Amita, The pictures are just fantastic.
Now, there're people who tolerate barrel (fisheye) distortion and those who don't. If you are OK with it -- just enjoy it. My wife actually preffers the look of fisheye to 15mm rectilinear lense. So do I. This is just a matter of taste. Check out some of the graphiscs of MC Escher -- the guy made a point to reproduce "fisheye" distortion to make things look more "natural" (as far as this is applicable to his works). Personally, I would take a fisheye over an ultrawide any time. It just looks better *to me*. Even a cropped fisheye. Best, Mishka On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:53:57 -0500, Amita Guha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Peter J. Alling wrote: > > > My biggest objection is that it makes a very > > expensive special purpose lens into the equivalent of a cheap badly > > designed lens. > > I suppose it's just a matter of personal taste, although I did mention that > I'm planning on using it on film bodies as well. And speaking of expensive, > I now have a full-frame super wide angle lens for $250 less than the DA 14mm > that I can use on all my bodies. > > > I suppose I was a bit disappointed, I happen to like fisheyes > > and using > > them in a situation where you can minimize the fisheye effect on full > > frame is > > more what I expected. > > Ok, here are a few of the images that really sold me on this lens. These > ones showed some distortion: > > Guitar: http://www.pbase.com/image/36692773 > Museum: http://www.pbase.com/jlefcourt/image/28610905 > Phone: http://www.pbase.com/image/33933780 > Dog: http://www.pbase.com/image/26897289 > > Here are some where the distortion is minimized: > > Birthday: http://www.pbase.com/image/33014871 > Fish: http://www.pbase.com/image/28988352 > Mountains: http://www.pbase.com/image/34265101 > Snow: http://www.pbase.com/image/26302807 > Grave: http://www.pbase.com/image/33493063 > > And hey, if you don't like these, that's cool...that's what makes this list > interesting. <G> > > Amita > >
