16mm Fisheye as Wide-Angle lens

SebastianJ

Senior Member
Messages
1,893
Reaction score
0
Location
Berlin, DE
I thought this might be interesting if someone´s looking for a wide angle prime and find Nikons 14mm way too expensive (2.149,00 € as stated on the Nikon Website).

The 16mm Fisheye on a DSLR could be an alternative. I didnt have the chance to take some nice shot so far, but heres a sample how you can easily get rid of the fisheye distortion. Its a few clicks with PTlens (Freeware) in Photoshop. You can save your settings and it will be ONE click from then on.

Sample picture (dont care about the subject...)



Looks cooler IMHO than the 20mm 2.8 I have used before.

Cheers

--

 
Thanks for posting Sebastian.
I have had the 16mm fisheye for several years. I don't use it much though.
I might have to experiment with this freeware.
I am curious how much of the image is lost after correction, if any.
I also have the 20mm 2.8 (just got it last week), so I'll do some playing today.

Cheers,
Bryan...
 
»and he does the same conclusion«

I´ve just read the review you posted. Thats indeed funny. Proves at least that I am not crazy, trying to use the 16mm as a No-Fisheye... ;)

PTlens is a well know software for correction though.

--

 
Did you use a pre-existing profile for the 16mm fisheye in PTLens? I don't see one.
Or, did you create your own profile?

Thanks,
Bryan...
 
All the tests were done after correction with PTlens.

I didnt do the 20mm focal lenght because I was more curious about the 16mm-17mm difference.
wow, thats a lot of difference for 1mm of FL, how much would it be
compared to 20mm? Anyway, how you do this test, after the
correction or before?

greetings.
Nicolas
--
yo sólo pasaba por aqui ...
http://www.photoblog.be/metalosaurio
 
The profile for the 16mm is in the text file that comes with PTlens. It's just "voided out". You just have to open the text file and remove some of the additional characters surrounding the 16mm fisheye profile. Then save the text file and it will appear in the plugin.

PTLens doesnt have the 16mm listed originally because it recommends that the user use the "fisheye correction" function instead.

For my tests above, I used the regular fisheye method without using the profile. So it was pretty much by using my eye to judge.
Did you use a pre-existing profile for the 16mm fisheye in PTLens?
I don't see one.
Or, did you create your own profile?

Thanks,
Bryan...
 
Whoops...I didnt see the "To Sebastian" part.
But I hope this answers your question though!
 
»how much would it be compared to 20mm?«

Metalo... I wanted to know myself and tested it right now in my office. Manfrotto tripod, unchanged position. Here is the results.

The picture contains 3 frames (16mm Original, 16mm corrected and 20mm Original). The difference in width is HUGE.



Note that the 20mm Original has slight distortions too.

--

 
It will be interesting to see how the 16mm corrected holds up to large prints. I'm curious how the PTLens software degrades the image.

Thanks again Sebastian!
 
It's lot of diference, I was considering the 12-24 when I decide to go wider but the 16mm looks like a perfectly good choice now, besides, it's 2.8..., how about IQ, how good it's after the correction? what's the size of the image after PTLens (cause it doesn't stay in 6MP, does it?)?

greetings.
Nicolas
--
yo sólo pasaba por aqui ...
http://www.photoblog.be/metalosaurio
 
»what's the size of the image after PTLens (cause it doesn't stay in 6MP, does it?)?«

You see, its slightly smaller. You cant count it in MP. Technical resolution remains the same after correction.

--

 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top