[Groucho]

I already have (and love) a Zenitar 16mm fisheye, and use it often on my DL, and occasionally put it on my K1000 to get the full 180' effect. Much as I like my K1000, it would be awfully nice to have the full fish effect on my DSLR.

I recently found that I can get the Pentax 10-17mm for a very reasonable price (less than I expected) from a reputable site... cheap enough that I'm considering it. My question is - has anyone compared these two, and will I still be likely to use the Zenitar if I have the Pentax?

Like I said, I really like the Zenitar, but as far as I can see, the only advantage of it (other than price!) is that it is slightly faster, F2.8 vs F3.5-F4.5... but I rarely find myself using it in low-light, so that may not really be an issue. (And the Zenitar will probably work better on the K1000, but that's honestly not that big of a concern.) How's the Pentax lens wide open? Has the speed been an issue for anyone? And I assume that the Pentax at 16-17mm produces approximate the same field of view as the Zenitar does?

Thanks!

[attack11]

the pentax is a fisheye after crop, the zenitar isn't. there is ca wide open at 10mm on the pentax, ideal aperture is usually f7.1.

[normhead]

Does anyone have a picture taken with the PENTAX DA 10-17MM 3.5-4 ED FISHEYE
on a *ist DS? I'm interested in how much of the 6.1 mg sensor frame the image covers. I'm assuming that if it produces a round image on a 35mm film plane, it would be someting less than that on the smaller sensor on an *1st or a K100D. Does anyone know how it looks on a K10D?

[Jonas B]

Does anyone have a picture taken with the PENTAX DA 10-17MM 3.5-4 ED FISHEYE
on a *ist DS? I'm interested in how much of the 6.1 mg sensor frame the image covers. I'm assuming that if it produces a round image on a 35mm film plane, it would be someting less than that on the smaller sensor on an *1st or a K100D. Does anyone know how it looks on a K10D?

Normhead,

It's a DA lens made for the digital Pentax SLR cameras. It's all in the specidications. The D/DS/DL/K100D/K10D share the same sensor size and there will be no difference.

[Groucho]

...and since it's a zoom, the amount that covers the sensor depends on your zoom level. At 10mm, you should get a full 180' diagonal fisheye image on your DSLR's sensor. This will probably be somewhat circular on a 35mm lens (kind of opposite of how the Peleng 8mm circular fisheye is almost a normal fisheye on a DSLR sensor, with only the corners blacked out)... and at 17mm, will probably produce a more or less normal 180' fisheye on a 35mm.

I'm still curious if anyone has experience with both and which they prefer. I'm leaning towards buying one anyway, the CA seems to be the only real issue, but that's apparently a problem with other DSLR-friendly fisheyes, too, like the Nikkor 10.5mm.

[blende8]

If you can get it at a reasonable price get it by all means!
It is a great leans, extremely sharp (better than the 12-24 in the center).
To my own surprise it is one of my most used lenses now.

[Alvin]

...and since it's a zoom, the amount that covers the sensor depends on your zoom level. At 10mm, you should get a full 180' diagonal fisheye image on your DSLR's sensor. This will probably be somewhat circular on a 35mm lens (kind of opposite of how the Peleng 8mm circular fisheye is almost a normal fisheye on a DSLR sensor, with only the corners blacked out)... and at 17mm, will probably produce a more or less normal 180' fisheye on a 35mm.

I'm still curious if anyone has experience with both and which they prefer. I'm leaning towards buying one anyway, the CA seems to be the only real issue, but that's apparently a problem with other DSLR-friendly fisheyes, too, like the Nikkor 10.5mm.

I don't have experience with the Zenitar, but you can see some Zenitar shots and 10-17's here.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/2841-show-me-your-fisheye-shots.html

My posting in that thread above has a shot taken using the 10-17 FE in the same place, one at 10mm and another at 17mm. Hope that will give you a feel of the lens.

Here's another couple of the 10-17 I recently snapped.

The first shot was at 10mm, ISO 1600 in P mode. Camera chose 1/3200 sec shutter and f/11! I didn't have enough time to set it as the kids just happened to be running through and just stopped for a second. Purple fringing was almost non-existent in this strong lighting...the black loop above the "snow" around the sign there was a minor touch, and the kid in the centre had a touch around his left shirt hole. Not visible at all unless you really are looking for it.

Second shot was 10mm handheld, bulb mode, 2.3 seconds, f/16, ISO 400. SR was on.

Attached Images

   

---

Last edited by Alvin; 07-03-2007 at 09:07 PM.

[betsypdx]

I have both a fish-eye prime (the smc Pentax 17mm 1:4) and the zoom (DA 10-17mm). They are both great and I love the creative perspective that you can get out of both - plus with short focussing distances (.14m with the zoom, .2 with the 17mm) they're great for close up shots as well. Here are my two galleries for your "viewing pleasure" - SMC Pentax Fish-eye 1:4/17 Photo Gallery by betsypdx at pbase.com and Pentax 10-17mm Fish-Eye Photo Gallery by betsypdx at pbase.com. I took the 17 out yesterday, and the 10-17 out today, but haven't processed (or downloaded) the shots yet. Gotta say though, looking at them on my p2000, I'm reminded why I love these two lenses. If you can get a good deal on the 10-17, I'd go for it.

[roscot]

Here you go
Pentax smc P-DA Fish-Eye 10-17mm F3.5-4.5 ED (IF) Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

Quite a few of these are from forum members (including myself)

[roentarre]

This lens is definitely a fine lens.

Not as sharp as I would have liked though ...

[attack11]

looks like you didn't have focus in the shots. i've been happy with my 10-17 since it came out; but i don't use it as often as my other glass.







off topic, i just noticed the candy cane trumpets in the first pic only had 5 heads when i got it a year ago. it's got over 20 now

[Groucho]

Alvin, it's funny that you posted fisheye shots at WDW; I too used my fisheye (Zenitar) to shoot Wishes and Illuminations in January. I also used the Zenitar on my K1000 there to get the full fish effect. I've very active on the photography forum over at Disboards so I'm used to talking photography and Disney at the same time!

Anyway, the great deal on the 10-17mm isn't quite as great as it was - it looks like the price just went up! I guess I should have gone ahead and ordered it. Buydig had it for $409, so $309 after the rebate. Beach has had it for $429, now Buydig raised their price to $429 as well.

$329 after rebate is still pretty good (especially compared to what the C/N people have to pay for the Tokina version), but I may wait a week or two to see if the price goes down again. I have a couple months before a trip to California that I'd like to have it for.

[Buddha Jones]

Here are some shots that I took witht he K10D and the DA FE. I dont have the EXIF info handy at the moment.
To me the FE isnt a must have lens, but it is a fun lens to have. It is like buying a Miata when you already own a minivan. If you have a stable core of glass and some extra money, then yeah, get it if the deal is good, and just have fun with it.

I think this one is at 10mm


This one should be at 17mm


This is at 10mm also I believe, Turner Field

[little laker]

I had fun with a 10-17 fisheye for about a week, and hope that my wallet recovers enough to buy one soon.

Here's a couple of pictures from it






And of course my personal favorite


I'd recommend anyone getting it. You'll be surprised what you'll see happening through the view finder.

[sft]

The DA10-17 is an excellent lens as it very versatile for a fisheye. In fact it really is a unique lens and is one of my favorites - its sharp but has CA/PF but thats not a dealbreaker at all. Here are a few shots with mine: