ULTRA wide lenses (only FF equiv 12mm or lower)

beholder3 · 03-17-2017, 11:02 AM - **3 Likes**

Given their very extreme viewing angles, here is a thread dedicated to the extreme end of ultra wide lenses.

Please only post images shot with lenses set at maximum 12mm FF equivalent (8mm APSC). No 14mm. No 15mm etc.

To start:

**bobbotron** · 03-17-2017, 11:13 AM - **2 Likes**

I can play this game. These were taken on APS-C with the Rokinon 8mm.

**WPRESTO** · 03-17-2017, 02:26 PM

Three all taken @ 10mm. The historic pedestrian suspension bridge in Maine was taken with a 10~17mm Pentax. The two church images, the first in Bristol, the exterior shot of flying buttresses taken in Edinburgh, were both done with a Sigma 10-20mm.

obsolescence · 03-17-2017, 04:27 PM

Fisheye distortion can be corrected to yield an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens. I wonder how edge sharpness compares?

**WPRESTO** · 03-17-2017, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by obsolescence

Fisheye distortion can be corrected to yield an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens. I wonder how edge sharpness compares?

I found that the difference left-right between my Sigma 8~16mm @ 8mm versus the 10~17mm @ 10mm is almost negligible. A 10~17mm @ 10mm defished is almost indistinguishable from an 8~16mm @ 8mm. The most noticeable difference IMHO is not right-left/top-bottom coverage, but rather that the fish eye seems to push back objects near the center of the frame a bit more. However, this is an informal impression, not a consequence of careful tests.

**Tony Belding** · 03-17-2017, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by obsolescence

Fisheye distortion can be corrected to yield an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens. I wonder how edge sharpness compares?

I did a test of this once. . . With the gear that I had available at the time, the results came out very similar. I was surprised by that, but it seemed like digital correction and optical correction (with lens elements to make it rectilinear) did the same things to the image, and with the same shortcomings. The practical difference is that the rectilinear lens was huge and heavy! The fisheye gave me a small, lightweight, inexpensive lens that could perform double-duty, since I could choose to de-fish or not. But of course, I didn't get to see a rectilinear view when composing and shooting. I just had to imagine how it would come out if I de-fished it.

As for "an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens". . . Do you know that Voigtlander now make a 10mm rectilinear lens for Sony E-mount? Yes, with full frame coverage. Seems like black magic to me.

**Scorpio71GR** · 03-17-2017, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by WPRESTO

I found that the difference left-right between my Sigma 8~16mm @ 8mm versus the 10~17mm @ 10mm is almost negligible. A 10~17mm @ 10mm defished is almost indistinguishable from an 8~16mm @ 8mm. The most noticeable difference IMHO is not right-left/top-bottom coverage, but rather that the fish eye seems to push back objects near the center of the frame a bit more. However, this is an informal impression, not a consequence of careful tests.

I posted this in the fisheye fever thread but I will post it here too. I agree with WPresto, the 10-17 and the Sigma 8-16 are very similar at their widest focal lengths. The 10-17 can be defished if you are careful with your technique. Keep anything out of the extreme corn 9th at you want to keep and keep the camera extremely level. The Lightroom profile does a pretty decent job on its own. The Sigma 8-16 pulls way ahead when shooting indoors in my opinion.

10-17 @ 10mm partially defished.

Sigma 8-16 @ 8mm. The light was rapidly changing at this time. It changed significantly between the two shots.

As you can see even the Sigma is 2mm wider the horizon appears farther away in the 10mm shot of the 10-17.

**Scorpio71GR** · 03-17-2017, 05:26 PM

Sigma 8-16 @ 8mm, this shot would not have worked as well with the 10-17.

**Tas** · 03-17-2017, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by beholder3

Given their very extreme viewing angles, here is a thread dedicated to the extreme end of ultra wide lenses.

Please only post images shot with lenses set at maximum 12mm FF equivalent (8mm APSC). No 14mm. No 15mm etc.

To start:

A great idea for a thread Karl and a wonderful series you have here with the Laowa 12mm.

I've been interested in the Irix 11mm but the edge softness, distortion and CA compared with the Laowa has me leaning towards this lens instead. Particularly as the straight lines when shooting this wide makes this lens so compelling. Hopefully some Irix 11mm images will appear here soon too.

Tas

VoiceOfReason · 03-17-2017, 06:18 PM

I need to dig out my Sigma 12-24 pics taken with he K1 at 12mm.

