BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Nikon, pleas, give me a super wide angle lens, at list 13mm rectilinear, and I don't care if it is f/8 or even f/11, but not that giant 13/5.6 AI-S astronomically prices Holly Grail. And, absolutely, no, AF, please. Price, C$ 2000-3000 max.<br>I all ready own a 14/2.8 rectilinear, ( sold my behemoth AF-S 14-24/2.8 ) and it would be nice if the 13mm not bigger the the present 14/2.8.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pge Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>The Sigma 12-24mm might be of interest to you.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Agreed - the Sigma 12-24 is, by reputation, pretty good, though not quite up to the 14-24's standards. Not that the 14-24 is perfect in the corners on a D800 (unless I've dropped mine too often), but neither is anything else.<br /> <br /> Now, if you ask Nikon to clone the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4 (which would let you get the same effect by stitching), you've got my vote. Since the Samyang 24mm T-S doesn't seem all that hot, I'm waiting for Nikon to play catch-up here. Or you could just get a fish-eye and de-fish in software, depending on how you feel about the corners.<br /> <br /> I assume we're talking full frame, by the way. Otherwise life is a lot easier.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_halliwell Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Guess you want straight lines to remain <strong>straight, </strong>ie 0% distortion and have no 'smearing' at the corners too?</p> <p>Oh, and....</p> <blockquote> <p>Nikon, please, <strong>give</strong> me a super wide angle lens<br> </p> </blockquote> <p>.....they give nothing, they will <strong>charge</strong> you <em>slightly</em> more than you can afford...:-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Andrew. What I'm doing now, stitching the shoots with the 14/2.8, but I like to have more convenient shooting with a wider lens sometime.<br /> Mike. The price is no question if it is not going over the 3000 dollar. But I'm not so insane to spend 30-40,000 dollar or more, for the 13mm f/5.6 AI-S holly grail. With to days technology, it is possible to manufacture a lens like this, even it is going to be a low volume, special order, and still able to make a small profit on it, and also, the fame for Nikon.<br /> The Nikon PC-E 24mm also a low volume production lens and mechanically more complex and need more machining time, labor, as a prime, S.W. angle lens would be.<br /> http://www.photo.net/photo/15876113</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Phil. I tried the Signa. On FF, it is badly vignetting in the corners. You get what you paid for it and you get a much lover quality then a specially designed prime 13mm would be. I would be happy, if the sigma at 12mm is reasonable good, for architectural images. But, it is not.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>http://www.photo.net/photo/15894414</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theodoros_fotometria Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Bela... if I may, I also sold the 14-24 and returned back to the 14mm f2.8 (after I was foolish enough to have sold my original 14mm for the zoom), ...thus, I want to hear (if you don't mind) for the reasoning behind that move. I just want to see if your reason coincides with mine, since the zoom is sharper at faster apertures... It's really a (little out of topic) curiosity question. Thanks, Theodoros.<br> P.S. Isn't the 14mm MF enough for you Bella? ...it does have (very) good focusing feeling and does bear an equally good to an old AI-s (well.. almost) DOF scale on it...</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_allegretta Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>There is a Vivitar Series 1 13mm/2.8. I have no first hand opinion on that lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>You know, there are switches to turn AF off (re: Sigma 12-24 and others)</p> <p>Sometimes you just can't have everything you want -- I personally would love to have a 500mm f/2.8 lens of light weight and costing under $400.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Theodoros. I sold my 15mm F/3.5 AI-S when the 14-24/2.8 show up, happily, noticing the extra 1mm, which is in the super wide angle lens is a lots of angle. Then using the 14-24/2.8 I get tired of the big behemoth lens, not really enjoying the zoom range, basically, I used only the 14mm range. Then I learned, the prime 14/2.8 a slightly wider then the zoom at 14mm. As I said, I get tired of dragging around the big zoom, and learning the prime is slightly wider then the 14mm zoom, I decided to sell the zoom and buy the prime 14/2.8 So far I'm very happy with the 14/2.8 regardless the zoom is a bit sharper, wide open, specially in the corners, which, I don't really care to much.<br /> M. Allegretta. The Vivitar Ser.1 13mm . . . ? I don't believe, it is really a 13mm SWA lens and not really a rectilinear, or close to it. Reading a review from this lens, I read, it is a sharp lens, but my concern is, the slight barrel distortion, plus, you always get what you paid for it. But, I my going to try out, because it is not that expensive. I would rather have a real rectilinear Nikon 13mm lens instead.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>JDM. You right. <em>"Sometimes you just can't have everything you want " </em>500/2.8 under 400? Don't be sarcastinc.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>For my cropped frame D7000, I use a Sigma 8-16 (12-24 equivalent). It's rectilinear and costs significantly less than most Nikon wide angle zoom lenses. The reviews on this lens are quite good. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 6, 2013 Author Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Michael. The focal length is relative, not always reflecting the same expanding angle of view. The Sigma 8-16 on a DX camera, 12-24, and at 12mm not neceserily as wide as an FX lens at 13 or 14mm. Even, the same manufacturers NIKON 14mm lenses vary in angle of view. See quote, and review of the prime Nikon AF 14mm f/2.8<br /> <em>"There isn't really much difference between the 13mm f/5.6, 15mm f/3.5, 14-24mm f/2.8, and this AF14mm f/2.8.