Anyone own the Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by kidkaprie, May 10, 2008.

  1. kidkaprie macrumors member

    kidkaprie

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    #1
    I'm thinking about purchasing this and am a bit concerned. Ive read that this lens doesn't take filters on the front because of the shape of the lens. Now i haven't gotten into shooting with different filters yet, and only have a UV one on my current lens simply to protect the glass.

    Is there anything that i can put on the front of the fisheye to protect the glass or am i out of luck?

    edit: I should also mention that I am taking a trip to Israel and would like to bring this lens with me. (Sand, desert air, etc. on the front of the lens is the main reason for my concern)
     
  2. kidkaprie thread starter macrumors member

    kidkaprie

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
  3. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #3
    I think you've got your answer. :D

    That Tokina 10-17mm variable focal-length fisheye looks interesting, BTW...
     
  4. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #4
    The lens cap will do a great job of protecting the front element.

    Now with digital I don't think filters are used so much because you can adjust the white balance in the camera or in post. With film you'd do that with a filter Some times a polerising filter is used but with a fish eye it would not work, You'd get an uneven sky.

    I doubt a filter could be made to fit over the front of any fish eye lens.
     
  5. gwuMACaddict macrumors 68040

    gwuMACaddict

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    washington dc
    #5
    I shoot with a buddy who owns it. It's a fun lens. We don't use a filter, not sure if there is one that fits it.

    Seems to be a bit of a slow focuser.
     
  6. Clix Pix macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #6
    I own it and indeed there is no way to place a filter over that lens or over the 16mm fisheye, either.... Ditto for Nikon's new 14-24mm lens as well.
     
  7. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #7
    I agree but "no way" is too strong of a statment.

    This is the only thing that I've ever seen that will fit over the Nikon 10.5mm fisheye and allow you to shoot through it. It does protect the lens from hostile environments. And yes I've seen one of these in use. Note the price, not cheap

    http://tinyurl.com/5dh6gf

    What this thing is: It's an optically corect "fish bowel" that is designed so that when placed the corect distance from the lens the light will travel perpendicular through the glass and not distort the image. I does act as an optical element and has a great effect on the focus distance but if used in AF mode the photographer would not notice unless you were to look at the distance scale and notice it said (about) "1 meter" when the subject much farther away.
     
  8. Consultant macrumors G5

    Consultant

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    #8
    Fish eye is a novelty lens. You won't be shooting with it too much. If you need it for a project, rent it.

    Why do people go through the trouble of doing tiny url when they can post the full URL on MR?

    Many people do not click on URLs with hidden desinations, since the hidden URLS could point to anywhere.
     
  9. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #9
    Tested the full URL. Line wrap killed it. Not everyone uses the same browsers.

    The fisheye is a specialty lens, no doubt but I've been noticing lots of fisheye shots in publications I get and NOT photography related ones. The last one was a shot if this guy breifing a small group and it was cropped to a tall vertical. I another one shot inside a night club. This "in your face" wide angle look is gettng popular in some print media. I think because it is an attention grabber. As long as the subject lacks any long straight lines a fisheye can look almost natural. From a pro's point of view, the reason to own a fish eye is because you've seen fish eye shots sell and you think the lens will make you some money. As an amature your only justification for owning any SLR equipment at all is you have the money and like toys.
     
  10. Clix Pix macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #10
    I am one who will not click on any "tiny URL" link. If someone doesn't provide the full link then I'm not interested.

    ChrisA wrote:
    >What this thing is: It's an optically corect "fish bowel"

    Do you mean "fish bowl?" There IS a difference!!

    Yes, the fisheye is a novelty, fun lens with which one can produce interesting results. Just as with anything else, though, overuse of it will quickly ruin the novelty and impact.
     
  11. Adrien Baker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    Bakersfield, Ca.
    #11
    I own a 10.5, but I've rarely used it. It's a neat little lens, but it's a 'special purpose' or 'novelty' lens like others have mentioned. You can definitely come up with some cool things to use it for--however, I'd suggest you reconsider your needs and maybe invest the money somewhere else.

    On another note, the desire to "protect" the front element is a bit naive. Usually hoods do this better then anything else. Filters have many uses, and I suppose under certain situations protection "could" be one of them.

