Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-06-2008, 07:44 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: nyc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 564
I'm cheating on my fisheye lens!

So, the 10-17 was basically the first lens I bought, after the kit 18-55. I loved this lens, no denying that. I used it a lot when on vacation in December.

I loaned it to a friend in February, and decided to get the 10-20 Sigma in the interim to fill the gap (silly me, I didn't think I'd miss the fisheye that much...).

Well. I got the fisheye back almost a month ago, and it hasn't been used since! I gotta say, I really love the sigma. Nothing against the fisheye, but i've got a serious lens-crush on the 10-20, like I never expected.

Anyone else have both 10-17 and the 10-20, and find themselves almost exclusively shooting the sigma option?
And note, I really don't think its the fisheye effect for me. i like it/don't mind it. Just lot the sigma I guess

05-06-2008, 11:03 AM   #2
Senior Member
ricosuave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 299
exactly what is it about the sigma that you prefer?
does it render color better, produce more pleasing pictures, or less prone to flare?
05-06-2008, 11:38 AM   #3
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6
I'd like to know too. I'm currently in the market for a fisheye-wide lens and I'd like to hear your opinions on why you like the sigma better
05-06-2008, 12:36 PM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 193
Yes, I had both. Sold the 10-17 after 9 months or so.

For me, it was about making life easier. Whenever I'd go out shooting I stood at home paralyzed trying to figure out if I wanted a fisheye or rectilinear wide angle only to regret picking one and not the other when I was out. So I sold the 10-17 as many of my best work was done with the 10-20.

However, I've kinda yearned to have the 10-17 back. Its such a fun lens to use.



05-06-2008, 04:00 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: nyc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 564
Original Poster
that is kinda it-if I had two bodies, having each one on a body of its own and being able to swap quickly might be nice.

otherwise, its kind of a wash for me. i think they are both very good lenses. i think i just got used to being without the fisheye, i havent felt the urge to put it back on the camera.

don't get me wrong, i doubt highly that I would sell either one. I think I just didn't expect to dig the sigma as much as I have. and just my opinion, you couldnt go wrong with either/both. the key is, if you must have the rectilinear, then get it. yes, i know some software removes the fisheye effect, but why buy it if you don't want the effect
05-06-2008, 05:15 PM   #6
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 512
QuoteOriginally posted by jmdeegan Quote
... some software removes the fisheye effect, but why buy it if you don't want the effect
There's the key right there. They're two lenses designed for two very different applications/effects.

Frankly, I've had my eye on the Sigma. Just can't pull the trigger on that purchase 'till after I've paid for both my daughters tuitions and one wedding... Ungh, life is suckin' for me right now. Maybe by the time this is all taken care of, I'll be due for a K300 to go with it.
05-07-2008, 10:48 PM   #7
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Irvine, So. Cal
Posts: 104
pentax 17-28 fisheye

I sold my Nikon D70s and got the K200d so that I can use the 17-28 fisheye that I had. You still get the fisheye look at 17mm (not as severe as with 10-17mm). At 28mm it looks almost normal. To me it is just right for full time use.

It is not as wide but if you want little bit of fisheye look when you want it, try the lens. I had excellent results with K200d.
05-08-2008, 12:16 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 726
Same here w/Nico comment on F 17-28 Fisheye.
I have this lens and it's really fun to use not to mention how sharp it is even wide open.
At 28mm the degree of view is more like 24mm to me. For sure it's wider than just a 28mm.
Last time I tried this lens on 35mm film camera and WOW...it almost cover my whole bedroom sort of.
Can't wait to try it when Pentax launched their FF DSLR...just a hope.

I think ultra wide angle and fisheye has different use.
Ultrawideangle is good for architecture work
while the Fisheye is good for creative work.

05-08-2008, 06:43 AM   #9
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,010
I would like to have both myself. I also have a daughter in college so money is tight. I will probably get one of them soon and i'm leaning towards the fisheye. I've seen it under $400 on a few sites recently.
05-08-2008, 12:58 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 506
QuoteOriginally posted by TourDeForce Quote
There's the key right there. They're two lenses designed for two very different applications/effects.

Frankly, I've had my eye on the Sigma. Just can't pull the trigger on that purchase 'till after I've paid for both my daughters tuitions and one wedding... Ungh, life is suckin' for me right now. Maybe by the time this is all taken care of, I'll be due for a K300 to go with it.
Just one chubby guys opinion but... the amount of money that you'll save by not hiring a photographer for the wedding should cover the cost of a number of lenses.
05-08-2008, 02:44 PM   #11
MrA
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England UK
Posts: 211
QuoteOriginally posted by HermanLee Quote
I think ultra wide angle and fisheye has different use.
Ultrawideangle is good for architecture work
while the Fisheye is good for creative work.
I think in a few months this will be my #1 dilemma. Architecture student into creative photography. Which to choose.
05-08-2008, 03:48 PM   #12
Senior Member
ricosuave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 299
QuoteOriginally posted by beaumont Quote
Just one chubby guys opinion but... the amount of money that you'll save by not hiring a photographer for the wedding should cover the cost of a number of lenses.
and in some cases, a new body too.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
fisheye, k-mount, lens, lot, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should I be cheating? Ira Site Suggestions and Help 18 07-14-2010 04:45 PM
DPReview is cheating? kyrios Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 01-02-2008 01:45 PM
I have been cheating on you ;) vievetrick General Talk 3 12-30-2007 03:21 PM
K100D, Cheating in manual mode Ed in GA Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 04-07-2007 12:05 PM
I feel like using Raw is like cheating slip Pentax DSLR Discussion 64 02-02-2007 03:28 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:27 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top