Trying to avoid the 17/4

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>My first reaction is that this seems like a much overengineered solution. Kinda like buying a crane to get that appliance up to your third floor apartment when a block-and-tackle setup would do the job.</p>

<p>Yakim. I'm sure you know all about lensbabies. They do have wideangle attachments but this only gets you 30 mm or so.</p>

<p>I'm wondering if there's any way to MacGyver a lens like Samyang 8/3.5 fish-eye into a lensbaby?</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>double post</p>

[kari v]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm wondering if there's any way to MacGyver a lens like Samyang 8/3.5 fish-eye into a lensbaby?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Lens caps for mounting and a piece of large rubber hose (or something) as bellows? Samyang has quite large and high quality image circle for a lens marked for crop sensor cameras (looks great corner to corner mounted on 5D).<br>

I've wondered for some time how a fisheye would react. 5D + 30/3.5 Arsat Fisheye could be interesting too.</p>

[model mayhem gallery]

<p>Not sure what you mean by 17/4. If you are talking about the 17-40 F4L why would you want to avoid such a hands down great lens. On a crop sensor camera this was by far my favorite lens for portrait and street photography work. I have had to rent TS lenses but it was for shooting archetecture where it was very important to keep the lines of the Windows straight on a while shooting a very tall building. However, those photos where going to be printed very large so obviously I tripod was a must. My tripod and live view focusing has made the bigest difference in the sharpness of my photos over Megapixels, full frame, L -series lens and everything else I can think of. To me a good tripod goes more to seperating the pros from the joes than anything else I own espeacially at their price range.</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>Not sure what you mean by 17/4.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">I'm referring to the 17/4 TS. And yes, I have a good tripod but seldom use it.</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

 

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

<p> </p>

[carlosquintana]

<p>Hi<br>

If you are not going to earn some (a lot of) money from the corrected perspective pictures you take with the 17/4 TS-e, don't buy it.<br>

Furthermore, the pictures taken with this lens are awful, specially the vertical ones. This lens distorts more than it corrects. Anything looks very unnatural. Just resist the temptation and invest the money in a nice trip.<br>

Regards from Spain<br>

Carlos</p>

[yakim_peled1]

<blockquote>

<p>Furthermore, the pictures taken with this lens are awful, specially the vertical ones. This lens distorts more than it corrects.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">That is the first time I hear negative comments on the IQ of the 17/4 TS. Can you elaborate?</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

 

[yakim_peled1]

<p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">Got it. It turned out that the sentence "the 35/3.5 is the widest FL in the M645 Mamiya range" is not entirely accurate. It is the widest rectilinear FL in the M645 Mamiya range. I just learned that there's also the M645 24/4 fisheye. As a fisheye, it will be wider than any rectilinear 24mm after defishing, and that includes the Canon TS and Nikon PC samples. As a MF, it won't have much fishiness anyway (if any) on my 40D. Another good feature is that is has a build in hood, albeit a tiny one. Best of all, it costs less than half the price of the 17/4 TS. Now, to the difficult task of finding a good one. KEH has two 'UG' samples and E-bay has none. I'll have to wait.....</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

 

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

</p>