Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-29-2014, 07:43 AM   #1
Veteran Member
ripper2860's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 890
Wide Angle questions

I've determined that I must add a nice wide angle to my lens kit for landscapes as it seems that landscape is one of the types of images I seem to be gravitating towards. Unfortunatley, I know next to nothing about wide angles lenses, so I have a few questions hoping for guidance. I currently have a 19mm - 35mm lens that seems to produce some nice images. I'd like to get a bit wider, but do not want to go "Fish-eye" as I'm not a huge fan of the effect. So...

1. Is Fish-eye a special lens or are extreme wide-angles and fish-eye really synonymous?
2. If a Fish-eye and Extreme wide-angle are really one in the same, how wide a len can one go w/o a fish-eye effect?

I think part of my confusion is the 1.5x crop factor which has me asking myself: If I get a fish-eye extreme wide-angle and the sensor crops it, is what I'm left with really a fish-eye effect anymore??

As a side question:

10mm zoom Wide-angles are a bit pricey with 17mm lenses being a bit more in my price (ex: 17-70 Tamaron/Sigma). Seeing as I already have a 19-35mm, is it really worth going to a 17mm zoom?

Thanks!!!

08-29-2014, 07:55 AM - 1 Like   #2
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
Fishe eye just means its not rectilinear, it doesn't draw straight, parallel lines. But the Pentax DA 10-17mm is not very fishy at 17mm. It also depends on the orientation, sometimes a fisheye photo will not appear very fishy. Other times, the distortion will be very obvious. There are also different types of fisheye projection btw. On crop, the fisheye will still be fishy, because the sensor size wouldn't affect how the lens projects the image or its focal length. It only crops of the corners, which affects the field of view (or angle of view)
Anyway, I would suggest you don't need a fisheye. From 19mm lower there are a lot of wider lenses, and every mm in that range counts far more than in the tele range. So think about the Samyang 16mm, 14mm or 10mm. Most of these are also sold under other brands, like Rokinon, Bower, ProOptic, Walmiex, Vivitar,... but should be optically identical. Only slightly different cosmetics in some cases. This is the cheapest way to get a brand new ultra wide with high quality, sharp rendering. Just make sure the lens has no problems, like decentered elements. Also, Samyang has no AF, but if you stop down to f8, the DoF will be very wide so MF is not too difficult.
Or Sigma 10-20mm, Tamron 10-24mm. These are not very expensive and give you a very wide angle and full automation.
Used you can get even lower prices. Even the Pentax DA 14mm might be affordable, if you buy used and find a good deal.
I have the Samyang 14mm and it is plenty wide. Much, much wider than 19mm. In fact, I would recommend 16mm, because 14mm is awkwardly wide sometimes. For many landscapes, it is too wide, because it makes everything in the distance seem incredibly small
08-29-2014, 07:56 AM - 1 Like   #3
hcc
Pentaxian
hcc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,999
Fisheye and Wide angle are different. A Wide angle lens has limited distortion. On the opposite, a fisheye lens has a lot of distortion which adds to the shot.

I have the DA15 Ltd and DA10-17mm. The former is a wide angle prime lens. The second is a wide angle at 16-17mm and a fisheye at 10-12 mm.

You may find reviews of these two lenses at:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-15mm-f4-limited-review/introduction.html & http://www.photozone.de/pentax/463-pentax_15_4
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/132-pentax-smc-da-10-17mm-f35-45-edif-fisheye...w--test-report

In terms of IQ, the DA15mm Ltd is stunning. Many PF members regard the DA15mm Ltd as a 'must have' wide angle.

The DA10-17mm strength is its versatility and its fisheye effect.

Altogether I tend to use much more the DA15mm Ltd. The DA10-17mm is a more specialised lens IMHO, for example for tight indoor situations.

If you are not a fan of fisheye and are happy with 15mm, go for the DA15mm Ltd and you will not be disappointed.

Hope that the comment will help.
08-29-2014, 08:43 AM - 1 Like   #4
Pentaxian
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,479
This may help a bit. The 10-17 fisheye is fisheye at all focal lengths, to varying degrees. I did not shoot it at 10mm during this comparison with the 12-24.



08-29-2014, 09:02 AM - 1 Like   #5
Veteran Member
narual's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,988
oh hey, I just pasted this elsewhere and I can reuse it here:
Focal length comparison tool, Tamron USA

You can use that to see the difference between 10mm and 17 and so on. It doesn't show any fisheyes, though.

