1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.


Discussion in 'Pentax Chat' started by Dave_Cox, Dec 12, 2007.

  1. Dave_Cox

    Dave_Cox Well-Known Member

    Just ordered one of these 16mm f2.8 semi-fisheye lenses to use on my K10 as a wideangle. Any distortion can be cured on the PC if I want a 'straight' shot. The write-up looks good, but has anybody else actually tried one?
  2. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    I'll be very interested to know if you can anywhere near correct fisheye "distortion" with software. I find it difficult to believe that it's possible and would guess all sorts of other gremlins would creep in as the correction became more extreme.
  3. Dave_Cox

    Dave_Cox Well-Known Member

    I'll have to wait and see. As there's the 1.6 crop factor to take into account then I won't get the full fisheye effect. Some US reviewers say that it'll be more like an extreme wide-angle than fisheye on a digital.The 16mm will become a 25mm (equivalent)
  4. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    I get no distortion from my Sigma 17-70mm lens at 17mm (24mm equivalent) so you should be ok.
  5. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    That's a very different animal. A fisheye lens has none of the corrections to produce rectillinear images, so in itself produces huge distortion. That still applies on APS-C when the diagonal angle of view is nowhere near 180 degrees - there's still significant distortion. It's not quite as severe as on full-frame, given that the edges of the image aren't there, but it's nothing like what a rectillinear lens of a similar focal length would produce.
    "De-fishing" software attempts to correct that, and is remarkably successful in my experience - resolution is always a bit dodgy at the corners, which is inevitable given the lens design, I suppose, and perspective within the shot can be a little crazy, but it's generally a workable solution. I've not used this particular fisheye, but I have used both a Canon 15mm and a Mamiya-made Rollei QBM one on both APS-C and full-frame digital - to be honest, I'm personally a fan of this type of lens, so greatly appreciate the full-frame opportunity, but it certainly works on APS-C with corrective software.
  6. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Ooops, missed the fisheye bit, sorry. Speed reading is not always best! :(
  7. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    "As there's the 1.6 crop factor to take into account then I won't get the full fisheye effect."

    You would with the SMC Pentax-DA 10-17mm Fisheye Zoom. I've just bought one of these and am looking forward to some interesting effects.
  8. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    Ah, but that is DA, so is designed to give fisheye on a DSLR, whereas the Zenitar wasn't made for smaller sensors.
  9. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

  10. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member


    The point was the Zenitar won't give the full fisheye look on a DSLR (see here for example), whereas the Pentax 10-17 will.
  11. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    "The point was the Zenitar won't give the full fisheye look on a DSLR (see here for example), whereas the Pentax 10-17 will.

    Yes, I know, I was agreeing with you! :cool:
  12. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    Don't mind me, I'm - a stressful day at work.
  13. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Must say the Pentax fisheye zooms are a great idea IMHO.
  14. Dave_Cox

    Dave_Cox Well-Known Member

    I bought it as a wide-angle, so losing most of the fisheye effect is a bonus. Don't forget that I use my K10 (as I've stated often enough!!!) as a manual-focus only system, so my lovely 28mm f2.8 super-sharp Takumar is actually a 42mm; this will give me a near-enough 24mm for my architecture and landscape stuff.
  15. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    They must sell well, because there was a film version - the 17-28mm Fisheye Zoom and now the 10-17mm for DSLRs is the same concept.

    As far as i know no other manufacturer does a similar lens. (The Tokina version of the Pentax lens excepted)
  16. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Indeed so, John. I can't think why nobody has copied this idea.
  17. Iloca

    Iloca Well-Known Member

    Hi Dave,

    there's also the Peleng 8mm Fisheye (again designed for 35mm)

    See link Here

    Also check out the link page for more information including a little bit about the Zenitar.

    Here's another link dealing with the Zenitar 16mm including De-Fishing. See Here

    De-Fishing the Zenitar 16mm , Pentax *ist DS
  18. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Morning Dave,

    I would go for it, although I agree with John and check out the FA 10-17 :) \
    which is, granted, a tad more expensive but you get all the fixin's :D plus a full 180 degree fisheye.

    And, just think of the nifty tyre shots you could get....heck, maybe you could even sell some (of the tyre pics) to Michelin for their next calender ;)

    Cheers (and hope your keyboards recovered :rolleyes:

  19. OleTj

    OleTj Member

    The Zenitar is a "pure" fisheye, so it should actually be EASIEr to correct in software than a wide-angle zoom - which is never 100% rectilinear.

    I'll have to try with mine one day. :)
  20. Dave_Cox

    Dave_Cox Well-Known Member

    Now got the lens, and first indications are that on the K10 there is no more distortion than with a super-wide on a 35mm camera. I've had to give it back to SWMBO to wrap up now, so further reports and trial shots after Christmas!

Share This Page