D60 - Wide lenses

Check out this link,

I was think of buying the 14mm but this link has me rethinking that idea.

Is the 15mm wider than the 14mm

Sigma 14 WA 2.8

Sigma 15 Fisheye 2.8

Canon 15 Fisheye 2.8

I've been pursuing this with the Nikon 16mm fisheye. The tips for using Panotools with that lens are not really what you want to use, but with a little effort I've achieved about 102 degrees diagonal. The front glass is much flatter and more resistant to flare than the 14mm and it's easy to fit a front filter if you like.

The width stretches more than the height, so be prepared for the result to be wider than 3:2.

Can you post some examples?

I have only had it on land, not underwater yet.

Good link for all looking at making the huge purchase of a 14mm lens.

Another good link on the Fisheye ..rather than the 14mm

Angle of view and field of view with standard focal length lenses on 24x36 format (e.g. EOS 1Ds) versus Canon EOS 1D, D30, and D60 digital SLR cameras:

Wide angles lenses on DSLR

All found in Posts on dpreview

Fisheye lenses can provide interesting shots. I enjoy shooting with it just for jollies. It also works well for over/unders. The curvature can make a nice effect, but it can also ruin shots, especially top side.

The curvature is obviously less apparent with a d-SLR with less than full frame chip. How well this works underwater as a pure wide angle lens, where lines aren't so straight, will be a matter of opinion.

Topside on the D100, I've found the fisheye to be the worst of both worlds. The distortion is obviously evident, but with the crop you lose a lot of the fisheye effect. I didn't care for any of the shots I did with the D100.

Yet, I'll be trying it underwater to see how that world looks.

The examples of barrel distortion correction on luminous-landscape are quite good. But, I think the scene shows the nice line corrections without showing the other effect of this correction. Objects will lose their size perspective. I've seen this on landscape work. Things get a little out of kilter. You general don't notice it unless you actually know what the scene is supposed to look like. An analogy is a flat map of the world, where the map makes perfect longitude/latitude squares. Greenland gets really big.

The fisheye is a fun lens and maybe through s/w will give you satisfactory results, but it doesn't compare with the Canon 14mm. I'm a Nikon shooter, but spent some time in September shooting with a Canon guy, actually one of the contributors to luminous-landscape. He had the 14mm. It's a fine piece of glass. Really fine. Just don't have any food or drink in your mouth when you see the price for the first time. Anyone close by will not appreciate it.

Here's one of my favorite fisheye shots:

An over/under, where the fisheye seems to do a much better job than a 20mm lens:

Stupid topside image:

I converted these just as examples. Don't know if I got very close to correct, but you get the idea. Are these scanned film? Probably need some tilt compensation, too.

Thanks for the examples, I didn't like the converted images. Hmmm maybe I'll rethink the 15mm.