I love my 15mm ltd, and it's my favorite prime lens by a good margin, but it's not really an extreme wide angle. If you really want an extreme wide angle, you should be looking at one of the 10-xmm zooms or the 10mm prime from samyang, or the 8-16mm from Sigma. If you want extreme wide fisheye, the 10-17mm zoom, or the 8mm samyang fisheye (or one of the other very wide fisheyes) are good options.

You could always check the lens clubs:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/33549-fisheye-fever-club-f...ye-photos.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/84539-sigma-10-20mm-club.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/107938-sigma-8-16mm-club.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/103557-tamron-10-24mm-club.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/86234-15mm-limited-controls-my-mind-club.html
08-29-2014, 09:47 AM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
QuoteOriginally posted by ripper2860 Quote
I've determined that I must add a nice wide angle to my lens kit for landscapes as it seems that landscape is one of the types of images I seem to be gravitating towards.
You do not need ultra-wide angle for landscapes, most of mine are taken @ 20mm - 35mm. But if you want an ultra-wide, wider than 15-16mm then your options are the Sigma 10-20, Tamron 10-24 and the Pentax 12-24.
QuoteOriginally posted by ripper2860 Quote
I'd like to get a bit wider, but do not want to go "Fish-eye" as I'm not a huge fan of the effect. So... 1. Is Fish-eye a special lens or are extreme wide-angles and fish-eye really synonymous? 2. If a Fish-eye and Extreme wide-angle are really one in the same, how wide a len can one go w/o a fish-eye effect?
A fisheye is a special lens, it gives you very wide angle shots but with a lot of distortion. it's a specialist lens not something I would use for general landscapes. The fishyness depends. Pentax has two fisheyes that are easy to find the DA 10-17, which is designed for APS-C and goes from fishy to almost not fishy. The other is the F 17-28 FE which is designed for film and is barely fishy at 17mm and just a wide angle at 28mm when used on APS-C. I'm hanging onto mine waiting for the "coming soon" Pentax FF Where it will again be a real fish eye.
QuoteOriginally posted by ripper2860 Quote
10mm zoom Wide-angles are a bit pricey with 17mm lenses being a bit more in my price (ex: 17-70 Tamaron/Sigma). Seeing as I already have a 19-35mm, is it really worth going to a 17mm zoom?
If you already have 19mm I honestly do not think it worth getting a 17-70 just for the extra 2mm. It will be noticeable but not worth the investment IMHO. If you really want to go wide angle or ultra-wide angle then either get the 15mm Limited which is a delight to use, or one of the ultra-wide zooms noted above.
08-29-2014, 10:14 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Sydney
Photos: Albums
Posts: 844
+1 for the 15mm ltd. I'd also give an honourable mention to the da21 ltd. it's a very nice little walkaround lens.

08-29-2014, 10:53 AM - 1 Like   #8
Veteran Member
ripper2860's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 890
Original Poster
Thanks to everyone for their help. I am now well versed in the difference between a wide-angle and a fish-eye lens and the impact of every additional millimeter. I have come to the conclusion that I probably do not need extreme wide-angle lenses for landscape photography. It seems they are more suited for wide interior shots or close-up shots where you need to get more in the frame but can't really step back. Seems like a 12-24 would suffice, but with the 15mm getting such wide praise and my loving to shoot prime lenses, it is likely the direction we will go. After I secure a 2nd mortgage of course!! (and secure a lawyer to handle the divorce!!)
08-29-2014, 11:18 AM - 1 Like   #9
Veteran Member
narual's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,988
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
You do not need ultra-wide angle for landscapes
+1
You don't even necessarily need wide angle for landscapes. I think Adam posted a while back that his favorite lens for landscapes was the FA* 85, but he might have just said it was his favorite lens overall and that he *could* use it for landscapes.

I'm perfectly happy with my 15mm ltd for landscapes and other things. I adore it. If I could change anything about it it would be to add WR and to either have a built in ND filter or have the hood be a little wider so it was easier to take a filter on and off.

To me, extreme wide angles aren't for landscapes, unless you're doing something "artsy" like taking a photo of a single flower and showing a landscape behind it. (this was actually with an 8mm fisheye, but you could get similar results with a rectilinear lens. Instead of things bending towards the middle, the stuff near the edges of the image would be stretched out.)

I mostly use my 10-20mm now for interiors of large spaces (or small spaces, for that matter - realtors use them to make houses look more spacious than they are) and for cool distortion effects that you get by getting close to the subject. The 8mm fisheye I haven't really found a specific niche for yet, but it's fun to use (when I remember to keep my feet out of the picture).

BTW, in case this helps -- the terminology for wide and ultra wide angle are based on sensor size. Wide angle lenses are a shorter focal length than the long side of the film or sensor is in length. When it gets smaller than the short side, it becomes ultra wide. Pentax DSLR sensors are 23.7 × 15.7 mm, so anything under ~24mm is wide and anything under ~16 is ultra wide (so I guess technically the 15mm is ultra wide, but it's still not *extreme* ultra wide )

---------- Post added 08-29-14 at 02:19 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ripper2860 Quote
After I secure a 2nd mortgage of course!! (and secure a lawyer to handle the divorce!!)
Buy it used (and get the SMC version rather than the HD version so you can get the cool starbursts) and you might be able to avoid that -- maybe just a home equity line and a trial separation? lol
08-29-2014, 12:34 PM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
QuoteOriginally posted by narual Quote
You don't even necessarily need wide angle for landscapes. I think Adam posted a while back that his favorite lens for landscapes was the FA* 85, but he might have just said it was his favorite lens overall and that he *could* use it for landscapes.
Several of my favorite landscapes were taken with DA*60-250, depends on your definition of landscape
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5 II s  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-5  Photo 
08-29-2014, 02:03 PM   #11
Veteran Member
narual's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,988
Yeah, yeah, yeah... you people with your scenic vistas and your land with multiple elevations... *jealous*
08-29-2014, 04:44 PM - 1 Like   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,698
As others have said - and illustrated here, you can use any lens for landscapes. To add width, and still use your lens of choice, you can stitch. Just take adjoining images with about 25 to 30% overlap and download Microsoft ICE for free. If you shoot in JPG, you can just drag them in to the utility. If you shoot in RAW, then use your post processing utility to convert to TIFF and then drag the TIFF files in to ICE for stitching.It really is that simple... If the results take on the - long skinny look, tip the camera up to the portrait orientation and shoot.

08-29-2014, 05:04 PM - 1 Like   #13
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,409
I also love tele for some landscape shots. But there are some shots you can only get with an ultrawide. Love my DA 12-24.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-30  Photo 
08-29-2014, 07:48 PM   #14
Veteran Member
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,776
The Pentax 16-45 f4 is also a decent affordable option if you don't need an ultrawide(modern with a few quirks). The big advantage with the 15ltd is that it produces minimal lens flare when shooting with the sun in frame, a constant issue with ultrawide lenses.
08-29-2014, 08:18 PM   #15
Veteran Member
ripper2860's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 890
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by interested_observer Quote
As others have said - and illustrated here, you can use any lens for landscapes. To add width, and still use your lens of choice, you can stitch. Just take adjoining images with about 25 to 30% overlap and download Microsoft ICE for free. If you shoot in JPG, you can just drag them in to the utility. If you shoot in RAW, then use your post processing utility to convert to TIFF and then drag the TIFF files in to ICE for stitching. Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor (ICE) It really is that simple... If the results take on the - long skinny look, tip the camera up to the portrait orientation and shoot.
ICE, ICE, Baby. Too cold. Too cold ... ICE, ICE, Baby. Too cold. Too cold ...

Oh Noooooo! It's stuck in my head! Someone make it STOP!!!!




OK. Seriously now. ICE is a very intriguing tool that may just change the way I shoot some landscapes. I did see some artifacts in the Golden Gate Bridge demo in the video, but certainly worthy of a try.
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!
15mm, 17mm, angle, bit, crop, fish-eye, fisheye, k-mount, landscapes, length, lens, lenses, pentax lens, questions, sensor, slr lens, version, wide-angle, wide-angles
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
0.5x wide angel attachment? or C-mount wide angle? MegaPower Pentax Q 58 10-19-2020 03:58 PM
Wide Angle lens Geoff Ince Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 39 12-05-2013 06:05 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Wide / Ultra Wide angle lens for my K-5 GWARmachine Sold Items 3 03-23-2013 12:03 AM
Wide angle lens TheCornishGiant Pentax K-r 3 11-09-2012 01:08 PM
Questions on SDM/HSM/Wide-Angle Zooms/Primes Biro Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 12-02-2009 06:24 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:27 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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