    I could reiterate what's said on this topic by pretty much every seasoned forum dweller--or you could read Thom's spiel on it, and probably learn something, too.

    http://bythom.com/filters.htm

    Adrien
     
  12. Paul Turpin macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    Bellingham, WA
    #12
    I own this lens and use it nearly everytime I shoot. But - I also switch lenses a lot. I am usually taking flashy "rock and roll" pics and I think the distortion often matches the feeling of excitement or just adds something special to the shot. Maybe its not for everyone - but for what I shoot - I think it is great.

    For protection - just keep the lens cap handy and put it back on constantly. Unlike some of the third party manufacturers - most of the Nikon lenses are made very professionally. I think they are pretty tough and take a pretty good beating before getting damaged.

    Here are some examples if you want . . .
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulturpin/2374305386/in/set-72157604311489946/
    [​IMG]
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulturpin/2399003099/in/set-72157604449128267/
    [​IMG]
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulturpin/2397474585/in/set-72157604449128267/
    [​IMG]
     
  13. juanm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Location:
    Fury 161
    #13
    I love it.

    I use it a lot. Mostly for underwater photography, VR photography, and to get ultra wide angles. Nikon Capture can "defish it", giving the field of view of a rectilinear 14mm (or so, on 35mm equiv.), for when the 12-24 isn't wide enough. Another way to defish it is the Hemi plugin, available for Photoshop, and, soon, Aperture (I'll be buying the Aperture version the very same day it's released). It has a very limited use as a simple lens, as is, but proves to be very useful for many other things.
     
  14. uMac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #14
    No fount filter, handle with extreme care. You can get back filters if you want to do effects.
     
  15. kidkaprie thread starter macrumors member

    kidkaprie

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    #15
    I dont think anyone has actually read what i said....lol.

    i know filters can be used for effects and such, but what I use them for currently is protection of the front glass. I have a UV filter on my 18-135 lens so that i dont get dust, dirt, etc on the actual glass of the lens. and from what ive been reading, it doesnt seem like i can get one for the fisheye.

    Adrien, you said "the desire to "protect" the front element is a bit naive. Usually hoods do this better then anything else". I did mention that I was going to be in the middle east, where I have been told, is quite sandy...i dont know this, im assuming. /END_SARCASIM. I wanted a filter to protect the lens from sand, but i guess im s.o.l.

    as for people who say it's a novelty lens and i should rent one....yea it is a novelty lens. it does produce a cool effect and can be overdone, but i want it to get some really interesting shots, as well as the 180 degree field of view. its a good lens, in my opinion. i plan on using it alot.

    thanks for your help everyone!!
     
  16. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #16
    I would think that even if it were possible to put a protective filter on the front of a fish-eye lens, it'd be a no-no. It just seems like a recipe for significant degradation of the optical quality.
     
  17. eddx macrumors regular

    eddx

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #17
    I think you should look at the Sigma 10-20mm - it isn't fisheye but it is super wide and unbelievable on the Nikon D80.

    I got my Sigma last week after looking at the Nikon 10mm and being disspointed. Shooting city scapes and interior apartments in the last week I have already taken 1,500 shoots on this new lens and I am sure it has already paid for itself with the extra work I am getting from the images that it allows me to take.

    Also, you can buy a 77mm Hoya thin UV filter to protect the glass from dust and sand. Check it out!
     
  18. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #18
    I think you are right about the fish eye. If your artistic vistion says "curved lines" then buying a 10-20mm zoom or whatever is not going to be the same. If it helps I've never seen a lens damaged by blowing dust in a way that a filter could have prevented. What happens is the dust gets inside the lens via the gaps between the moving parts. A filter would not help.

    About the only thing that can help with dust and dirt is a camera housing but these are very expensive and not practical. Better to just pay for a cleaning as required.

    Filters are needed to protect from some things. For example blowing saltwater spray. About the only way to get that crud off glass is to soak the glass in fresh water over night or use an ultrasonic cleaner.
     
  19. Digital Skunk macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #19
    No you can't get any protection for it. No filters for lens protection isn't naive, they are very practical and worth the cash. Even if you are being naive I'd rather be safe then sorry, and would rather spend the $20-$30 now for a filter then have to send the entire lens in for a scratched element.

    The Fisheye is VERY novelty, and it's only used for that effect and many times (skater videos and photos:rolleyes: ) it's over used. I would say rent one or borrow one if you are only going to use it here and there. The price is just right to own it if you wish though. Since $600 isn't that bad for a piece of glass. The Tokina 10-17 is nice since it's fisheye at 10mm and not fisheye at 17. The sad part about it is the aperture which is variable and pretty much useless at 17mm (f5.6). That destroys any chance of it going in my bag.

    The 10-20 is good, but it's Sigma, and I just got off of a job where I was using it and I have had my fill of their glass. :mad: I used to rep them, but now they are going in the "if you have to" category.
     
  20. Adrien Baker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    Bakersfield, Ca.
    #20

    $20-30 on a filter? Are you joking? Cheap filters do nothing but cause IQ degradation and if you were to spend the money on a filter, you should buy the highest quality one you can come by. It's ridiculous to put a $20 filter on a $1000+ piece of glass. It takes a lot to scratch a front element, let alone break one. Also, a small scratch or multiple small scratches usually won't even cause artifacts or blemishes on images anyway. I've seen many sample images from lenses with scratches on front and rear elements with no noticeable affects. I'm not trying to fight with you, but get real.

    Adrien
     
  21. Adrien Baker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Location:
    Bakersfield, Ca.
    #21
    Your sarcasm is cute, however your puncuation, grammar and diction are not. Anyway, get the lens if you want it--if not, then don't. You've had this idea put in your head about filters and protection or whatever else, so roll with it. As you grow into this hobby you'll soon realize what's hype and what's sensable. There's pro's out there who don't even use lens caps or end caps, let alone filters. Do what you want. :rolleyes:

    Adrien
     
  22. Digital Skunk macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Location:
    In my imagination
    #22
    Why are you so angry? Calm down. If you aren't trying to argue then why post? I never said I would put a cheap filter on a piece of good glass, just that I'd rather have a filter then nothing at all. A simple UV filter shouldn't cost you anything more than $30 for most threads (unless you have to have one that says "Nikon" or "Canon" across the front), and they don't degrade IQ at all.

    As for it being hard to break or scratch a front element.... sure.... it may be hard for some people but once you have dropped just one lens and need it sent away you will wise up and grab a filter.

    I am being very real.
     
  23. Terry222 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    #23
    Hi kidkaprie,

    I just came to this forum via a search engine with the same question, although for some reason you seem to have stirred up too much excitement with some of the less thoughtful members :confused:

    I too have the Nikon D80 and the Nikkor 10.5mm lens. I actually make a living out of 360 degree panoramas with this combination (plus pano head & tripod) but am also not happy with the ease of scratching the lens. There doesn't seem to be any thread on the lens to accept a filter/protector and the actual 2 hood protectors are just a pain in the rear. They cut down your 'full' 180 degree viewing area so more shots are needed to make up the full globe. The more drastic solution would be to 'shave' them off'.

    Regarding using it in a sandy environment as you mentioned, I would really give it a miss unless your super careful. I honestly wouldn't even get it out of the case with the $700 price tag and no doubt getting stung with a repair bill.

    For your intended use, I would go with the widest angle you can get...... THAT ALSO ACCEPTS A FILTER/PROTECTOR and you could also apply some clear wrapping to the camera body and lens in extreme conditions.

    Hope your trip goes well (although you may have already left) and fill up those memory cards ;)

    Terry
     
  24. reformed89 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    #24
    what you can do with the 10.5 fisheye is hook it up to the nikon capture software and take out any distortions in the picture. it's awesome. a buddy of mine has it on his d200 and also takes the 360 panorama shots.
     
  25. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #25
    What risk is there from dust? I don't get it. People, you paid for these lenses. Use them well, and use them often.

    A filter won't protect your lens from impact or scratches. It's very difficult to scratch a lens unless you do so with something like a nail. Have any nail incidences lately with your DSLR? Anyone? Hello?

    If your lens gets dirty, clean it off. If there's dust, use a blower and blow it off. That's it. I wonder what all those photographers with their $10000 lenses to protect their 500 mm lenses? After all, they don't use filters with those lenses, and they're expensive. They're likely doomed. ;)

    Not true. Buy multi-coated UV lenses if you're going to buy one.


    A filter won't protect your lens if you drop it, or bang it very hard. If you bang into anything that shatters your UV filter, you'll definitely hit the front lens element as well.

    You're joking, right? That's just ignorant.
     

Share This Page