- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Being an editorial photographer, and having editors always wanting something different to last time (just wish they'd use it!!), my lens range has grown massively over the last year. One lens that I'd had my eye on for a while was the Nikon 10.5mm fisheye, Nikon's widest DX lens.
Now, fisheye lenses are a total luxury in many people's eyes, what with the distorted field-of-view and the limitation this brings. For everyday use you'll run out of steam quickly but as an 'impact' lens (i.e. one that can deliver arresting images in a jiffy), it's found a permanent place in my kit bag.
But what's it like to use?.....
Out of the box you'd be forgiven for thinking there was some kind of mistake; although much heavier than a 50mm f/1.8, it's not actually that much bigger really, just extending further out because of the built-in petal hood and the extreme front element that is dome-like. For what it does it's positively tiny!!
_DSC5271 by Pat MacInnes, on Flickr
Compared against the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D the 10.5mm isn't that much bigger.
This lens packs a massive visual punch into a tiny, tiny frame.
The overall build quality is fantastic; it's got weight that confirms you're into pro lens territory and the finish is superb. The focus ring is silky smooth (although I rarely MF with it) and all in all, it's a lens that (on looks) totally fits the £500 price tag.
Obviously, a lens with such a huge front element is always at risk from damage and unfortunately, like the 14-24 f/2.8, there's no facility to fit any filter of any kind becuase of the front element curvature. That said, polarisers would be useless on anything with this field of view. If you're worried about flare when shooting in strong light I'd take it as it comes; I've yet to experience totally shot-ruining flare (thanks to the clever work on lens coatings by Nikon), although it's very easy to bring a bit of flare into shot by accident just by moving the lens a millimeter or so, such is the way the lens gets everything in shot..... move it an inch and it looks like you're just recomposed a totally different shot!!
Also, the other key thing with this lens is the minimum focus distance; Nikon says it's 14cm but that's confusing, because that's a measurement obviously given from the film plane. I've had it down to roughly 4cm from the front element and with the fisheye effect, it's very difficult to judge lens-to-subject distance when you're looking through the viewfinder. On several occasions I've tried to get a little bit closer and only realised when I've taken my eye away from the camera that i was just a centimetre or so away from ruing the front element for good.
It all sounds a bit negative so far but these are just things that you have to get used to quickly because this lens is such a one-trick pony.
Fighting To The End by Pat MacInnes, on Flickr
This shot just wouldn't be possible with any other type of lens. For action
photography it really does bring something vibrant to the party...
The field of view is 180 degrees from corner to corner, meaning there's a hell of a lot this lens can take in. It become second nature to look for your feet in shot and avoid it to save cloning them out later! What is great about it is that through the central third (horizontal) of the frame, there's so little in the way of distortion that you can confidently shoot panoramas without the need for photo-stitching in software. Once things start going towards the corners then that's time for computer magic to happen, but saying that on wide scenes the distortion is not a major problem. Where the fisheye effect really takes hold is when you're shooting A) up, B) down and/or with the subject very close to the lens. This is when it's full power comes into play and although fisheye shots aren't to everyone's taste, they can transform a very normal scene into something very interesting, which for my magazine work is invaluable to add variety into a shoot.
Lens performance is good. This is not a technical test – I'll let the links below give you scientific jargon and data - but I'll say that you won't be disappointed with results. Sharpness is fantastic, although at f/2.8 when close focussing you could be mistaken for thing it's a soft lens; the apparent depth-of-field is so minimal that it can look unnerving. Get it to f/8 and things are much better and shoot a landscape (at any aperture) and you'll be impressed.
Oh, by the way, on DX (it will work on FX but you'll have vignetting and a reduced image circle) it's got an effective focal length of somewhere around the 15/16mm mark but is a true diagonal fisheye and not a circular fisheye (the latter produces a circular image within the normal rectangular frame).
_DSC5278 by Pat MacInnes, on Flickr
The built-in petal hood and massively curved front element mean
filter use is out of the question (unless you find a DIY fix)...
The main compromise you have to make for buying such a specialised piece of kit at what is effectively a cheap price, are the chromatic aberrations; at the corners they're highly visible when shooting high contrast subjects. There's little you can do, even when stopping down, simply because the lens is working so hard to capture so much info from so many places there's always going to be some weak spot. This really applies to shooting into those horrible white skies; shooting into azure blue and you'll not even notice.
AF is sweet; fast and certain. Never had a problem with it on either of my D2X bodies.
The lens cap is not the standard pinch-type one found on regular lenses, instead it's an actual cap that slots over the hood and is well-fitting so you can feel reassured the lens is safe when it's shouldered and you're walking around.
I paid £330 for a mint, boxed example from www.mpbphotographic.co.uk and feel I got a bargain. Would I have paid the full asking price? Probably, at some point, but such is the nature of the used market these days that you can get minters of all types for bargain prices as other photographers move onto the next new thing.
Because it's a specialised lens that has very little in the way of competition (although Sigma produces a 10mm f/2.8 but it's £120 more) the question you have to ask yourself is; does it work? I thing yes, 100 per cent. I knew what I was getting into with this lens and knew it was a luxury items for specific occasions. For that it gets 10/10, simply because it's the best of its kind for Nikon.
Official Nikon 10.5mm web page
Ken Rockwell review
Photozone.de review
Now, fisheye lenses are a total luxury in many people's eyes, what with the distorted field-of-view and the limitation this brings. For everyday use you'll run out of steam quickly but as an 'impact' lens (i.e. one that can deliver arresting images in a jiffy), it's found a permanent place in my kit bag.
But what's it like to use?.....
Out of the box you'd be forgiven for thinking there was some kind of mistake; although much heavier than a 50mm f/1.8, it's not actually that much bigger really, just extending further out because of the built-in petal hood and the extreme front element that is dome-like. For what it does it's positively tiny!!
_DSC5271 by Pat MacInnes, on Flickr
Compared against the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D the 10.5mm isn't that much bigger.
This lens packs a massive visual punch into a tiny, tiny frame.
The overall build quality is fantastic; it's got weight that confirms you're into pro lens territory and the finish is superb. The focus ring is silky smooth (although I rarely MF with it) and all in all, it's a lens that (on looks) totally fits the £500 price tag.
Obviously, a lens with such a huge front element is always at risk from damage and unfortunately, like the 14-24 f/2.8, there's no facility to fit any filter of any kind becuase of the front element curvature. That said, polarisers would be useless on anything with this field of view. If you're worried about flare when shooting in strong light I'd take it as it comes; I've yet to experience totally shot-ruining flare (thanks to the clever work on lens coatings by Nikon), although it's very easy to bring a bit of flare into shot by accident just by moving the lens a millimeter or so, such is the way the lens gets everything in shot..... move it an inch and it looks like you're just recomposed a totally different shot!!
Also, the other key thing with this lens is the minimum focus distance; Nikon says it's 14cm but that's confusing, because that's a measurement obviously given from the film plane. I've had it down to roughly 4cm from the front element and with the fisheye effect, it's very difficult to judge lens-to-subject distance when you're looking through the viewfinder. On several occasions I've tried to get a little bit closer and only realised when I've taken my eye away from the camera that i was just a centimetre or so away from ruing the front element for good.
It all sounds a bit negative so far but these are just things that you have to get used to quickly because this lens is such a one-trick pony.
Fighting To The End by Pat MacInnes, on Flickr
This shot just wouldn't be possible with any other type of lens. For action
photography it really does bring something vibrant to the party...
The field of view is 180 degrees from corner to corner, meaning there's a hell of a lot this lens can take in. It become second nature to look for your feet in shot and avoid it to save cloning them out later! What is great about it is that through the central third (horizontal) of the frame, there's so little in the way of distortion that you can confidently shoot panoramas without the need for photo-stitching in software. Once things start going towards the corners then that's time for computer magic to happen, but saying that on wide scenes the distortion is not a major problem. Where the fisheye effect really takes hold is when you're shooting A) up, B) down and/or with the subject very close to the lens. This is when it's full power comes into play and although fisheye shots aren't to everyone's taste, they can transform a very normal scene into something very interesting, which for my magazine work is invaluable to add variety into a shoot.
Lens performance is good. This is not a technical test – I'll let the links below give you scientific jargon and data - but I'll say that you won't be disappointed with results. Sharpness is fantastic, although at f/2.8 when close focussing you could be mistaken for thing it's a soft lens; the apparent depth-of-field is so minimal that it can look unnerving. Get it to f/8 and things are much better and shoot a landscape (at any aperture) and you'll be impressed.
Oh, by the way, on DX (it will work on FX but you'll have vignetting and a reduced image circle) it's got an effective focal length of somewhere around the 15/16mm mark but is a true diagonal fisheye and not a circular fisheye (the latter produces a circular image within the normal rectangular frame).
_DSC5278 by Pat MacInnes, on Flickr
The built-in petal hood and massively curved front element mean
filter use is out of the question (unless you find a DIY fix)...
The main compromise you have to make for buying such a specialised piece of kit at what is effectively a cheap price, are the chromatic aberrations; at the corners they're highly visible when shooting high contrast subjects. There's little you can do, even when stopping down, simply because the lens is working so hard to capture so much info from so many places there's always going to be some weak spot. This really applies to shooting into those horrible white skies; shooting into azure blue and you'll not even notice.
AF is sweet; fast and certain. Never had a problem with it on either of my D2X bodies.
The lens cap is not the standard pinch-type one found on regular lenses, instead it's an actual cap that slots over the hood and is well-fitting so you can feel reassured the lens is safe when it's shouldered and you're walking around.
I paid £330 for a mint, boxed example from www.mpbphotographic.co.uk and feel I got a bargain. Would I have paid the full asking price? Probably, at some point, but such is the nature of the used market these days that you can get minters of all types for bargain prices as other photographers move onto the next new thing.
Because it's a specialised lens that has very little in the way of competition (although Sigma produces a 10mm f/2.8 but it's £120 more) the question you have to ask yourself is; does it work? I thing yes, 100 per cent. I knew what I was getting into with this lens and knew it was a luxury items for specific occasions. For that it gets 10/10, simply because it's the best of its kind for Nikon.
Official Nikon 10.5mm web page
Ken Rockwell review
Photozone.de review
Last edited:
