For anyone that has used the D700 with the Nikkor 16mm fisheye I would love some feedback. Does the combination work well together? How is sharpness? Have you ever tried to use the combination with a 1.4 converter.. Thanks in advance...
D700 and 16mm Fishey
Started by dougbenc, Aug 07 2010 06:39 AM
6 replies to this topic
#1
dougbenc
-
- Member
- 13 posts
Sea Nettle
- Gender:Male
- Location:Port St Lucie
-
Posted 07 August 2010 - 06:39 AM
#2
ckchong
-
- Member
- 206 posts
Sting Ray
- Gender:Male
- Location:Malaysia
-
Posted 07 August 2010 - 08:52 PM
#3
loftus
-
- Member
- 4550 posts
Blue Whale
- Gender:Male
- Location:Winter Park, Fl
-
Posted 08 August 2010 - 12:42 PM
Works very well with or without the 1.4 TC. I use the 16mm with 1.4 TC frequently both for diving and pool work when I want something as wide as or wider than a rectilinear and I prefer a slight barrel distortion of the subject rather than the pincushion distortion of a rectilinear wide angle lens.For anyone that has used the D700 with the Nikkor 16mm fisheye I would love some feedback. Does the combination work well together? How is sharpness? Have you ever tried to use the combination with a 1.4 converter.. Thanks in advance...
Most of my pool work is shot with the 16mm 1.4 TC combination or 16-35 (Previously 17-35) depending on subject. I tend to use the 16 and TC more for full figure images and the 16-35 for portrait and torso work.
www.waterworldimages.com
Edited by loftus, 08 August 2010 - 12:43 PM.
Nikon D800, Nikon D7000, Nauticam, Inons, Subtronic Novas. Lens collection - 10-17, 15, 16, 16-35, 14-24, 24-70, 85, 18-200, 28-300, 70-200, 60 and 105, TC's. Macs with Aperture and Photoshop.
#4
col
-
- Member
- 124 posts
Wolf Eel
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bangkok, Thailand
-
Posted 11 August 2010 - 03:25 AM
Works very well with or without the 1.4 TC. I use the 16mm with 1.4 TC frequently both for diving and pool work when I want something as wide as or wider than a rectilinear and I prefer a slight barrel distortion of the subject rather than the pincushion distortion of a rectilinear wide angle lens.
Most of my pool work is shot with the 16mm 1.4 TC combination or 16-35 (Previously 17-35) depending on subject. I tend to use the 16 and TC more for full figure images and the 16-35 for portrait and torso work.
www.waterworldimages.com
Loftus - do you use the 16mm with or without the Nikon supplied filters at the back of the lens? I remember reading something before about not using the filter but cannot find anything...
Colin Lee | zenfolio/colinlee
#5
Alex_Mustard
-
- Super Mod
-
- 8294 posts
The Doctor
- Gender:Male
- Location:La Maddalena
-
Posted 11 August 2010 - 04:51 AM
Not using the filter makes it focus marginally closer, but not much. It also stops it focusing on infinity on land.
Many photographers (myself included) remove the filter on the back of the 16mm. But it is not essential.
Alex
Many photographers (myself included) remove the filter on the back of the 16mm. But it is not essential.
Alex
Alexander Mustard - www.amustard.com - www.magic-filters.com
Nikon D4 (Subal housing). Olympus EPL-5 (waiting for housing).
#6
col
-
- Member
- 124 posts
Wolf Eel
- Gender:Male
- Location:Bangkok, Thailand
-
Posted 12 August 2010 - 02:21 PM
Not using the filter makes it focus marginally closer, but not much. It also stops it focusing on infinity on land.
Many photographers (myself included) remove the filter on the back of the 16mm. But it is not essential.
Alex
thanks Alex
Colin Lee | zenfolio/colinlee
#7
Undertow
-
- Member
- 438 posts
Manta Ray
- Location:Bermuda
Posted 03 September 2010 - 07:54 AM
i got the 16mm then replaced it with the sigma 15mm FE, which i use with a 1.4x tc all the time. the nikon 16mm, while sharper, doesn't focus close enough at all. cheers,
chris
chris
D200, Aquatica, 10.5, sig 15, 12-24, 17-55, 60, 105
3x SB-105
3x SB-105
