[palmor]

Here are two examples of uncorrected shots from the Zenitar so you can get an idea of the less then extreme affect of the fish eye.


Hope that helps
John

First is just a landscape shot, its pretty hard to tell it was taken with a FE lens.
Large Size: Eagle Lodge photo - palmor photos at pbase.com
pbase "medium"



This one you can see the distoration
Large size:Sunset over Boston photo - palmor photos at pbase.com
pbase "medium"

[frank]

I'd like to know, if it's possible to make those funny fisheye portraits with zenitar (16mm on dslr is not ultra, ultra wide). You know, those with big nose in front and small ears
like:
http://images.fotop.net/albums4/cfay/fisheyeportrait/1_G.jpg
Stock Photo of Fisheye portrait of a very worried man
http://www.erfoto.lv/img/My_eGallery/fotopleneri/buclera_pedas/thumb3/b18304...c4893c88b1.jpg

Well, I've made some pretty funny portraits w/ the DA1017:








Of course the FE lens is best for something like this:



It is a great fun lens, I'm sure you'd love it

Cheers!

[Richard Day]

Well, I've made some pretty funny portraits w/ the DA1017:





Of course the FE lens is best for something like this:



It is a great fun lens, I'm sure you'd love it

Cheers!

Frank

I love #1, the detail and texture of the gents face is fantastic and #4 is just surreal, very SF (science fiction)!

I'm beginning to get a real itch for the 10-17 again! or is it ?

[frank]

Frank

I love #1, the detail and texture of the gents face is fantastic and #4 is just surreal, very SF (science fiction)!

I'm beginning to get a real itch for the 10-17 again! or is it ?

Hi Richard,

Sorry for the late reply. Totally forgot about this thread ...

Anyway, thanks for the comments. And glad you like these. The DA1017 is a great fun lens, I'm sure you'd like it if you had one

Cheers!

[SpecialK]

[QUOTEThe DA1017 is a great fun lens, I'm sure you'd like it if you had one

[/QUOTE]

I agree. Definitely worth having in the bag.

[skaktuss]

Fantastic pics, Frank! I love FE portraits

[FotoPete]

very sharp lens! Umm..if 17 was less barrelled, I would consider it that much more.

[igowerf]

I really like my Zenitar 16mm, but I've found that it's not THAT much wider than my 18-55 kit lens. The only time where I really want the extra 2mm is when I'm in a confined space like a room, but that's when I don't really want the FE effect. As Palmor pointed out though, the Zenitar is pretty good for landscapes in addition to more creative FE shots.

[Lowell Goudge]

I was going to ask how wide was wide, but you answered this by saying that 16 was not much wider than your present 18mm kit lens.

you really want to go with either the pentax 12-24 or the sigma 10-20. not cheap but really good lenses.

[roy]

good, cheap, light weight wide/tele does not compute
try the lenitar 16mm for wide
it's about a close as your ???

[Richard Day]

I was going to ask how wide was wide, but you answered this by saying that 16 was not much wider than your present 18mm kit lens.

you really want to go with either the pentax 12-24 or the sigma 10-20. not cheap but really good lenses.

I would suggest that for wide landscapes stitching 2 or 3 shots in a panoramic format gives much better results than using a very wide angle lens. To support my statement I submit 2 shots taken on my istD in France last year from the same viewpoint, one is a 4 shot stitch with my DA 16-45 set at around 30mm and the other from the Sigma 10-20 (which I subsequently returned).

Even on screen at reduced resolution, you can see the very marked differences. I have had the panoramic shot printed to A0 size and it is stunning!

I subsequently tested the DA 12-24 and found it to be considerably superior to the Sigma 10-20 EX, I had a replacement of the first Sigma I returned and the second was virtually the same, so I decided not to keep it. If you want a single wide lens to take street shots I would recommend the DA 12-24 as being the better lens, even though it is more expensive I believe it's really worth saving up for.

Sigma shot (only the top and bottom cropped to match the view of the panao):



Stitched shot:



Regards

[pixelpruner]

I need a wide angle for photographing interior and exterior architecture. I'm very tempted by the zenitar because of it's cost, but i think I would still need to purchase something without the distortion, particularly for exterior architectural photography, just to achieve what I want compositionally. But there is no way I can afford the new Pentax wide lenses. :/

[Lowell Goudge]

I would suggest that for wide landscapes stitching 2 or 3 shots in a panoramic format gives much better results than using a very wide angle lens. To support my statement I submit 2 shots taken on my istD in France last year from the same viewpoint, one is a 4 shot stitch with my DA 16-45 set at around 30mm and the other from the Sigma 10-20 (which I subsequently returned).

Even on screen at reduced resolution, you can see the very marked differences. I have had the panoramic shot printed to A0 size and it is stunning!

I subsequently tested the DA 12-24 and found it to be considerably superior to the Sigma 10-20 EX, I had a replacement of the first Sigma I returned and the second was virtually the same, so I decided not to keep it. If you want a single wide lens to take street shots I would recommend the DA 12-24 as being the better lens, even though it is more expensive I believe it's really worth saving up for.

Sigma shot (only the top and bottom cropped to match the view of the panao):
Stitched shot:
Regards

Richard

Photo's deleted only to save space.

There is no question that the stitched together shot is superior. If you really want an A0 print, i.e. something in excess of 1 meter wide,, then I don't care what lens you have, you just don't have the pixels. Your stitch of 4 *istD shots essentually is a wide angle crop of the equivelent of about a 100 megapixle sensor.

the reason I asked how wide was considered wide enough was on the assumption that it would be printed as a "normal" size print.

I agree, if you want a huge print, photo stitching multiple long lens images is the only way to go.