 10mm on a rectilinear lens; thus, there is no overlap between these lenses.

[mikeSF]

why buy a fisheye if you plan to "defish" it?
also, i find converging verticals from a rectilinear to be more bothersome than curved distortion from a fisheye. In other words, when lines are present in a rectilinear image, i almost always need to apply perpective correction to fix it.

[Sandy Hancock]

I have had the DA10-17 for a while, and absolutely love it.
I got the DA15 quite recently, and absolutely love it.
Philosophically, I am 100% with mikeSF.

[ihasa]

why buy a fisheye if you plan to "defish" it?

I guess because the Zenitar is about the cheapest option wider than 18mm - and maybe because the Zenitar isn't really fishy on APSC; looks more like an extreme case of barrel distortion. Because it's a fisheye the angle of view is wider than the 16mm focal length would suggest, and it still seems wider than 16mm when 'defished'. I like the Zenitar, it's a good sharp lens. Decent wide open, or at least my copy was, and excellent at f5.6-8. The distortion can be tricky to deal with though.

But within the OP's budget, perhaps the most straightforward route to wide angle would be a DA16-45mm.

None of these lenses will extinguish a latent desire for the DA15mm, in my experience! (I now own a DA15mm after owning and selling both :evil But when I look back on my images from both lenses, they were both really great lenses.

[Marc Sabatella]

BTW, I,m not sure where you live or what dealers you are looking at, but among legit dealers in the aus, there is no difference in price between the 10-17 and 15 with the current pricing structure. Both go for $650 at, for example, B&H, but you can also find gray market dealers or ones unloading old stock for less. Since the 10-17 has been around longer and once upon a time sold for less than the DA15 did upon its introduction, you may be able to find people selling used copies for less than used DA15. But I'd expect used prices to readjust to the current new prices pretty quickly.

[mikeSF]

I guess because the Zenitar is about the cheapest option wider than 18mm - and maybe because the Zenitar isn't really fishy on APSC; looks more like an extreme case of barrel distortion.

this makes sense, thanks!

[RioRico]

Lenses wider than 20mm ain't cheap, with certain exceptions.
Ultrawides are almost never cheap, with very few exceptions.
The DA10-17 is the lens that drove me to Pentax; recommended.
The Zenitar 16/2.8 is cheap, clean, fast; highly recommended.
The Tamron 10-24 is very flexible and clean; also recommended.
All those are superb in certain situations, not so good elsewhere.
I can't speak of other alternatives because I haven't used them.

As mentioned, a 10-17 fisheye and 10-20 or 10-24 rectilinears don't overlap coverage. The are complementary. I now use the Tamron 10-24 more than the DA10-17 or Zen16, but each of those are necessary sometimes. Each does what others can't. The right lens(es) for you depend on what you want to do. Good luck!

[gilsouthwood]

Both the DA10-17 and the DA15 are going for around £400 on ebay, a little way out of my price range… I'd probably go for the 15 between the 2, as I have a liking for primes,and it's a compact lens. The tamron is marginally cheaper, at £360. I already have an 18-55mm standard kit lens, but i'd rather have a dedicated fisheye… The zenitar is by far the cheapest, at around £140 for a good model… Having said that, the samyang 8mm looks a little nicer despite it's size, hand is still cheap. f3.5 is livable with too… It's between the zenit and the samyang

Thanks for your help everyone, I was lost without you