Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-14-2009, 09:26 AM   #1
emr
Guest




How's THIS for a fisheye lens?

Nikon 6mm f/2.8 and 220 degrees!

Nikon 2,8/6mm Fisheye-Nikkor Auto non-AI bei eBay.de: Lenses (endet 14.09.09 14:19:31 MESZ)

09-14-2009, 09:38 AM   #2
Pentaxian
panoguy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,301
If I remember correctly, there were only a handful of those made for things like tire inspection at companies like Michelin (you stick the lens inside the mold from the center!) and other offbeat industrial purposes. There is a much more common (but still rare) Nikkor 8mm that is also quite large which was designed for full-sky photography.

I've held a DSLR with the 8mm on it, and it was unbelievably heavy and large, but the shots at 2.8 were crisp from edge to edge. Impressive stuff, but I'm not sure this $36,000 "mushroom fisheye" is just as good.
09-14-2009, 10:22 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Nikon made 582 of them from 1972 thru 1998

Nikon made 582 of them from 1972 thru 1998



Ah the classic 6mm 2.8. Nikon made 3 mount versions, Non Ai, Ai and AiS totalling less than 600 examples over 26 year production run. New price was $14,300 via special order only. Wholesale price to your dealer cost him/her $8,800. The last one that sold on ebay a couple years ago hammered:

$12,000, which was a much more reasonable price point, & complete in its dedicated nikon wooden trunk & w/ instructions manual.


This Germany based rare camera dealer has had this one for sale the last few years. One day he'll grab A Big Fish with Deep Pockets. Until then its remains unsold due to being insanely overpriced.


Lots of useful nikon serial number data found at site below. I wish the same type data existed for Pentax serial numbers. Canon is also easy to decipher as they date code their lenses: Month and Year and most numbers start with 100001 since 1971, but Nikon lens production numbers are a breeze to understand:


Nikon Lens Serial Nos
09-14-2009, 06:16 PM   #4
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 49,673
Question: HOW can this lens possibly cost $36k, and who in their right mind would pay that?


Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

09-14-2009, 06:46 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
I hear you Adam, its a crazy asking price

I hear you Adam, its a crazy asking price.

I kinda thought $12,000 was high on the one I saw trade hands on ebay, but in retrospect unless Nikon makes more, theres less than 600 made. $12,000 was a very good price. And we know $35,000 to $38,000 is too high as it hasn't sold for years now. His price varies with currency exchanges on it.

Still, I'd love to handle one, being a 220 degree fisheye is pretty incredible. For some reason is it listed as incompatible with D700. I don't know why, but it is, all 3mount versions. I've never read of a forum poster (anywhere) that owns or shoots with one. So it may be usable only on certain nikon film bodies. ?

Nikon is reigning king of ultrawide photography, my opinion. Think about it, this first issued in 1972. Canon never matched it, Pentax never matched it, Minolta never matched, no one did. And Nikon produced it for 26 years with no competition using same optical formula, just the mounts changed over time.




QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Question: HOW can this lens possibly cost $36k, and who in their right mind would pay that?

Last edited by Samsungian; 09-14-2009 at 07:55 PM.
09-14-2009, 11:25 PM   #6
Veteran Member
SuperAkuma's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 445
I think that lens is the most "weird" lens that I've ever seen.
09-15-2009, 01:45 AM   #7
Veteran Member
xjjohnno's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,115
Kind of makes my Samyang 8mm sound like a hell of a bargain. I wonder how many users of the lens let their feet sneak into the pic?
09-15-2009, 07:17 AM   #8
emr
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by SuperAkuma Quote
I think that lens is the most "weird" lens that I've ever seen.
You know, it could easily double as an umbrella in the unfortunate case of rain during a photoshoot.

09-15-2009, 01:57 PM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,169
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Question: HOW can this lens possibly cost $36k, and who in their right mind would pay that?
Hell, it's a bargain compared to the Canon 1200/5.6!
09-15-2009, 02:07 PM   #10
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 49,673
QuoteOriginally posted by Samsungian Quote
I hear you Adam, its a crazy asking price.

I kinda thought $12,000 was high on the one I saw trade hands on ebay, but in retrospect unless Nikon makes more, theres less than 600 made. $12,000 was a very good price. And we know $35,000 to $38,000 is too high as it hasn't sold for years now. His price varies with currency exchanges on it.

Still, I'd love to handle one, being a 220 degree fisheye is pretty incredible. For some reason is it listed as incompatible with D700. I don't know why, but it is, all 3mount versions. I've never read of a forum poster (anywhere) that owns or shoots with one. So it may be usable only on certain nikon film bodies. ?

Nikon is reigning king of ultrawide photography, my opinion. Think about it, this first issued in 1972. Canon never matched it, Pentax never matched it, Minolta never matched, no one did. And Nikon produced it for 26 years with no competition using same optical formula, just the mounts changed over time.
Ah, I see.

Given the size/cost of that thing, I still think I'd rather spend $100 on a 180-degree fisheye, do some stitching, and then go buy an M3 (the car, not the camera) instead of the 220-degree fisheye tongue

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

09-15-2009, 02:17 PM   #11
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
your really loving that smiley huh adam?

On another note, I believe this lens is more for bragging rights than anything. What a beast though!
09-18-2009, 07:45 PM   #12
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 12,401
I was in Calgary Photo one day about 30 years ago and they had a used one for sale. I was using an F2s at the time and they kindly let me put it onto my camera and go out and take a few shots with it.
Truly a remarkable lens.
09-18-2009, 07:59 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,169
Wasn't it Gary / Damn Brit who wanted a lens so wide you could "see behind you"? 220 degrees ought to cover that.
09-19-2009, 01:29 AM   #14
emr
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Wasn't it Gary / Damn Brit who wanted a lens so wide you could "see behind you"? 220 degrees ought to cover that.
I believe it was, but as I was desperately trying to figure out something witty to say or paraphrase regarding it when I was starting this thread, his signature had already changed.

You're free to complete my mission!
09-19-2009, 01:46 AM   #15
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,476
Insanely overpriced indeed. And wow I have never seen anything like that before, that is one crazy piece of glass...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
nikon
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Widest non-fisheye lens? Nimrad Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 11-06-2013 03:12 PM
Fisheye lens RussellW Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 06-28-2009 04:53 PM
Fisheye Lens Orli Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 03-08-2009 12:04 AM
DA 10-17 fisheye as a landscape lens ryno Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 02-18-2008 05:51 PM
What FishEye lens is Better. Fl_Gulfer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 02-12-2008 08:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:37 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top