federico2 Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 Has anyone tried the cheap Zenitar fisheye 16mm f:2.8 on a nikon F100 or equivalent? Is it worth the 150$ it costs? I'd like to try fisheye photography but haven't got enough money to purchase a nikon fisheye and was wondering whether this russian lens is good enough. I'm a bit suspicious towards russian equipment as the quality control seems to be sometimes really lacking. Thank you very much! Best regards, Federico Sartorio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_lau4 Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 ive seen teh quality of the zenitar, it isn't that good, the corners aren't sharp as they should be, if u can't afford nikon glass, get the sigma fisheye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravi_swamy Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I definitely think it was worth the $130 I paid but it is definitely not a Nikkor lens. At f8 the corners seem sharp enough for me but I have not compared it with the 16mm Nikkor. My problem with the lens is flare when the sun is just out of the frame. <p> Since you have an F100 you could get a used manual focus Nikkor fisheye. That will definitely hold value more than a new Sigma lens and should be around the same price (~450) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john lehman, college alask Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 <p>My experience is the opposite of Andrew's - the quality on mine is excellent. More details (including official and actual resolution) at <a href="http://www.johnandlisa.us/john/zenitar.html"> /www.johnandlisa.us/john/zenitar.html</a></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiyen Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 <p>I got the Zenitar for only $75, and have seen it for closer to $100 here and there (though not on ebay, where it is about $130-$150, I believe). I think it's great - a lot less than the Nikkor or even the Sigma, especially since most people say that fisheye is something that'll wear off sooner rather than later (though I still enjoy using it quite a bit). I haven't had any quality control issues, and it seems quite well built. If you're wanting to merely "try" fisheye, I think it's the best option. <p>I find the corners quite acceptably sharp at f8 or f11 and smaller. Some samples, on a N70: <p><a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/image/31979552">Fort Baker Fisheye</a><BR> <a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/image/24487537">Union Sqare Fisheye</a><br> <a href="http://www.pbase.com/romosoho/image/25115846">Embarcadero Center</a> <p>allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_miao1 Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 For the price of about $150 Zenitar fisheye which is what I paid for and used on my N90s and F4s, it absolutely worth it. I have no comparison with Nikkor fisheye in any chance, but I guess that it's only for fun to me, I wouldn't spend $400+ on a Nikon's for probably a 25% better optical quality. Unless you're a heavy user on fisheye, go for the Nikon's. Couple cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
federico2 Posted September 13, 2004 Author Share Posted September 13, 2004 Thank you all for the nice pieces of advice. I think i'll definitely buy a zenitar sooner or later because fisheye photography intrigues me but i certainly wouldn't use such a lens very often. I'm sure old nikkors are much better, but they still cost more than three times the zenitar. Thank you everybody! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now