Lss
Well-known
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Which Fisheye among the discussed ones?
I had tested one of the (full-frame) f/3.5 ones, in Nikon mount, back when they had no native EVIL ones yet. My test shots on the NEX had some CA in the corners, but nothing that couldn't be fixed in software. Overall ok, but not noticeably better than that old Soligor Fisheye converter I already had around (and which I bought along with a Canon T70 and some FD lenses for 10€ in all). At the price, that makes it too hard to justify as a purchase. As a bonus, it covers FF/film - but I had not bought it for that purpose, so back it went.
Going by my WA converter to the Sony 16/2.8 (whose results are no worse than those from the bare lens) and user reports on its fisheye counterpart, the original Sony ECF1 fisheye converter might even beat it in IQ, for less than 1/3 of the price if you already own the 16mm.
Hard to tell how the (apparently APS-C dedicated) new f/2.8 Samyang fares. My gut feeling tells me that it will be good as well, but not worth its money either. The heap of decent converters built ever since the seventies proves that it is trivial to build visually good (sharp, contrasty, low visible error) fisheyes for a few pennies. The high price for vintage professional fisheyes was due to the fact that they have a accurate enough geometric projection for scientific purposes, with near-zero distortion - but I doubt that that Samyang was designed and tested to similar specifications.
Given its looks and the lack of focus, the 12/7.4 probably will just be a modified Soligor/Hanimex style budget price converter with some very simple lens (probably no more than a meniscus) permanently attached to the back - at the prices its European ebay sellers ask (200€) that would be pretty poor value for the money. Given the low speed it might nonetheless have a image quality no worse than the others, but even if, its focal length will not make it particularly useful in a APS-C application - the Sony 16mm+ECF1 combination has 10mm, the others 8mm. 12mm would have a rather limited fisheye effect, unless it creates fake-fisheye distortion rather than a genuine alternate projection...
I had tested one of the (full-frame) f/3.5 ones, in Nikon mount, back when they had no native EVIL ones yet. My test shots on the NEX had some CA in the corners, but nothing that couldn't be fixed in software. Overall ok, but not noticeably better than that old Soligor Fisheye converter I already had around (and which I bought along with a Canon T70 and some FD lenses for 10€ in all). At the price, that makes it too hard to justify as a purchase. As a bonus, it covers FF/film - but I had not bought it for that purpose, so back it went.
Going by my WA converter to the Sony 16/2.8 (whose results are no worse than those from the bare lens) and user reports on its fisheye counterpart, the original Sony ECF1 fisheye converter might even beat it in IQ, for less than 1/3 of the price if you already own the 16mm.
Hard to tell how the (apparently APS-C dedicated) new f/2.8 Samyang fares. My gut feeling tells me that it will be good as well, but not worth its money either. The heap of decent converters built ever since the seventies proves that it is trivial to build visually good (sharp, contrasty, low visible error) fisheyes for a few pennies. The high price for vintage professional fisheyes was due to the fact that they have a accurate enough geometric projection for scientific purposes, with near-zero distortion - but I doubt that that Samyang was designed and tested to similar specifications.
Given its looks and the lack of focus, the 12/7.4 probably will just be a modified Soligor/Hanimex style budget price converter with some very simple lens (probably no more than a meniscus) permanently attached to the back - at the prices its European ebay sellers ask (200€) that would be pretty poor value for the money. Given the low speed it might nonetheless have a image quality no worse than the others, but even if, its focal length will not make it particularly useful in a APS-C application - the Sony 16mm+ECF1 combination has 10mm, the others 8mm. 12mm would have a rather limited fisheye effect, unless it creates fake-fisheye distortion rather than a genuine alternate projection...
Lss
Well-known
Dante Stella is testing a 12/7.4 fixed-aperture fisheye lens in Fuji X mount. He thinks the same lens is available for Sony NEX, and indeed at least three such lenses can be found on eBay. The ones with a picture seem to be the same lens, but there are different brands. It's made in Japan.
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
I don't know that there is a lot of point on a NEX, where the 16 + Sony converter is so cheap, so convenient, and so good. The NEX version is sold under the Gloxy name. My preliminary conclusion is that it is very well corrected for CA on the Fuji and fairly sharp on the Fuji (who knows if this is true on a Sony). It is a pretty solid piece (the barrel is all aluminum with no extension or rotation), and as far as I can tell, it is not a converter hacked to something (screw on converters don't cover APS-c anyway). The front element is almost planar and the exit pupil small, so I'm guessing retrofocus. I am still trying to understand the focusing mechanism, which at that FL should be unnecessary. Stay tuned.
Also, though not a circular image like an 8mm on a 35mm camera, the distortion responds to Photoshop's adaptive lens correction in fisheye mode.
Dante
Also, though not a circular image like an 8mm on a 35mm camera, the distortion responds to Photoshop's adaptive lens correction in fisheye mode.
Dante