Jump to content

fisheye for E-500


shyroller

Recommended Posts

Wouldnt any 8mm lens for any of the number of film camera mounts that can be adapted to 4/3s mount work? There are often Russian variants of fisheye lenses which are much cheaper than the original brands. I doubt you even need to focus with a lens that wide so manual focus is not an issue. I think you should be able to get adaptors for just about any popular 35mm SLR mount to 4/3s for $50 or less. So if you just shop around for the cheapest 8mm you can find, you should be able to then buy a working adaptor.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I'd reckon the 8mm Peleng will have pretty much the same angle of view as the the 8mm DZ, so that's not an issue.

 

I use the Peleng with a Nikon mount on my E-300 via a Nikon-->FourThirds adapter. With the original adapter I used the thickness was not quite right (too thin) so the lens focussing scale was out and it's almost impossible to focus using the camera's focussing screen. I have just purchased another adapter which is obviously closer to the correct thickness so I can use the lens focussing scale, just set it to .7m and f8 most of the time.

I'm sure the image quality of the DZ is better but the Peleng is quite good enough for most work. As noted in the review, flare is not well controlled in the Peleng.

 

...Wayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can search for the Peleng 8mm on ebay. There are many sellers who are selling them for almost all mounts. Its a complete manual lens but at 8mm you should not have any problems focussing this lens.

 

I have a question though...

Does a 17-40 at 17mm on eos 5d gives an image like 8mm zuiko?

I want to start some landscape photography... so I was looking for a good lens for olympus like the 8mm zuiko.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than the Peleng, I had a OM-mount Sigma 8mm f/4.0 fisheye mounted on my E-1 for a while before I got the 8mm Digital Zuiko. Results are here: http://www.skipwilliams.com/olympus/fisheye-test.htm. It's pretty good, and the resulting image stopped down was fine. The downside is that those lenses aren't easy to find.

 

There's also the 8mm f/2.8 Olympus Zuiko, but that's a $1200-1400 lens, hardly an economical option.

 

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adwait... the short answer is... sorta. You should be able to count on a prime ultra-wide giving you better image quality than a zoom. 8mm on 4/3s should be similar view angle as 16mm on full-frame. However, there are optical differences between a fish-eye lens and an ultra-wide non fish-eye lens. So the question there is, do you want the fish-eye distortions or just the wide view? Fish-eyes are not great for distant landscapes because of how small objects in the background become. They are better suited to subjects in the middle ground, where there is less distortion than in the foreground. JMO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Patrick for the difference between a fish eye and a WA lens. I believe we should look at the Vieving angle also and not just the MMs.

 

So in that case 7-14 is a very good option. I believe the pros must be using this for their ladscaping work. This lens is however expensive. I read somewhere about the upcoming oly 9-18, Anybody has more info about that???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the March 2007 Olympus Lens Roadmap there is an ultra-wide-angle zoom slotted in the consumer grade lenses to be introduced in 2008. That might be the "9-18" you mention.

 

It will be a consumer grade lens, and constructed as such. Don't expect it to have the f/4.0 speed, edge-to-edge sharpness, or weather-sealing of the 7-14. I'd expect f/4-6.3. It also won't cost $1,600.

 

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...