Nikon 16mm fisheye still decent?

<p>I know this is a lens that hasn't' been updated yet a ~1999 model isn't it. How does it fare with modern dSLRs? Cheers. </p>

<p>Fisheye lenses are obviously different from more conventional lenses that are designed to render straight lines straight, but taking that in consideration they can perform quite well. I have used my 16 less then my other lenses but when I want that special look it does a good job. Mine gives good center performance at most all f stops but the edges are best at f8. A few years ago I shot an Italian Cathedral interior with the lens on my 24 meg D3x and later an 8x12 foot print was made for the lobby of a local business. I have received a number of compliments on the image and based on that would not hesitate to recommend the lens.</p>

I use my 16 mm f/2.8 on a D610 and love it. It does have noticeable chromatic aberration at the edges but easily

correctable in ACR.

 

I got tired of waiting for an upgrade and bought it a few years ago.

<p>I can assume you are talking about the 16/2.8AF-D. There were also the manual focus 16/2.8 AIS and 16/3.5 AI (also the K version). The 16/2.8 AIS is supposedly the same optically as the AF-D (and that's what I found).<br>

Both the AF-D and AI-S are OK - they never get truly sharp off center on an FX sensor even when stopped down when using today's high MP FX Nikon DSLR bodies (I could easily see this at 12MP on my D700).<br>

The 16/3.5 is way better in off-center sharpness at all apertures while the AFD/AIS is slightly sharper in the center wide open, but this advantage goes away a few stops down - I've owned and/or tried them all. Any of the three versions are extremely flare/ghosting resistant with the AI being better with bright sources in the frame while the AF-D/AIS being better when bright sources are just out of the frame.<br>

Find a 16/3.5 AI'd or native AI (there are some slight differences) and you'll have the best fisheye you can get in Nikon mount.</p>

<p>I like my AF copy for it's low flare. When I first got it for my D800, I read the article on it in Nikon's A Thousand and One Nights and the tests at f8 were identified as the best.</p>

<p>I have looked at some Nikon Fish Eye lenses, but i found the Samyang offerings more atractive , although for me it is an 8mm lens now ( DX) , i found that Smayang is the only manufacterer i could find that makes stereographic Fish eye lenses, and that is what i prefer atn.<br>

The Samyang Fish's are also a bit cheaper while they still ( in my experience) offer a verry good quality Fish Eye, so maybe you would want to find some reviews on the web first..<br>

Background for the diefferent possible projection types for Fish Eye lanses can be found here ( if interrested that is..) : <a href="http://www.liquisearch.com/fisheye_lens/mapping_function">http://www.liquisearch.com/fisheye_lens/mapping_function</a></p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"Nikon 16mm fisheye still decent?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I find the full-frame Nikon 16mm f/2.8 AIS fisheye very useful for scenic shots, interior architectural shots, interiors of vehicles, and airplane cockpits. If desired, with a good editing software program, it is possible to correct the linear distortions formed by this lens.</p>

<p> </div>

<blockquote>

<p>"I know this is a lens that hasn't' been updated yet a ~1999 model isn't it. How does it fare with modern dSLRs?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I also have a Fuji 16mm f/1.4 wide angle lens that provides the same angle of view on a Fuji body but does not produce the fisheye linear distortions. However, the Fuji lens only works on a Fuji APS-C mirrorless body while the Nikon fisheye works on a Nikon DX body (APS-C), a Nikon FX body ("full-frame"), or the Fuji APS-C mirrorless body (with an adapter).</p>

<p> </div>

<p>It also depends if you are using it on a full frame DSLR or a crop sensor DSLR. Full frame you might have some issues in the corners but with a fisheye no one really cares about the corners anyway.</p>

<p>Fisheyes have corners? I love my 10.5 full frame fisheye (DX). You have to be in love with the distortion, but if you like it there is a lot you can do with it. I'll be shooting with it tomorrow!</p>

<p>I first owned a 16/3.5 AI and used it on my D300 as a light weight ~20mm FX FOV lens (with heavy distortion correction) since there was no small 20mm FX FOV equivalent lens for DX at that time.<br>

I then got my D700 and fully utilized the fisheye capabilities. I bought the 16/2.8 AIS and tested a copy of the 16/2.8AF-D against it and found them both inferior to the f/3.5 in regards to off-center sharpness. The AI-S got sold and I now own three copies of the 16/3.5 AI - they all three are almost indistinguishable (sp?) in sharpness, etc. The only thing I found is that these lenses are sensitive to internal dust/haze/etc. which shows up as degraded flare performance. The 16/3.5 K or AI'd does have a slightly different light baffle design internally and thus has slightly less great flare/ghosting than the true AI version.<br>

The 16/3.5 is one of my most used and cherished lenses.</p>

<p>The sigma 15 fisheye is a superior fisheye lens. Samyang/rokinon make a ff fisheye as well but imo its overpeiced and mf online </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Samyang/rokinon make a ff fisheye as well but imo its overpeiced and mf online</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed the Samyang 8mm and 12mm are MF only, but AF is not really importand on a FishEye with a hughe dept of field<br>

Where did you find that the Sigma 8 and 15mm are much better ?<br>

I find mostly a better build and optical quality in Samyang fisheye lenses but opiinions may differi guess..<br>

Andhow"Overpriced"? The Sigma lenses are , here i live. 1.5 times the price of the Samyanglenses, but maybe there is a higheer import tax where you live fot the Samyang lenses ?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The sigma 15 fisheye is a superior fisheye lens. Samyang/rokinon make a ff fisheye as well but imo its overpeiced and mf online</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The one copy of the Sigma 15 that I tried was clearly not that great - perhaps I just got a bad copy.</p>