A semifisheye for A7

[Dr hatem Ayman]

Any ideas. I dont mind MF or manual exposure

 

[JurijTurnsek]

Samyang 14mm

 

[ProfHankD]

Any ideas. I dont mind MF or manual exposure

Most semi-fisheye adapters are basically terrible optics: not true fisheye projections, but just moderate wide-angle converters with terrible barrel distortion. I have a bunch and I don't use them. Well, I guess I've occasionally used one on a camcorder or a webcam.... Then again, I've used more $4 door peepholes on webcams. ;-)

The old Spiratone/Accura fisheye adapter -- the one that screws into the front of a lens but has its own aperture control -- is actually not bad stopped down somewhat on an appropriate lens. It is a little touchy about what lens is appropriate. Basically, it was designed to work on a fast 50 to give a circular fisheye image on full frame. I would not spend as much on this as I did when I got mine, but I've seen these go for under $40 on eBay, and for that price it would be one of the better choices. Just be careful that it has the right adapter to screw-into the filter ring on the base lens you want to use it with, because the adapters are not standard rings.

Probably the best full-frame (as opposed to circle in the middle of the frame) fisheye for an A7/A7R would be one of the old 15-17mm fisheyes. My understanding is that IQ of some of those is excellent, but they can be hard to find for less than $200, which is a little steep for such a special-purpose lens. I haven't tried one of those since the 1970s when the 16mm Minolta was really pricey, but it was quite impressive on film back then.

There also are modern high-end fisheye converters that produce very good IQ and work well with lots of base lenses. The 185-degree Raynox DCR-CF185PRO in particular really delivers. However, it cost me about $350 new and is heavy enough to be scary screwed-into the front of most lenses -- heavy enough to potentially strip autofocus drive gears, etc.

 

[andrewlee]

Any ideas. I dont mind MF or manual exposure

Most semi-fisheye adapters are basically terrible optics: not true fisheye projections, but just moderate wide-angle converters with terrible barrel distortion. I have a bunch and I don't use them. Well, I guess I've occasionally used one on a camcorder or a webcam.... Then again, I've used more $4 door peepholes on webcams. ;-)

The old Spiratone/Accura fisheye adapter -- the one that screws into the front of a lens but has its own aperture control -- is actually not bad stopped down somewhat on an appropriate lens. It is a little touchy about what lens is appropriate. Basically, it was designed to work on a fast 50 to give a circular fisheye image on full frame. I would not spend as much on this as I did when I got mine, but I've seen these go for under $40 on eBay, and for that price it would be one of the better choices. Just be careful that it has the right adapter to screw-into the filter ring on the base lens you want to use it with, because the adapters are not standard rings.

Probably the best full-frame (as opposed to circle in the middle of the frame) fisheye for an A7/A7R would be one of the old 15-17mm fisheyes. My understanding is that IQ of some of those is excellent, but they can be hard to find for less than $200, which is a little steep for such a special-purpose lens. I haven't tried one of those since the 1970s when the 16mm Minolta was really pricey, but it was quite impressive on film back then.

There also are modern high-end fisheye converters that produce very good IQ and work well with lots of base lenses. The 185-degree Raynox DCR-CF185PRO in particular really delivers. However, it cost me about $350 new and is heavy enough to be scary screwed-into the front of most lenses -- heavy enough to potentially strip autofocus drive gears, etc.

I recently obtained a well-worn copy of the legendary 16mm Rokkor fisheye and can whole-heartedly recommend it as a fantastic match for the A7.

Full-frame coverage is great with no perceivable vignetting. Contrast and sharpness (edge-to-edge) is downright stunning! Some minor PF can be found on edges of backlight subjects. With the help of ImageTrends Fisheye Hemi, this is now my favourite lens on the A7

I'm still marvelling at how fortunate I am to get hold of this gem (considering their high prices).

Unfortunately, due to the firewall policy in my office, I am unable to upload or link any sample images Drop me a PM and I'll be glad to share a sample.

 

[parallaxproblem]

Any ideas. I dont mind MF or manual exposure

Zenitar 16 fisheye lens worked well on my Pentax, not sure how good they would be the A7

You would need to use this lens with an adaptor as I don't think they make an E-mount version

 

[havanna60]

Probably the best full-frame (as opposed to circle in the middle of the frame) fisheye for an A7/A7R would be one of the old 15-17mm fisheyes. My understanding is that IQ of some of those is excellent, but they can be hard to find for less than $200, which is a little steep for such a special-purpose lens. I haven't tried one of those since the 1970s when the 16mm Minolta was really pricey, but it was quite impressive on film back then.

Hi Prof,

I'd be very happy, if I could buy a decent Minolta MD 16mm fisheye lens for $200. In my region (ebay.de) a clean MD 16mm/f2.8 goes for 550 euros (USD $760 :-O ).

With the arrival of the A7, the guys owning nice collections of old lenses are becoming rich.

The myth of "buy-a-decent-old-lens-dirt-cheap" is over :-(

Miki

 

[darkdirtydwarf]

I'd be very happy, if I could buy a decent Minolta MD 16mm fisheye lens for $200. In my region (ebay.de) a clean MD 16mm/f2.8 goes for 550 euros (USD $760 :-O ).

With the arrival of the A7, the guys owning nice collections of old lenses are becoming rich.

The myth of "buy-a-decent-old-lens-dirt-cheap" is over :-(

It has never been true. The prices just got worse

I mean, I don'\t remember finding a nice MD 58mm 1.2 for less than 350 Euro since years.

Same goes for the 16 mm, which is basically the only MD/MC lens I don't have due to the price.

