# Wide Angle vs. Fisheye Lens...?



## Audyn (Dec 3, 2006)

hey i was wondering what type of lens was use to take this photo by Glen E. Friedman:

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h91/Audin/Dogbowl/TONYALVA_DOGBOWL_1stAIR_GEF.jpg


because i was thinking about getting a wide angle lens, but i've always wanted a fisheye lens (however, i don't like how the fisheye has that annoying border around the image--is there anyway to get rid of that?)
what's better?


----------



## fmw (Dec 4, 2006)

That image was made with a full frame fisheye lens.  The border was added by the photographer, not the lens.


----------



## darich (Dec 4, 2006)

I'm impressed that there's no vignetting at the corners.
My 24-70mm lens shows vignetting at the 24mm end on my 5D although I'm not sure if the polarizer is the cause or the lens.


----------



## JIP (Dec 4, 2006)

If you are getting vggnetting with a 24 mm lens you are doing something wrong.  You either have the wrong lens hood on or something is bad with your filter.  Vignetting especislly with a digital should not start until extreme wide angle lenses if at all.  Oh yeah and I agree that picture was taken with a fish-eye lens at least 17mm fo a 35mm camera if not lower.


----------



## theRossatron (Dec 4, 2006)

JIP said:
			
		

> If you are getting vggnetting with a 24 mm lens you are doing something wrong. You either have the wrong lens hood on or something is bad with your filter. Vignetting especislly with a digital should not start until extreme wide angle lenses if at all. Oh yeah and I agree that picture was taken with a fish-eye lens at least 17mm fo a 35mm camera if not lower.


 
5D is full frame though no?


----------



## Philip Weir (Dec 5, 2006)

I wouldn't be sure your example was done with a fisheye. I use a 10.5 lens on my nikon and don't get any cut off.  If I can find an example, I'll post it later.
www.philipweirphotography.com


----------



## Joepo (Dec 5, 2006)

Thats an awesome pic. Tony alva, dogtown, good stuff.


----------



## fmw (Dec 6, 2006)

Philip Weir said:
			
		

> I wouldn't be sure your example was done with a fisheye. I use a 10.5 lens on my nikon and don't get any cut off. If I can find an example, I'll post it later.
> www.philipweirphotography.com


 
What do you mean by cut off?


----------



## Jeff Canes (Dec 6, 2006)

I have both a circular and full frame Sigma fisheyes. The circular is 8mm for Canon EF mount and full 14mm Canon FD. Personally the 14mm is my favorite of the two but I do not ether a lot. i have sample of the 8mm use the link in my signature


----------



## hammy (Dec 6, 2006)

It is certainly a fisheye. Quote from an interview with Friedman: "And all I had to know in 1975 was what a fisheye lens was because that's what I wanted to use. That was the cool thing for skateboarding." 


Full frame fisheye. I'd guess 15mm or so.


----------



## Philip Weir (Dec 6, 2006)

fmw said:
			
		

> What do you mean by cut off?



Maybe it's an Australian expression. I mean the darkening of the edges of the image that can be caused by a lens hood not being wide enough to cover the angle of the lens. I have a cheap fisheye which I have used on my Hasselblad and it gives me "cut off"  or it gives me a round image on the film and cuts of drastically on the edges.  Evidently the initial shot posted was on a fisheye, my mistake. I assumed it could have been a 10.5mm lens based on the images below.






Shot on a 24mm




Shot on a 10.5mm


----------



## fmw (Dec 6, 2006)

Ah.  In the U.S. we use "vignette," the French word.  I couldn't tell you why.  Putting a filter or a lens hood on a fisheye wouldn't work.  That's for sure.  They have a tiny little bit of hood built in but adding to it would certainly cause cut off.  Here's an architectural shot I made recently with my 10.5


----------



## Philip Weir (Dec 6, 2006)

Nice shot FMW.  The 10.5 is a great lens in the roght circumstances.
Philip.


----------



## darich (Dec 7, 2006)

theRossatron said:
			
		

> 5D is full frame though no?



Yes it is full frame so my 24mm is actually 24mm. No crop factor to take into account.
My polarizer (and ND filter) are standard ie not slim line, but even without a filter i can see a hint of vignetting on certain images.
Not enough to bother me but i can see it.

Out of interest does anyone know at which focal length vignetting will start to appear??


----------



## Alex_B (Dec 7, 2006)

edited away


----------



## Alex_B (Dec 7, 2006)

darich said:
			
		

> Yes it is full frame so my 24mm is actually 24mm. No crop factor to take into account.
> My polarizer (and ND filter) are standard ie not slim line, but even without a filter i can see a hint of vignetting on certain images.
> Not enough to bother me but i can see it.
> 
> Out of interest does anyone know at which focal length vignetting will start to appear??



i use a slim polarizer on my full frame body only.

if you get vignetting or not does not simply depend on the focal length, but also on the built of the lens. And it depends on your aperture.

even at 17mm on full frame I can get rid of most vignetting if I just close the aperture a bit.

as i understand, there are two reasons of vignetting, one is thatsomething shades off part of the light which comes at the outermost angles, might be a lens hood, a filter, ot part of the lens barrel/filter mount itself. This sort of vignetting is often the most pronounced, and can be easily reduced by using small apertures.

the other type of vignetting results from the light at the edges of the image  hitting the film or the sensor at a much shallower angle, especially if you use ultra wide angle lenses. as you then have less intensity per area unit on the sensor or film, it will appear darker than in the centre of the image. sensors are even a bit more touchy as their sensitvity itself depends on the angle... which then pronounces the effect even more than on film.


----------

