6 replies to this topic

[sharky1961]

Hi,
wich lens is sharper???
Sigma has close focus at 15 cm and Nikon at 25 cm ( not so good for cfwa i know).
wich would you recommend for the D800.
I already have the nikon 16mm. Is the Sigma so much better over the Nikon that a change would be justified??

Rob

[John Bantin]

Hi,
wich lens is sharper???
Sigma has close focus at 15 cm and Nikon at 25 cm ( not so good for cfwa i know).
wich would you recommend for the D800.
I already have the nikon 16mm. Is the Sigma so much better over the Nikon that a change would be justified??

Rob

I bought a Nikon 16mm and then spent a lot more money part-exchanging it for the cheaper Sigma 15mm lens.

[Paul Kay]

In my experience both Sigma and Nikon make excellent lenses, but I think that in this comparison it is the Sigma which focuses closer and is therefore potentially more useful underwater. The difference that I have personally found in the past is that Sigma are more likely to change the design and their lenses are more lightly built and therefore potentially easier to break or develop faults, and it is less likely that spares will be available as long as they will for Nikon lenses. If this doesn't worry you then the Sigma is probably the more versatile lens for underwater use, but whether its worth changing depends on how limiting you find the Nikon rather than which lens will be 'sharper'.

[Alex_Mustard]

See also here:
http://wetpixel.com/...showtopic=46484

[JackConnick]

I've decided to rent a D800 and both of these lenses to get some full-frame experience with them in Fiji the end of next week. Going to try to also cram in my D7000 rig and mini dome.
Does anyone know if the Sigma will vignette with a 230mm glass dome?

Should get interesting...

[ChrigelKarrer]

Jack,
the problem is not the glass dome, the problem is if the Sigma stick enough inside the dome to not photograph the bajonet mount or eventually adapter.
My Hugyfot D800 housing and the Sigma 15mm using the Athena 170mm dome and a approx. 20mm long adapter ring is vignetting badly while the
original Hugyfot 174mm acrylico dome seems to work fine.
From my - not very scientific testing - the max lenght of a adapter is about 10mm, otherwise vignetting will start to show up.

I did some research regarding this lens and it seems that this lens - due its short size and the long sunshade - is rather diffcult to fit in a dome.

Chris

Edited by ChrigelKarrer, 05 October 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[Alex_Mustard]

Depends on your housing, Jack.

I have use the Sigma 15mm on both Subal and Nauticam housings without cut-off with 5 different domes on various FX cameras.

Although to update the data from the linked discussion above:

Percentages of use of two fisheyes (judged from images kept, not taken) - with update for 2012:

All years shooting FX: Sigma 15mm 57%, Nikon 16mm 43%

2008 (D3 mainly): Sigma 15mm 84%, Nikon 16mm 16%
2009 (D700 mainly): Sigma 15mm 72%, Nikon 16mm 28%
2010 (D700 mainly): Sigma 15mm 66%, Nikon 16mm 34%
2011 (D700 mainly): Sigma 15mm 38%, Nikon 16mm 62%
2012 (D700/D4/D800): Sigma 15mm 54%, Nikon 16mm 46% - data unreliable as current shoot where I only have 15mm is unedited.

Comparison of all underwater FX wide angle from 2012, so far:
14-24mm - 3%
15mm FE - 39%
16mm FE - 32%
16-35mm - 26%

Alex