**WPRESTO** · 03-17-2017, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Tas

A great idea for a thread Karl and a wonderful series you have here with the Laowa 12mm.

I've been interested in the Irix 11mm but the edge softness, distortion and CA compared with the Laowa has me leaning towards this lens instead. Particularly as the straight lines when shooting this wide makes this lens so compelling. Hopefully some Irix 11mm images will appear here soon too.

Tas

I've been frustrated that the Laowa-Venus 12mm in K-mount has been so slow reaching B&H. I feel like I'm back waiting for the FF Pentax.

**Tas** · 03-17-2017, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by WPRESTO

I've been frustrated that the Laowa-Venus 12mm in K-mount has been so slow reaching B&H. I feel like I'm back waiting for the FF Pentax.

Well it appears if they don't have one at the moment then it shouldn't take too long to get one in your hot little hands: Venus Optics Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lens for Pentax K VE1228PK

I don't have to rush, my K-1 is off with the service dept again for who knows how long, but hopefully you can get one ordered soon and post some images too.

Tas

**WPRESTO** · 03-18-2017, 05:08 AM

Originally posted by Tas

Well it appears if they don't have one at the moment then it shouldn't take too long to get one in your hot little hands: Venus Optics Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lens for Pentax K VE1228PK

I don't have to rush, my K-1 is off with the service dept again for who knows how long, but hopefully you can get one ordered soon and post some images too.

Tas

It says 7-14 days for more to arrive, but I've seen such a notice on a product for months.

**Tas** · 03-18-2017, 05:29 AM

Originally posted by WPRESTO

It says 7-14 days for more to arrive, but I've seen such a notice on a product for months.

Really? Well that's not good, but the OP seems to have one so maybe it can't hurt to ask?

**WPRESTO** · 03-18-2017, 05:35 AM

Originally posted by Tas

Really? Well that's not good, but the OP seems to have one so maybe it can't hurt to ask?

I have a standing order for one @ B&H. Those who have one, including I think the OP, bought into the cloud funding before the lens went into production. I don't think any USA merchants, B&H, Adorama etc., have received any K-mount versions of the 12mm as yet.

03-17-2017, 11:02 AM - 3 Likes	#1
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112	ULTRA wide lenses (only FF equiv 12mm or lower) Given their very extreme viewing angles, here is a thread dedicated to the extreme end of ultra wide lenses. Please only post images shot with lenses set at maximum 12mm FF equivalent (8mm APSC). No 14mm. No 15mm etc. To start:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New Ultra Wide Rectilinear Lens Decision - Irix 11mm F/4 v Venus 12mm f/2.8	Echo Eric	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	05-05-2018 01:20 AM
Looking for an ultra wide angle for FF..	kooks	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	28	11-04-2016 02:26 PM
Rokinon 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Ultra Wide Angle Lens	ellicottva	Pentax Price Watch	6	06-19-2015 12:26 AM
Cheap way to go ultra wide (10mm or 12mm)	tcdk	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	06-17-2009 10:00 AM

03-17-2017, 11:13 AM - 2 Likes	#2
bobbotron Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,349	I can play this game. These were taken on APS-C with the Rokinon 8mm.

03-17-2017, 04:27 PM	#4
obsolescence Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2016 Posts: 25	Fisheye distortion can be corrected to yield an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens. I wonder how edge sharpness compares?

03-17-2017, 04:38 PM	#5
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,104	Originally posted by obsolescence Fisheye distortion can be corrected to yield an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens. I wonder how edge sharpness compares? I found that the difference left-right between my Sigma 8~16mm @ 8mm versus the 10~17mm @ 10mm is almost negligible. A 10~17mm @ 10mm defished is almost indistinguishable from an 8~16mm @ 8mm. The most noticeable difference IMHO is not right-left/top-bottom coverage, but rather that the fish eye seems to push back objects near the center of the frame a bit more. However, this is an informal impression, not a consequence of careful tests.

03-17-2017, 05:08 PM	#6
Tony Belding Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Hamilton, Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 779	Originally posted by obsolescence Fisheye distortion can be corrected to yield an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens. I wonder how edge sharpness compares? I did a test of this once. . . With the gear that I had available at the time, the results came out very similar. I was surprised by that, but it seemed like digital correction and optical correction (with lens elements to make it rectilinear) did the same things to the image, and with the same shortcomings. The practical difference is that the rectilinear lens was huge and heavy! The fisheye gave me a small, lightweight, inexpensive lens that could perform double-duty, since I could choose to de-fish or not. But of course, I didn't get to see a rectilinear view when composing and shooting. I just had to imagine how it would come out if I de-fished it. As for "an even wider angle of view than any rectilinear lens". . . Do you know that Voigtlander now make a 10mm rectilinear lens for Sony E-mount? Yes, with full frame coverage. Seems like black magic to me.

03-17-2017, 05:21 PM	#7
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,005	Originally posted by WPRESTO I found that the difference left-right between my Sigma 8~16mm @ 8mm versus the 10~17mm @ 10mm is almost negligible. A 10~17mm @ 10mm defished is almost indistinguishable from an 8~16mm @ 8mm. The most noticeable difference IMHO is not right-left/top-bottom coverage, but rather that the fish eye seems to push back objects near the center of the frame a bit more. However, this is an informal impression, not a consequence of careful tests. I posted this in the fisheye fever thread but I will post it here too. I agree with WPresto, the 10-17 and the Sigma 8-16 are very similar at their widest focal lengths. The 10-17 can be defished if you are careful with your technique. Keep anything out of the extreme corn 9th at you want to keep and keep the camera extremely level. The Lightroom profile does a pretty decent job on its own. The Sigma 8-16 pulls way ahead when shooting indoors in my opinion. 10-17 @ 10mm partially defished. Sigma 8-16 @ 8mm. The light was rapidly changing at this time. It changed significantly between the two shots. As you can see even the Sigma is 2mm wider the horizon appears farther away in the 10mm shot of the 10-17.

03-17-2017, 05:26 PM	#8
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,005	Sigma 8-16 @ 8mm, this shot would not have worked as well with the 10-17.

03-17-2017, 05:35 PM	#9
Tas Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Brisbane, QLD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,202	Originally posted by beholder3 Given their very extreme viewing angles, here is a thread dedicated to the extreme end of ultra wide lenses. Please only post images shot with lenses set at maximum 12mm FF equivalent (8mm APSC). No 14mm. No 15mm etc. To start: A great idea for a thread Karl and a wonderful series you have here with the Laowa 12mm. I've been interested in the Irix 11mm but the edge softness, distortion and CA compared with the Laowa has me leaning towards this lens instead. Particularly as the straight lines when shooting this wide makes this lens so compelling. Hopefully some Irix 11mm images will appear here soon too. Tas

03-17-2017, 06:18 PM	#10
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	I need to dig out my Sigma 12-24 pics taken with he K1 at 12mm.

03-17-2017, 07:32 PM	#11
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,104	Originally posted by Tas A great idea for a thread Karl and a wonderful series you have here with the Laowa 12mm. I've been interested in the Irix 11mm but the edge softness, distortion and CA compared with the Laowa has me leaning towards this lens instead. Particularly as the straight lines when shooting this wide makes this lens so compelling. Hopefully some Irix 11mm images will appear here soon too. Tas I've been frustrated that the Laowa-Venus 12mm in K-mount has been so slow reaching B&H. I feel like I'm back waiting for the FF Pentax.

03-17-2017, 09:11 PM	#12
Tas Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Brisbane, QLD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,202	Originally posted by WPRESTO I've been frustrated that the Laowa-Venus 12mm in K-mount has been so slow reaching B&H. I feel like I'm back waiting for the FF Pentax. Well it appears if they don't have one at the moment then it shouldn't take too long to get one in your hot little hands: Venus Optics Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lens for Pentax K VE1228PK I don't have to rush, my K-1 is off with the service dept again for who knows how long, but hopefully you can get one ordered soon and post some images too. Tas

03-18-2017, 05:08 AM	#13
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,104	Originally posted by Tas Well it appears if they don't have one at the moment then it shouldn't take too long to get one in your hot little hands: Venus Optics Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lens for Pentax K VE1228PK I don't have to rush, my K-1 is off with the service dept again for who knows how long, but hopefully you can get one ordered soon and post some images too. Tas It says 7-14 days for more to arrive, but I've seen such a notice on a product for months.

03-18-2017, 05:29 AM	#14
Tas Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Brisbane, QLD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,202	Originally posted by WPRESTO It says 7-14 days for more to arrive, but I've seen such a notice on a product for months. Really? Well that's not good, but the OP seems to have one so maybe it can't hurt to ask?

03-18-2017, 05:35 AM	#15
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,104	Originally posted by Tas Really? Well that's not good, but the OP seems to have one so maybe it can't hurt to ask? I have a standing order for one @ B&H. Those who have one, including I think the OP, bought into the cloud funding before the lens went into production. I don't think any USA merchants, B&H, Adorama etc., have received any K-mount versions of the 12mm as yet.