9 replies to this topic

[caveman]

Been looking for a ultra wide (weitwinkel) / fisheye, and there are 2 which might shuit the fray. Nikon 16mm and the Sigma 15mm. I see on the net alot of people are very happy with the sigma, in terms of quality, and the substantial price difference.

Any views ?

[scorpio_fish]

I own a Nikon 16mm fisheye, but voted for the Sigma. This particular Sigma gets high marks. Save your money.

[caveman]

Thx,

I saw the reviews, and in general it has some good reviews. I am just worried about the results not being rectilinear an' all.

[davephdv]

Some people swear by the Sigma 15 - 30. Will it fit in your housing?

[scorpio_fish]

They are both fish eye lenses. Neither will be rectilinear. The results will be the same with either lens.

[caveman]

Looked at the lenses today. The 15mm from sigma is very big, and had some blemishes in the coating ( yes , it was a new lens). I heard sigma coating gets blemishes more quickly, is that true ?

[Ryan]

I picked up a Sigma 15 today, thinking purely with my wallet. I saw some impressive race track shots with it from a local sports photog, and they sealed the deal.

Now, if it flares, I'll sell it, if not, I'll enjoy using it.

[craig]

Having had both, I think their performance is similar. The Nikon is smaller and appears more durable but that doesn't mean that it is. The Nikon uses rear bayonet filters where the Sigma uses a rear gel holder. Since gels are important to me, I prefer the the Sigma. Otherwise I'd prefer the Nikon. The Sigma is larger than the Nikon, but they're both small and lightweight considering how wide they get. I'd suspect their resistance to flare to be comparable.

[caveman]

Thanks. I just saw little spots / imperfection in the lens coating, which irked me. The price was of course attractive.

[BIKO]

Hello caveman,
I didn't tried the Nikon, but I own the Sigma 15 mm Fisheye and I like it very much. I'ts a very sharp lens. Here is an Example: