Wide Angle Church Interior

Wide Angle Church Interior · 08:51 PM

I was looking at some pics from my recent trip to Germany and noticed that I had taken a couple of photos with 2 different super-wide zooms, but from the same perpective. It wasn't a planned comparison, but I thought it would be pretty neat to post both images here.

One rectilinear, one fisheye.....which do you like better?

DA12-24

DA10-17FE

maxwell1295 · 03-05-2009, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Ash

Another for the rectilinear for me.
FE is better used elsewhere to me, particularly not for when trying to emphasise straight converging lines like here.
Nice captures though.

I'm still undecided on these....I like them both. Not because I took them but because I like using the FE in situations where there is some symmetry. Of course, it's very easy to overdo that effect which is one of the reasons I picked up the 12-24. As long as the lines are simple, I think the FE adds something to the image. Even though there's some distortion in the image above, it just feels "right" to me.

Here's an example where the FE doesn't work for me. The design in this particular church is a lot busier, especially at the top of the image where the FE effect is really exaggerated.

reeftool · 03-05-2009, 09:36 AM

I like both images but the fisheye made me say WOW! I really like the above fisheye also. Its the exaggerated effect at the top that caught my eye. Maybe I just like good fisheye shots.

ajuett · 03-05-2009, 09:43 AM

I like the complete Rectilinear image and the fisheye ceiling is great.

mikeSF · 03-05-2009, 10:42 AM

i love them both, but am more drawn to the effect of the fisheye for this shot.

SpecialK · 03-05-2009, 08:54 PM

The fisheye is a bit more interesting. Both seem to have the Pentax tilt, though.

**mike.hiran** · 03-05-2009, 09:50 PM

I never carry both my fisheye and rectilinear at the same time... but this post will change that. Both are great but give a different feel... I like the exaggerated depth of the fisheye, but I like the proportions and the impact of the rectilinear. I'm glad you posted both pics!

**Scottnorwo** · 03-06-2009, 05:54 AM

Going to be a politician here and say both shots are wonderful. Like that the fisheye shows more windows lit up. the Rectilinear has the long straight lines. Both are great. Makes me feel very small, that church must have been huge.

maxwell1295 · 03-06-2009, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Scottnorwo

Makes me feel very small, that church must have been huge.

Funnt you should mention that. The photos are from the Speyer Cathedral in Germany. It's supposedly the largest Romanesque cathedral in all of Europe. To call it massive would be an understatement....

Speyer Cathedral - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RioRico · 03-26-2009, 11:04 PM

I just got to this thread, a couple weeks late, referred from: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/55093-have-som...a-12-24-a.html I have the 10-17, and a couple other lesser fisheyes; and the 12-24 may be next on my LBA list. All these shots are interesting and show that these are very different lenses, at least at their extremes. IMHO such an interior space just isn't right for the 10-17, at least not so wide. I try to avoid such strongly bent lines at edges. I thus venture into strange rounded and irregular spaces, to brushy landscapes and radial interections (3 or many more lines converging centrally), and extreme closeups before a flat horizon.

I've read some commentary on rectilinear ultrawide lenses, to the effect that the proper(?) use of such is not to stand back and capture the entirety of vast spaces and vistas, but to delve ever closer to the subject and its context. A constrained opinion, yes, but it's driving my desire for the 12-24. But do I really need it? The 10-17 can approach rectilinearity with minor defishing, with nearly the same FOV; but how do the DOFs differ, and IQ? In our lens review database Pentax Lens Review Database - DA Series Zooms the 10-17 gets a higher rating; and the 12-24 costs MUCH more. Ah, the price vs performance is a quandry...

jsalver · 03-27-2009, 01:47 AM

I like the fish eye ... it makes the shot more interesting and fun to view and the light gives it a grandeur perspective.

Also, I've ben trying to decide on one of these two lenses.
Can anyone give me some of your thoughts. I'm not concerned about the difference in cost.

Thanks!!!

Class A · 03-27-2009, 03:10 AM

Originally posted by maxwell1295

I like using the FE in situations where there is some symmetry. ... Here's an example where the FE doesn't work for me.

I'm completely with you. I don't like fisheye shots in general and your second image is a good sample for why I personally don't like them.

I really like, however, how you used the fisheye effect in the first fisheye image. It makes you think you are turning your head upwards as you scan the image to the top. Very nice, "surround view" effect.

The rectilinear version looks boring in comparison. It doesn't have the same dynamics.

maxwell1295
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by maxwell1295
	Find threads started by maxwell1295
	Find threads in which maxwell1295 has posted

03-26-2009, 11:04 PM	#24
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	latecomer I just got to this thread, a couple weeks late, referred from: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/55093-have-som...a-12-24-a.html I have the 10-17, and a couple other lesser fisheyes; and the 12-24 may be next on my LBA list. All these shots are interesting and show that these are very different lenses, at least at their extremes. IMHO such an interior space just isn't right for the 10-17, at least not so wide. I try to avoid such strongly bent lines at edges. I thus venture into strange rounded and irregular spaces, to brushy landscapes and radial interections (3 or many more lines converging centrally), and extreme closeups before a flat horizon. I've read some commentary on rectilinear ultrawide lenses, to the effect that the proper(?) use of such is not to stand back and capture the entirety of vast spaces and vistas, but to delve ever closer to the subject and its context. A constrained opinion, yes, but it's driving my desire for the 12-24. But do I really need it? The 10-17 can approach rectilinearity with minor defishing, with nearly the same FOV; but how do the DOFs differ, and IQ? In our lens review database Pentax Lens Review Database - DA Series Zooms the 10-17 gets a higher rating; and the 12-24 costs MUCH more. Ah, the price vs performance is a quandry...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Help with a Restaurant Lens (interior wide angle)	MrZeroPing	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	02-20-2010 05:22 PM
Architecture Church interior (HDR)	Nass	Post Your Photos!	12	02-07-2010 04:07 PM
Architecture St Michael's Church - Interior	Big G	Post Your Photos!	8	01-31-2010 11:10 AM
Good wide angle lens for tight interior shots	djmindblender	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	01-21-2010 08:32 AM
Anyone prefer to stitch interior shots rather than use a wide angle?	joeyc	Photographic Technique	14	08-09-2009 09:23 AM

03-05-2009, 08:52 AM	#16
maxwell1295 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Long Island, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,703 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ash Another for the rectilinear for me. FE is better used elsewhere to me, particularly not for when trying to emphasise straight converging lines like here. Nice captures though. I'm still undecided on these....I like them both. Not because I took them but because I like using the FE in situations where there is some symmetry. Of course, it's very easy to overdo that effect which is one of the reasons I picked up the 12-24. As long as the lines are simple, I think the FE adds something to the image. Even though there's some distortion in the image above, it just feels "right" to me. Here's an example where the FE doesn't work for me. The design in this particular church is a lot busier, especially at the top of the image where the FE effect is really exaggerated.

03-05-2009, 09:36 AM	#17
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,553	I like both images but the fisheye made me say WOW! I really like the above fisheye also. Its the exaggerated effect at the top that caught my eye. Maybe I just like good fisheye shots.

03-05-2009, 09:43 AM	#18
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100	I like the complete Rectilinear image and the fisheye ceiling is great.

03-05-2009, 10:42 AM	#19
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	i love them both, but am more drawn to the effect of the fisheye for this shot.

03-05-2009, 08:54 PM	#20
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	The fisheye is a bit more interesting. Both seem to have the Pentax tilt, though.

03-05-2009, 09:50 PM	#21
mike.hiran Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Location: portland Photos: Albums Posts: 1,491	I never carry both my fisheye and rectilinear at the same time... but this post will change that. Both are great but give a different feel... I like the exaggerated depth of the fisheye, but I like the proportions and the impact of the rectilinear. I'm glad you posted both pics!

03-06-2009, 05:54 AM	#22
Scottnorwo Millionth Poster! Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Stafford, New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,086	Going to be a politician here and say both shots are wonderful. Like that the fisheye shows more windows lit up. the Rectilinear has the long straight lines. Both are great. Makes me feel very small, that church must have been huge.

03-06-2009, 12:19 PM	#23
maxwell1295 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Long Island, New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,703 Original Poster	Originally posted by Scottnorwo Makes me feel very small, that church must have been huge. Funnt you should mention that. The photos are from the Speyer Cathedral in Germany. It's supposedly the largest Romanesque cathedral in all of Europe. To call it massive would be an understatement.... Speyer Cathedral - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

03-27-2009, 01:47 AM	#25
jsalver New Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: mission viejo, Ca. Posts: 1	I like the fish eye ... it makes the shot more interesting and fun to view and the light gives it a grandeur perspective. Also, I've ben trying to decide on one of these two lenses. Can anyone give me some of your thoughts. I'm not concerned about the difference in cost. Thanks!!!

03-27-2009, 03:10 AM	#26
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by maxwell1295 I like using the FE in situations where there is some symmetry. ... Here's an example where the FE doesn't work for me. I'm completely with you. I don't like fisheye shots in general and your second image is a good sample for why I personally don't like them. I really like, however, how you used the fisheye effect in the first fisheye image. It makes you think you are turning your head upwards as you scan the image to the top. Very nice, "surround view" effect. The rectilinear version looks boring in comparison. It doesn't have the same dynamics.