What FishEye lens is Better.

Fl_Gulfer · 02-12-2008, 05:16 PM

Pentax F Fish-eye 17-28mm f/3.5-4.5 or the
Pentax DA 10-17

I'm going to order one this week and I saw the older one on fleebay.

bigben91682 · 02-12-2008, 05:25 PM

I have the DA 10-17mm and really enjoy it. Granted it has some limitations that need to be "worked within" but when it's on the camera I can't help but have fun with it.

I have a small gallery of shots I took with it here...

index

I haven't tried any others but can't stress how much fun the 10-17 is...

tux08902 · 02-12-2008, 05:27 PM

You should get the Pentax DA 10-17/3.5-4.5 because its effective FOV on digital is equivalent to 15-25.5 on a Pentax digital camera. It's close enough to the F 17-28, and I suspect that Pentax wanted to keep a similar FOV on digital camera as the older fisheye zoom on film, which is why they made it so wide. Also, the older fisheye will not be as wide, and fisheye are general used for wide shots.

Gooshin · 02-12-2008, 05:28 PM

i have been using the Zenitar 16mm F2.8 fisheye for awhile now

i cant get enough of it, for 150 dollars its simply steal.

if used off a tripod the sharpness levels, esp in the center are very good.

tux08902 · 02-12-2008, 05:34 PM

I don't really like fisheye distorition, which is why I don't want any fisheye. It may be fun, but to me, the distorition isn't pleasing.

-=JoN=- · 02-12-2008, 06:28 PM

The late Herbert Keppler loved the 17-28, but his main gripe was that it didnt focus close enough. fast forward....Pentax Releases the 10-17, w/ a very close focusing distance...
Mr. Keppler loved it even more than the original. one reason why I bought the 10-17.....

Distortedness can be worked in your favour.......w/ a lil creativity.

it's a very fun lens.....

Lens Test: Pentax SMCP-DA Fisheye 10-17mm F3.5-4.5 - - PopPhotoJune 2006

SLR: World-Class Glass - - PopPhotoAugust 2006

they dont have his last article posted, talking about the 10-17..but after reading that article, i went and bought it the next day.

on a digital body, the 10-17 would better fit (it is a DA lens after all...:P)......having a 180 degree FOV is just plain awesome

**NaClH2O** · 02-12-2008, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by tux08902

I don't really like fisheye distorition, which is why I don't want any fisheye. It may be fun, but to me, the distorition isn't pleasing.

I used to think the way you do but then a bunch of ppl over at the "other" pentax forum (the older one) convinced me to get the 16mm F2.8 Zenitar. What a great little lens! and very inexpensive at the time. It's gotten more dear in the last year, but it's still a great bargin. And you don't have to "put up with" distortion if you don't want to. DS Zenitar 16mm: 1/90 aperture unknown (it's a full manual lens)

And you can get pretty close too! 1/1000 aperture still unknown

NaCl(my 'funest' lens)H2O

**Lowell Goudge** · 02-12-2008, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by -=JoN=-

The late Herbert Keppler loved the 17-28, but his main gripe was that it didnt focus close enough. fast forward....Pentax Releases the 10-17, w/ a very close focusing distance...
Mr. Keppler loved it even more than the original. one reason why I bought the 10-17.....

Distortedness can be worked in your favour.......w/ a lil creativity.

it's a very fun lens.....

Lens Test: Pentax SMCP-DA Fisheye 10-17mm F3.5-4.5 - - PopPhotoJune 2006

SLR: World-Class Glass - - PopPhotoAugust 2006

they dont have his last article posted, talking about the 10-17..but after reading that article, i went and bought it the next day.

on a digital body, the 10-17 would better fit (it is a DA lens after all...:P)......having a 180 degree FOV is just plain awesome

there was a great article in a recient magazine discussing the number of bodies the 17-28 had sold, just because people loved it, then came digital, is it any surprise pentax came out withthye 10-17. on an ASP-c sensor the 17-28 is not radical enough,

tux08902 · 02-12-2008, 07:13 PM

Bro, you're making my LBA worse! This pictures don't seem entirely distorted though.

roscot · 02-12-2008, 07:18 PM

If you are looking for a true 180 degree fish eye, then the 10-17 is your only choice on a 1.5x crop camera. The 17-28 , like the Zenitar, will not have the same coverage as they were both designed for 35mm film.

I like the fish eye effect. It allows me some interesting creativity.

Gooshin · 02-12-2008, 07:22 PM

the fisheye effect has to be used properly, here are some of my personal Zenitar favorites:

tux08902 · 02-12-2008, 07:24 PM

Wow, those look really nice. I especially like the first.

**NaClH2O** · 02-12-2008, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by tux08902

Bro, you're making my LBA worse! This pictures don't seem entirely distorted though.

With careful framing and maybe some cropping you can get pretty much "distortion free" photos, but that wonderful curviness is there if you want it.
DS, Zenitar 1/500

K10D 1/160

NaCl(have your cake and eat it too)H2O

jmdeegan · 02-12-2008, 07:43 PM

love the 10-17. one lens i never worried about buying and i love it

and, for the distortion...i got the sigma 10-20 too. lba in full effect

ryan s · 02-12-2008, 08:01 PM

Zenitar...don't even need to focus really, unless you get close to something. The distortion isn't even that bad.

Uncorrected shot:

02-12-2008, 05:16 PM	#1
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	What FishEye lens is Better. Pentax F Fish-eye 17-28mm f/3.5-4.5 or the Pentax DA 10-17 I'm going to order one this week and I saw the older one on fleebay.

02-12-2008, 07:05 PM	#7
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	With careful framing distortion can be minimal Originally posted by tux08902 I don't really like fisheye distorition, which is why I don't want any fisheye. It may be fun, but to me, the distorition isn't pleasing. I used to think the way you do but then a bunch of ppl over at the "other" pentax forum (the older one) convinced me to get the 16mm F2.8 Zenitar. What a great little lens! and very inexpensive at the time. It's gotten more dear in the last year, but it's still a great bargin. And you don't have to "put up with" distortion if you don't want to. DS Zenitar 16mm: 1/90 aperture unknown (it's a full manual lens) And you can get pretty close too! 1/1000 aperture still unknown NaCl(my 'funest' lens)H2O

02-12-2008, 07:38 PM	#13
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	That's the beauty of the Zenitar Originally posted by tux08902 Bro, you're making my LBA worse! This pictures don't seem entirely distorted though. With careful framing and maybe some cropping you can get pretty much "distortion free" photos, but that wonderful curviness is there if you want it. DS, Zenitar 1/500 K10D 1/160 NaCl(have your cake and eat it too)H2O

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Widest non-fisheye lens?	Nimrad	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	11-06-2013 03:12 PM
Fisheye lens	RussellW	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	06-28-2009 04:53 PM
Fisheye Lens	Orli	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	15	03-08-2009 12:04 AM
Looking for Extreme Fisheye Lens	dgsullivan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	07-21-2008 08:38 PM
DA 10-17 fisheye as a landscape lens	ryno	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	02-18-2008 05:51 PM

02-12-2008, 05:25 PM	#2
bigben91682 Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Upstate NY Posts: 728	I have the DA 10-17mm and really enjoy it. Granted it has some limitations that need to be "worked within" but when it's on the camera I can't help but have fun with it. I have a small gallery of shots I took with it here... index I haven't tried any others but can't stress how much fun the 10-17 is...

02-12-2008, 05:27 PM	#3
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	You should get the Pentax DA 10-17/3.5-4.5 because its effective FOV on digital is equivalent to 15-25.5 on a Pentax digital camera. It's close enough to the F 17-28, and I suspect that Pentax wanted to keep a similar FOV on digital camera as the older fisheye zoom on film, which is why they made it so wide. Also, the older fisheye will not be as wide, and fisheye are general used for wide shots.

02-12-2008, 05:28 PM	#4
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	i have been using the Zenitar 16mm F2.8 fisheye for awhile now i cant get enough of it, for 150 dollars its simply steal. if used off a tripod the sharpness levels, esp in the center are very good.

02-12-2008, 05:34 PM	#5
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	I don't really like fisheye distorition, which is why I don't want any fisheye. It may be fun, but to me, the distorition isn't pleasing.

02-12-2008, 06:28 PM	#6
-=JoN=- Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NYC Posts: 999	The late Herbert Keppler loved the 17-28, but his main gripe was that it didnt focus close enough. fast forward....Pentax Releases the 10-17, w/ a very close focusing distance... Mr. Keppler loved it even more than the original. one reason why I bought the 10-17..... Distortedness can be worked in your favour.......w/ a lil creativity. it's a very fun lens..... Lens Test: Pentax SMCP-DA Fisheye 10-17mm F3.5-4.5 - - PopPhotoJune 2006 SLR: World-Class Glass - - PopPhotoAugust 2006 they dont have his last article posted, talking about the 10-17..but after reading that article, i went and bought it the next day. on a digital body, the 10-17 would better fit (it is a DA lens after all...:P)......having a 180 degree FOV is just plain awesome

02-12-2008, 07:13 PM	#8
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by -=JoN=- The late Herbert Keppler loved the 17-28, but his main gripe was that it didnt focus close enough. fast forward....Pentax Releases the 10-17, w/ a very close focusing distance... Mr. Keppler loved it even more than the original. one reason why I bought the 10-17..... Distortedness can be worked in your favour.......w/ a lil creativity. it's a very fun lens..... Lens Test: Pentax SMCP-DA Fisheye 10-17mm F3.5-4.5 - - PopPhotoJune 2006 SLR: World-Class Glass - - PopPhotoAugust 2006 they dont have his last article posted, talking about the 10-17..but after reading that article, i went and bought it the next day. on a digital body, the 10-17 would better fit (it is a DA lens after all...:P)......having a 180 degree FOV is just plain awesome there was a great article in a recient magazine discussing the number of bodies the 17-28 had sold, just because people loved it, then came digital, is it any surprise pentax came out withthye 10-17. on an ASP-c sensor the 17-28 is not radical enough,

02-12-2008, 07:18 PM	#10
roscot Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Virginia Beach VA USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,363	If you are looking for a true 180 degree fish eye, then the 10-17 is your only choice on a 1.5x crop camera. The 17-28 , like the Zenitar, will not have the same coverage as they were both designed for 35mm film. I like the fish eye effect. It allows me some interesting creativity.

02-12-2008, 07:22 PM	#11
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	the fisheye effect has to be used properly, here are some of my personal Zenitar favorites:

02-12-2008, 07:24 PM	#12
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	Wow, those look really nice. I especially like the first.

02-12-2008, 07:43 PM	#14
jmdeegan Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: nyc Photos: Gallery Posts: 564	love the 10-17. one lens i never worried about buying and i love it and, for the distortion...i got the sigma 10-20 too. lba in full effect

02-12-2008, 08:01 PM	#15
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	Zenitar...don't even need to focus really, unless you get close to something. The distortion isn't even that bad. Uncorrected shot: