http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=3878884041&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT
I was also eyeballing this fisheye lens:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=3880655987&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT
Anyone willing to tell me the advantages of each lens? For instance, what will a fisheye do that a wide angle won't?
Thanks!
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5
-
-
Also considering this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=64321&item=3880407976&rd=1
The Tokina looks to be of better quality, but what do I know. -
If you don't know what a fisheye lens does, it's probably not for you :P. If all you're looking for is a wider angle, get just that, a 'wide angle' attachment. A fisheye attachment such as that will give you a severely distorted image, and will also cut off the edges of the image on almost all lenses.
Tokina is a known good brand, although the quality of these attachments is likely to be equally 'average'.
I'd say just go for the Tokina lenses, if you're curious about what the fisheye lens does, just do a search online for sample photos.
P.S. - you might want to consider getting a lens shade if using these attachments, especially for the wide angle attachment. Otherwise you'll probably have alot of trouble with flare, in particular flare from sunlight. -
Originally Posted by steve2713
Don't believe the hype or go with? Are we talking about standard UV filters or something else? -
Don't believe the hype as you put it, for one. Even if the lenses are fully multicoated as they claim (they're likely only single coated in reality, at best), the more lens surfaces you introduce (lens elements) the more flare and ghosting problems you're going to have. I just mention it as a precaution, especially when using the wide angle attachment, so you don't get images with poor contrast, etc. If you can find a fitting lens shade, it'll probably only cost maybe $10 for such a small lens shade.
Adding any filter in addition will create even more flare and ghosting issues, cheap filters are often not coated at all and often create loss of contrast, without people even realizing it when they're using them (such as leaving a cheap UV filter on at ALL times).
Similar Threads
-
high bitrate h.264 looks like junk???
By RadicalxEdward in forum Video ConversionReplies: 14Last Post: 12th Jan 2008, 20:38 -
zipped/RARed S.U.P.E.R. ? don't like installing junk
By spyonmenot in forum Video ConversionReplies: 2Last Post: 2nd Jan 2008, 08:56 -
Junk chunk size calculation
By maestro777 in forum ProgrammingReplies: 8Last Post: 1st Jul 2007, 05:16 -
itunes junk mail
By wulf109 in forum ComputerReplies: 8Last Post: 6th Jun 2007, 07:31