I need to get fisheyed

[skipping stone]

So my little brother is finally convinced that he wants to use the alpha series and while currently serving in Iraq he had asked me to find him a Fisheye for my old A100 to get shots from the Blackhawk.

Knowing my brother he is a little rougher with his gear so I need sturdy with the greatest fisheye effect
( I know the cropping will take it down a notch) some input from the crew

Sigma 10mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM (NEW) @ 699.00 usd
Sony 16mm F2.8 (SAL-16F28) (used in LN-) @695.00 usd
Sony 16mm F2.8 (SAL-16F28) (New) @849.00 usd

I want to get it order since he will be stateside for leave in 3 weeks (plus the sooner I order it the more I can play with it before I have to hand it over)

Thanks
Justin

[David Kilpatrick]

Look for an older Sigma 8mm - they are much cheaper, you get a tiny bit of cutoff in the corners but more coverage. Do not get the 16mm it is not really a true fisheye on the Alpha 100. Do an eBay or Google search for Sigma EX DG 8mm fisheye. If you can't get one, the 10mm is your best bet despite the price.

David

[skipping stone]

David
Thank you so much your a wealth of information

I am assuming that this is not the
Sigma 8mm f/4.0 EX Circular Fisheye is not as good because... nonDG and f4 vs f3.5?

I did find one of the 3.5 around the same 650 range(after 30 dollar for shipping... uff)
thanks again
justin

[David Kilpatrick]

The old Sigma 8mm f/4 EX will do fine - any non-DG issues are almost irrelevant with this type of lens. I have used both the f/4 and the f/3.5 EX DG, and I would be happy with either. I currently use a 1988 Sigma 16mm f/2.8 M-AF Manual assisted focus fisheye on my A900 - about as non-digital as you can get. It is prone to a bit of flare, but perfectly usable for professional quality work when stopped down (as is normal with fisheyes) to f/11.

If you can find a clean 8mm f/4 EX at a fair price - maybe $300 - it's well worth going for. But if the EX DG HSM is not much more than used older options, it is far better of course - just the focusing is superior, before you consider the aperture and optical quality.

David

[skipping stone]

David
So just to double check is 650 a fair price for a 8mm F3.5 EX DG or should I keep looking?
J

[01af]

So just to double check is 650 a fair price for a 8 mm F3.5 EX DG or should I keep looking?

If you're ready to spend $650 then you may as well get the Sigma 10 mm 1:2.8 EX DC HSM with would be the better choice. A (used) 8 mm fish-eye was proposed as a cheaper alternative. The 10 mm EX DC HSM is specifically made for APS-C-format cameras and thus will suit your brother's A100 better. The 8 mm lenses are originally meant for 35-mm full-frame cameras; on those they render a circular image with an angle of view of 180° diagonally, horizontally, and vertically. If you want the same on APS-C format then currently your only choice is the Sigma 4.5 mm 1:2.8 EX DC HSM ... however fish-eye lenses that render a rectangular image with 180° only across the diagonal are better for pictoral photography (as opposed to scientific/experimental/pano work). Note that with the Sigma brand, DC lenses are for APS-C format; DG lenses are for 35-mm-full-frame format. Getting a (new) 8 mm DG fish-eye lens rather than the 10 mm DC will make sense only if you (or your brother) plan to acquire a 35-mm full-frame DSLR camera (like the Sony A900) in the foreseeable future. If you don't then better get the 10 mm EX DC.

Circular fish-eye image requires a focal length of 4.5 - 5 mm on APS-C format or 7.5 - 8 mm on 35-mm full-frame format.
Rectangular fish-eye image requires 10 - 10.5 mm on APS-C format or 15 - 16 mm on 35-mm full-frame format.

-- Olaf