</em><br /> <em>The 13mm f/5.6 was easily the widest</em><br /> <em>This 14mm f/2.8 is the next closest thing. <strong>The 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom at its 14mm setting doesn't really get as wide as this fixed 14mm lens."</strong></em></p> <p align="left"> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 <p>Bela, I learned something new today. I just checked out the Lens Tip site for a review on the 8-16 and it is 114.5 degrees angle on a cropped frame camera while a 14 mm on a full frame camera is 114 degrees. However the Sigma 12-24 on a full frame camera is 120 degrees. Practically, I seldom shoot at the wide end of the 8-16 but the D7000 is fairly compact so it's always in the bag. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Garrard Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 <p>Bela, to restate, the 12-24 is an FX lens (I think you're aware of this from previous comments, but just wanted to clarify after your last comment), and really is wider than a 14mm. Is it optically perfect? No (though vignetting is pretty easy to fix in post). Honestly, I very much doubt the old 13mm was either. If it's huge and only f/5.6; making a smaller version of a lens that's this retrofocal is going to be tricky and of interest only to a small minority of lens buyers - though the few things I can find out about the Vivitar 13mm are pretty favourable, so it's certainly worth a look. Are you sure you wouldn't be happy to correct the results of a fish-eye digitally? Otherwise, I believe even the Super-Angulon large format lenses don't have coverage this wide, and your best option for going any wider without distortion may be a pinhole.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 <p>Michael. If the 8-16mm lens angle of view is 114.5, and reasonable distortion compared to a perfect rectilinear, I my going to try it. Also, the Sigma 12-24 give me a 120 degrees reasonable image, I my going to try out this lens too.<br /> Andrew. I know, the Sigma 12-24 is an FX lens but I never tried on an FX camera. I wonder how is the lens projecting the image, vignetting and distortion. I going to give a try.<br /> One of my point, using a Zoom SWA lens on the widest setting only, is irritating me. One of the reason I sold my 14-24/2.8. The 17-35/2.8 always on, on one of the body, and the 14-24 zoom don't make a sense to me. Below 17 or 16mm ( or mostly below 14mm ) I need only one lens, a prime, a lens, wider then those and rectilinear. Seems to me, no escape and I my has to use some of those lenses. Or keep stitching as I'm doing it now.<br /> I tried the 16mm fish eye to convert to rectilinear with software. Don't like it. If you guys have seen images with the old 13mm f/5.6 AI-S rectilinear lens, you my understand my point. I used to have a friend, far back, who used this lens, the time, when the lens wasn't over 40,000 dollar, and the images I seen is something extraordinary. And lately on a D4, it produced architectural images no comparison to anything. Except, view, large format cameras.<br /> Thank you for the help for all of you.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 <p>Adendum; <em> "In this 9th Tale, I introduce an ultra wideangle SLR lens for F mount, "Nikkor 13 mm f/5.6" that has the world's widest angle of field (2 omega = 118 degrees) among ultra wideangle lenses of the ordinary projection system for 35 mm (135) format SLR cameras.</em><br /><em>This record is not yet renewed even at this moment of 21st century."</em></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virginia_john_mybusiness Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 <p>I guess much depends upon use and taste. When you get to superwides I like some distortion as long as it is not unpleasant and enhances the effect. I use a Sigma 10-20 and a Nikon 10mm on my D7000 and love both in their place.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CvhKaar Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 <p>. Or keep stitching as I'm doing it now.</p> <p>mm You can also automate this, and do that more advanced depending on th investment you are willing to make...<br> Devices like these aredesigned for that... : </p> <p><a href="http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/en/application/d77/d78/f79.cfm">http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/en/application/d77/d78/f79.cfm</a><br> or <br> <a href="http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/en/application/d77/d111/f112.cfm">http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/en/application/d77/d111/f112.cfm</a> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 7, 2013 Author Share Posted June 7, 2013 <p><em>". Or keep stitching as I'm doing it now."</em><br> C.P.M, . . . I all ready said, I do that. Thanks.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 <p>I essentially switched from Nikon to Canon just for the 17 TS-E and the ability to shift/stitch without distortion and reach a 12mm equivalent with superb image quality. If Nikon came out with one, it would be phenomenal on the D800.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelaMolnar Posted June 8, 2013 Author Share Posted June 8, 2013 <p>John. I'm salivating for the nikon 17 TS-E lens for a long time. And if it ever happen, it going to be a very low production number, and if Nikon able to produce the TS-E 17mm, which is more complicated and labor demanding than a SWA rectilinear 12 or 13mm lens would be. I also almost switched to Canon, because the Canon TS-E 17mm lens. But I'm super "loyal" person, and given up.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starshooter Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 <p>Never, never be sarcastic. Folks who dwell happily in cloud-coo-coo-land have little sense of humor.</p> 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