10mm Fisheye vs. 10-20mm

[ecp1977]

I have the Sigma 10 -20 mm f/4 – 5.6 and absolutely love it, mostly for the distortion when used at the widest range. It is one of my favorite lenses to use and I typically use it between 10 – 14mm. How would this lens differ from a fisheye like the Sigma 10mm f/2.8 or Nikon 10.5 mm f/2.8. I have been considering letting go of the wide angle and getting a fisheye. Any thoughts as to whether this would be a bad idea. I figure there is enough overlap at the higher end of the range that my 18-55mm could pick up the slack if I wanted to shoot at that range.

Also, what are the differences between circular, diagonal and rectilinear fisheyes, other than the obvious differences in shapes and what are advantages/disadvantages of each.
Thanks

[scootermcq]

I have a 6.5mm fisheye, and the obvious answer is there is more distortion with it than an ultra wide. I have to be very careful as to what I am framing, because things out of the center get very curvey. If I have a post of something, it can almost become a J on the extreme edges of the frame

Look at the one light post on the left of this image, you can see it starting to curve.


Same pier, 20mm

[dannyrich]

Have the 10.5mm fishy. I also have a 10-20 which I use more than the fish.

I wouldn't buy it unless you get one for a steal. Only reason I didn't sell the fish is because I got it when the dollar was 2:1 against Gbp so it was really cheap!

[inkista]

A fisheye, obviously, is going to give you more distortion, but also more wide-angle coverage than a rectilinear. If you're judging by funhouse factor, the fisheye is funnier.

To mitigate distortion, horizon placement is key. The closer the horizon is to the center of the frame, the less distortion will appear. The closer the horizon is to a frame edge, well....


Canon XT/350D and Sigma 8mm f/3.5 EX DG circular fisheye

Originally Posted by ecp1977

...Also, what are the differences between circular, diagonal and rectilinear fisheyes, other than the obvious differences in shapes and what are advantages/disadvantages of each.

A circular fisheye gives you a wider angle of view than a diagonal, but only gives you a circular image within the frame, so you aren't using your entire sensor:


5DMkII, Sigma 8mm f/3.5 EX DG circular fisheye [the same lens as above, only on full-frame]

A lot of my 5Dii's sensor goes to waste when I put the Sigma 8 on it. But, I'm getting a full 180° coverage from side to side (yes, I have gotten shots with my hat brim and my shoes in them). When I put the Sigma 8 on a crop body camera, like the XT, it becomes closer to diagonal coverage, but I have cut down the field of view.

So, a diagonal will give you better resolution (no cropping to cover the frame), but less distortion and less scene coverage than a circular.

I use the circular because I shoot spherical panos and prefer stitching a smaller number of shots to cover the entire sphere. I can get away with four handheld shots sometimes with this lens. If I were using the Sigma 10mm, I'd have to do eight shots: six around, and a zenith and nadir (straight up and straight down) to cover a scene, and that would necessitate using a tripod and panohead, rather than going handheld. Most people don't have this issue to consider.

[OsmosisStudios]

I've tried Nikon's 10.5mm fisheye, and own their 10-24mm wide-angle.

The fisheye makes me giggle. Every time. It's a FUN lens.
The wide-angle makes me giggle. Every time. Its a USEFUL lens.

of course, this is in respect to what I do.

I know a friend that has nothing wider than 24mm (on DX; so 36mm) but carries a 10.5mm fisheye around. She shoots weddings and gets great shots from it. But it can be a royal pain to deal with if you're not used to A) working with a prime an B) working with a prime that wide.

To her, the fisheye is a FUN and USEFUL lens. To me it's just fun.

I also have another friend who has a 10.5 fisheye that she got for a song, but, after trying a 10-24 wide-angle, would prefer the zoom over the fisheye because she's a photojournalist, where the FUN of a fisheye is of little use.

[ecp1977]

A little late but thanks to everyone who replied. The fisheye definetly looks fun and I think it would be a practicle lens for taking to the skatepark. Also, I would eventually like to buy an underwater housing unit so I could take photos of my friends surfing from out in the water. Thanks again.