16mm Fish eye - Worth it?

[Biomech]

I've just come back from a wedding photography course were the instructor was using a 15mm fish eye. I really liked the effect this has and can see applications for it away from weddings as well. My question is, I use a Sony a200, the only Sony fish eye I can find is a 16mm at around £650.

My question is, as I have an 18-70 kit and 18-250 tamron. Is it worth it and will the effect be that noticeable? The crop factor on my camera is about 1.5 so what should I be looking for to get a full frame 15mm effect? I'm guessing you can't buy like 10mm fish eyes for APS-C cameras?

Cheers

Update: I've actually just found this 4.5mm Sigma. http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-...a-fit/p1031396 . reading the description, will I get a circular image inside a frame (black corners)? Also, I've avoided Sigma after I read several places that the motors chew up the insides of the Sony alphas. And finally - I'm guessing you can't get standard screw fit filters for fisheyes - would have to be a cokin style adapter with slide filters right? Thanks again

[OsmosisStudios]

A few things:
There are 2 kinds of fisheye: Rectangular (or full-frame) and Circular. Rectangular fisheye lenses produce an image that goes right to the edges, giving you the traditional fisheye look. A circular fisheye creates a circular image inside the rectangle of the photo leavin you with black edges and corners.

The 16mm fisheye you've found is a rectangular fisheye, intended for the full-frame sensor (or film). There *are* rectangular fisheyes designed for the APS-C format as well. Even on your body, though, you WILL see the fisheye effect, but you wont see as wide a view.

I've never heard of sigma lenses harming Sony Alpha bodies. Dont know where you got that.

Using filters on a fisheye is almost impossible because they see so wide. Even with the Cokin style flat plate filters, you'll likely see the edge of the filter or the mount.

[Biomech]

Thanks for your reply!

I couldn't get your opinions on this could I? Sigma 10mm f2.8 EX DC HSM Fisheye Lens For Sony Digital: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics
That amazon entry is by "Sigma" and states in the title that it works on a Sony. However, that model of the Sigma website only mentions Nikon and Canons : 10mm F2.8 EX DC HSM Fisheye - Fisheye Lenses - SigmaPhoto.com

The other option could be this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-Diagon...0607524&sr=1-4 at 15mm

The effect I am looking for is like so:
http://www.forevervisual.com/galleri...070428_717.jpg
http://www.forevervisual.com/galleri...729_0357-2.jpg

[OsmosisStudios]

THe Sigma page you linked to specifically states that it is available for the Sony/Minolta mount. Looks like a solid contender with good image quality, though it will have somme severe chromatic abberation in the edges/corners wide open.

[inkista]

The Sigma 10 is a diagonal for crop body, so it's probably the one you want. It will autofocus. The Sigma 4.5 is a circular for crop. The Sigma 8 is a circular for full-frame (on a crop you'll get dark corners). The Sigma 15 is a diagonal for full-frame.

However, if you're on a budget, you could give up autofocus and go for the Samyang/Rokinon/Opteka/Vivitar/Bower/Phoenix (and about a dozen other rebrands) crop-body fisheye lens. It's described for some weird reason, variously as an 8mm, 7mm, and 6.5mm, but they're really all the same lens, made by Samyang in Korea, and rebranded. Here in the US, it goes for about $300--half the price of the other fisheyes. It's possibly a better performer than the Sigma. But it's manual focus only.

Amazon.uk has the Opteka version of it for £259 Opteka 6.5mm f/3.5 MF Aspherical Circular Fisheye Lens: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics

With a fisheye, autofocus doesn't mean much. The short focal length gives you a vast DoF, so focusing is pretty easy. If you stop the lens down to f/8, you've pretty much got everything from about six inches in front of the camera to infinity in focus.

[Biomech]

Thank you for the great info! It has really helped.
So to put it to the vote: Sigma or Rebrand (Opteka say)?

[inkista]

Nope. I ain't gonna tell you what to buy. However, you should probably also find out what shooting with a manual focus lens means.

Manual focus lenses are not only non-autofocusing, they also do not change the aperture setting from signals from the camera body (because there are no electronic contacts on the mount). You control the aperture with a ring on the lens. Which means you can only shoot in aperture priority or full manual mode. You'll have empty EXIF fields for focal length and aperture, and you have to use what's called "stop-down" metering, which means the camera will accurately meter, but only if the lens is actually stopped down to the aperture setting you want to use--this will make the viewfinder darker than if you have the lens wide open.

With automatic lenses (like the Sigma), you have wide-open metering. The lens remains at its maximum aperture throughout the composition, metering, and focusing of the shot, and is only stopped down to the setting used when the picture is taken. This keeps the viewfinder as bright as possible.

I use adapted manual focus lenses on my Canons all the time, so I don't find it to be particularly annoying or onerous, but tastes and tolerances vary on this.

[Biomech]

Thank you all, your advise has been invaluable!
I decided to order the Sigma 10mm (with a whole host of other bits), which should arrive tuesday. If I get anything good from it, I'll post it up
Thank you again!

[Niresangwa]

No real advice on this (I'm lucky enough to have a 10-17mm FE zoom in the Pentax line up) but I will say that you will have more fun with this than anything else...

...when I first got it, I thought it might end up being a situational lens, now it sits on my second body permanently. There are surprisingly few people who use these tools regularly (no one else in my market). So nice job going for it and stepping up!

As far as the importance of AF, I can only tell you that a friend opted for the MF FE (under the same thoughts as Inksta mentioned above, and thinking she would save a few hundred bucks) and ended up hating it and never using it, so she upgraded and bought the 10-17. She had used mine, thought having MF would no big deal and she regretted it immediately upon getting it. Doesnt mean much, just anecdotal I guess...

...but neither would I put the quality up against a trusted 3rd party like Sigma, so you probably made the best decision.