The only good deal I've done was a mint AR 57 mm 1.2 for 50 euro, which sells for about 300

 

[anaksatawo]

Any ideas. I dont mind MF or manual exposure

i, too, am looking for a fisheye to pair with the A7. i am looking at the samyang 8/3.5 adapted from canon. would that work? its a fairly large combo though.

 

[dazedproductions]

Sigma also do a great 15mm f2.8 fish. Probably more expensive than samyang and it's an AF lens so handling probably worse but a decent option if you run into one cheap on the bay.

 

[ProfHankD]

I'd be very happy, if I could buy a decent Minolta MD 16mm fisheye lens for $200. In my region (ebay.de) a clean MD 16mm/f2.8 goes for 550 euros (USD $760 :-O ).

With the arrival of the A7, the guys owning nice collections of old lenses are becoming rich.

The myth of "buy-a-decent-old-lens-dirt-cheap" is over :-(

It has never been true. The prices just got worse

I mean, I don'\t remember finding a nice MD 58mm 1.2 for less than 350 Euro since years.

Same goes for the 16 mm, which is basically the only MD/MC lens I don't have due to the price.

The only good deal I've done was a mint AR 57 mm 1.2 for 50 euro, which sells for about 300

Sadly, you're right: these lenses have gotten much more consistently expensive.

I have had several opportunities over the last few years to purchase the 16mm f/2.8 MC for around $200, but didn't see the point for my APS-C NEX. Well, I see the point now and I don't see it much below $350. :-(

Similarly, I've had various opportunities to get 58mm f/1.2 Rokkors for between $250 and $350. However, I was able to get a pristine Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 for around $200, and really didn't think it made sense to pay so much for another f/1.2 fast 50. I actually don't regret that decision as much as the 16mm fisheye, but still....

 

[darkdirtydwarf]

I have had several opportunities over the last few years to purchase the 16mm f/2.8 MC for around $200, but didn't see the point for my APS-C NEX.

Same here, though for $200 I might have still bought it for my XD7 (here in Europe I've never seen it for such a low price!).

 

[Dr hatem Ayman]

Well thanx for all the answers but I dont want an adapter and I dont want a full fisheye for the a7 but a semi fisheye. Does the samsung give semifisheye images or full circles ?

 

[wb2trf]

I have just posted one of these for sale in the For Sale forum, if anyone is interested:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52730504

 

[ProfHankD]

Well thanx for all the answers but I dont want an adapter and I dont want a full fisheye for the a7 but a semi fisheye. Does the samsung give semifisheye images or full circles ?

The 16mm full-frame fisheyes (e.g., Minolta 16mm f/2.8 MC) give a rectangular image that is 180 degrees corner to corner on a full-frame sensor. That's what you want, right?

I don't think you know what a "semi fisheye" really is and very much doubt you want one. A "semi fisheye" is the marketing name for any highly barrel-distorting front-mounted wide-angle adapter. You can get them on eBay brand new for quite cheap. They are optically trash.

 

[PaulR]

I got very lucky and picked up a near mint Minolta MD 16mm Fisheye on eBay as part of a package of lenses for about $120 after allocating a small portion of the purchase price to the other two lenses. I haven't tested it on my A7R yet but the lens appears to be in essentially mint condition. If you want it make me an offer LOL.

Hi Prof,

I'd be very happy, if I could buy a decent Minolta MD 16mm fisheye lens for $200. In my region (ebay.de) a clean MD 16mm/f2.8 goes for 550 euros (USD $760 :-O ).

With the arrival of the A7, the guys owning nice collections of old lenses are becoming rich.

The myth of "buy-a-decent-old-lens-dirt-cheap" is over :-(

Miki

 

[Dr hatem Ayman]

This is the effect I am looking for

Google Workspace Updates: New community features for Google Chat and an update on Currents

plus.google.com

I shot those with the nex-6 and the fisheye adapter attached to the 16 mm lens. Unfortunately when I sold the Nex-6 they had to go with the camera. I am down to 2 lenses according to your responses

1. The Sigma 15 mm ( which is already available here in Cairo)

2. Samyang 14 mm

Which of these lesnes would give me this kind of distortion in the periphery ??

Hatem A Tawfik, MD

Cairo, Egypt

 

[Dr hatem Ayman]

Any final word on which to choose ?

 

[EinsteinsGhost]

Any final word on which to choose ?

Samyang 14 is a rectilinear lens. For FF fisheye, Sigma 15 or Minolta/Sony 16 would be good choices.

You could have kept the 16+ fisheye conversion lens too and used on A7 in crop mode. Something you can also do with a Samyang/Rokinon 8mm f/2.8 UMC E (E-mount lens). Samyang/Rokinon/Vivitar/Bower(etc) 8/3.5 is older and larger version of the same and designed for larger bodies (DSLR).

 

[Dr hatem Ayman]

Thanx for the 8mm/f2.8 tip/ Here is an interesting review. I think I will buy this one. I like the fisheye effect contrary to the majority, it makes you fell photography is art

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50823245

 

[ProfHankD]

Thanx for the 8mm/f2.8 tip/ Here is an interesting review. I think I will buy this one. I like the fisheye effect contrary to the majority, it makes you fell photography is art

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50823245

Are you reading the posts here?

On an APS-C NEX, such as the NEX-7, that 8mm is a "rectangular" fisheye. On an FF A7, that 8mm would give a circle (assuming the shade doesn't vignette) unless you let it automatically crop down to a 10MP APS-C portion of the FF sensor (which the A7 can do automatically). If you want that look using all 24M pixels on the A7's FF sensor, you want a fisheye in the 15-17mm range -- as we discussed above.