[ThorSanchez]

I was goofing around with my fisheye, taking some pictures of my new backyard patio and lighting. My wife and kids were walking around, and after a couple shots I realized that the long exposures could create some weird and spooky effects. So I took a dozen or so 10 second exposures with us doing various stuff and appearing as strange apparitions.


That was interesting enough, but my last exposure I stopped down to f/10 and got these spectacular starbursts from the little LED Christmas lights on the far right hand side of the picture. These have to be the best starbursts I've seen, almost to the level of the Lomo Daguerreotype with the star aperture plates and at least on par with my DA15. At wider apertures and bigger light sources the effect was just okay, but tiny lights stopped down... I was pretty impressed.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[pepperberry farm]

I loved the six-pointed starbursts on the Rok 8mm:

[Madaboutpix]

Not much different from the DA10-17 with likewise six aperture blades and therefore six-pointed starbursts, but nicely pronounced anyway. Do happen to like the more-pointed starbursts from higher-aperture-blade-count lenses as the DA15 even better, but some will consider that a bit nitpicky and otherwise subjective preference.

Suspect the DA10-17 having slightly better flare resistance, though. But, again, what ultimately counts is whether the final image appeals.

[ThorSanchez]

Not much different from the DA10-17 with likewise six aperture blades and therefore six-pointed starbursts, but nicely pronounced anyway. Do happen to like the more-pointed starbursts from higher-aperture-blade-count lenses as the DA15 even better, but some will consider that a bit nitpicky and otherwise subjective preference.

Suspect the DA10-17 having slightly better flare resistance, though. But, again, what ultimately counts is whether the final image appeals.

You can see all kinds of flare and related artifacts in the picture I posted, I wouldn't doubt that the DA10-17 was better. Here it kind of works into the surrealist quality I was looking for, if I was taking a landscape or something more realistic it would be annoying.


I ended up with the Rokinon instead of the DA10-17 mainly because it was several hundred dollars cheaper.

[Madaboutpix]

You can see all kinds of flare and related artefacts in the picture I posted, I wouldn't doubt that the DA10-17 was better. Here it kind of works into the surrealist quality I was looking for, if I was taking a landscape or something more realistic it would be annoying. I ended up with the Rokinon instead of the DA10-17 mainly because it was several hundred dollars cheaper.

Perfectly valid observations and reasons. Didn't intend to pick on your image in any way. At least here in Germany, the price of the DA10-17 has come down considerably, presumably because it has been around since 2006, and I got my copy for 329 euros brand new, which doesn't make it a particularly expensive lens, and should put it in roughly the same price tier as at least the Mk. II version of the Samyang/Rokinon?

Both are great options for the K mount, I guess. Fisheye photography with Pentax certainly rocks, and it doesn't break the bank either. Sooner or later, I bet even the FF people will get their modern iteration of the fisheye zoom.

[stevebrot]

Yep...fisheyes and starbursts sort of go together. Both my Zenitar 16/2.8 and my Rokinon 8/3.5 throw them.


Steve

[ThorSanchez]

Perfectly valid observations and reasons. Didn't intend to pick on your image in any way. At least here in Germany, the price of the DA10-17 has come down considerably, presumably because it has been around since 2006, and I got my copy for 329 euros brand new, which doesn't make it a particularly expensive lens, and should put it in roughly the same price tier as at least the Mk. II version of the Samyang/Rokinon?

Both are great options for the K mount, I guess. Fisheye photography with Pentax certainly rocks, and it doesn't break the bank either. Sooner or later, I bet even the FF people will get their modern iteration of the fisheye zoom.

No worries. We do have some good fisheye options. I think I bought the Rokinon in 2013 and it was cheaper than the 10-17 then. I don't use it a lot but occasionally it's the only thing wide enough to do the job.