New 8-15 mm vs Used 15 mm Fisheye

Started Dec 23, 2012 | Discussions thread
proudfather
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,457
Like?
Re: New 8-15 mm vs Used 15 mm Fisheye
In reply to Kevin Jorgensen, Dec 24, 2012

Yeah, like most, I probably wouldn't shoot fisheye routinely.  For landscapes I typically shoot between 17-21 mm with a 17-40 mm lens.  I also have a Rokonon 14 mm which I sometimes use.  The fisheye probably wouldn't get much use as a landscape lens, however.  It'd be more for special effects and creativity.  I think $1300 is a bit much for any fisheye since they're used so infrequently.  But It's hard to find new Canon lenses any cheaper than that these days.  My only concern with the used 15 mm is the need for repair.   That's exaggerated.  But it's a minor concern.

Thanks for the link!

-proudfather

Kevin Jorgensen wrote:

I looked at the 8-15 and decided to go with the 15f2.8 fisheye, which I'll point out jumped to $850 over my way when it was discontinued. It wasn't the money difference it was the fact that I don't use my 16-35f2.8L II a lot at its widest on my 5DM2 and only do fisheye shots ocassionally. Unless you're planning to do a lot of fisheye shots I'd recommend the 15, if you don't have an ultrawide then the 8-15 may be better. Either way they're both good lenses. Have a look at what PT lens can do to a fisheye shot.

http://www.rokkorfiles.com/funwithfisheyes.htm

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow