File :-(, x, )
WIDE BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
prepare for incoming silly question /p/

How wide a lens cant you get before you start to encounter distortion? For instance, if i was trying to capture all the people in a stadium stand, how would i do so with minimum correction?

picture not related.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKONCamera ModelE995Camera SoftwareMicrosoft Windows Photo Gallery 6.0.6001.18000Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2008:09:17 01:51:15Exposure Time5/767 secF-Numberf/4.7Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length8.20 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2048Image Height1536Unique Image IDA1135401876E479CA2BBCE1C9B51FBBD
>> Anonymous
all focal lengths will show various distortions or different views, so it depends on what you consider to be "normal" to compare it against.

also: most wide lenses are corrected for certain types distortions, the most obvious exception being circular fish-eye types
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> How wide a lens cant you get before you start to encounter distortion?
>> BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
>>255997

ok, what lens (nikon fit) does /p/ recommend for taking a very wide angle shot with little distortion?

>>256008

d'oh!
>> Anonymous
>>256015

A very expensive one.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
$300 on ebay

you'll have enough money left over to buy a car in 3 months
>> Anonymous
>>255989
>How wide a lens cant you get before you start to encounter distortion?

depends on how much you're willing to pay. less distortion == more money.
>> BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
>>256020

im looking at the Sigma 10-20mm, that seems pretty good, even wide open. But ive already got a nikon 18-135, is it really worth the money?
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>256025
10-20mm is awesome. Though don't expect low distortion with it. It has a troubling "tail up" that shows up at really wide focal lengths (only noticeable when shooting patterns or horizons very close to the edges of the frame)

Still I highly recommend the lens as its reasonably priced and is an extremely fun lens to use.
>> Anonymous
>>256025

i have the sigma 10-20 (canon mount) and i love it.. it vignettes a pretty good deal though.
>> Anonymous
>>256025


used it for a day from the local rental place on my 20d, really liked it, thought it was a fun and decently made lens. probably worth the money, useful to have it in the bag. wonder what it would look like on a full frame sensor...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>256039

like this

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1Ds Mark IICamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2006:06:18 10:31:57Exposure Time0.3 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/16.0Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length105.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width800Image Height641RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>256040

and here's a sample of the 10-20 on full frame

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D200Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern786Focal Length (35mm Equiv)15 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:09:16 21:54:27Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/11.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/11.0Exposure Bias-0.7 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceFine WeatherFlashNo FlashFocal Length10.00 mmCommentMark Gill(c)Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1291Image Height864RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
I'm thinking it depends a lot, too, on how far you are from the subject.
>> Anonymous
I've been thinking of the Tokina 11-16, anybody got one? Reviews seem to like it, and say it compares pretty well to Nikon lenses, way nicer than Tamron / Sigma. (I'll never trust either one, everything from those two companies that I've owned was pretty trashy.)
>> Anonymous
Depends on two things

1. If the film plane is parallel to the object being photographed. Lensbaby and Tilt-shift lenses help correct distortion by allowing the film plane to stay plum.

2. If the lens is rectilinear, (as most are) then it is designed to not have distortion, but if the lens is fisheye, then distortion is a feature, not a bug.

There is software that does fisheye to rectalinear conversion, or rectalinear to fisheye conversion.
>> Anonymous
>>256051

Canon 10-22 > Sigma 10-20 > Nikkor 12-24 > Nikkor 14-24 > Zuiko 7-14 > Tokina 12-24 > Sigma 12-24 > Canon 17-40 > Canon 16-35 > Zuiko 11-22 > Tokina 11-16 > Tamron 11-18

We'll see where the new Tamron 10-24 fits in.

Optical quality, build quality, price, use, "what you get/price" ratio accounted for.
>> Anonymous
>> Equipment Make NIKON
>> Camera Model E995

that camera is soooooo good it takes the earth curvature into consideration
>> Einta !!MWv3ICYobCM
>>256054
I'd sorta like to have the Canon 10-22 - mainly because it can be distortion-corrected if shot RAW with DPP. My Sigma 10-20 is acceptable, but noticeable and basically uncorrectable since it's compelx distortion. Then again, I only paid a couple hundred for mine, so I'm happy.
>> Anonymous
Einta is one of the biggest faggot on /p/

if ac and heavyweather are tier 1 faggots

and martin and butterfly are tier 3 faggots

einta would be somewhere in between, along with that honest guy and else too
>> Anonymous
Supposedly some new ultrawide zoom Nikkor is the best ultrawide ever made. Which is odd, you'd expect it to be some 24/25mm (the longest and presumably easiest to design ultrawide length) rangefinder prime.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>256080

sooooo good
>> Anonymous
Relevant ITT:

Ken Rockwell writes a good article about... what else, shooting unreasonably wide.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm

Next time he pulls this off, it'll be how to shoot well with over 9000 on the saturation control.
>> Anonymous
>>256093
"For newsmen, ultrawides are for jamming into the face of an enraged wino brandishing a feces-covered broken bottle to exaggerate his crazed anger and crude weapon."
>> Anonymous
"I don't have any really bad examples of "getting it all in" shots, so this one, made in good light, will have to suffice.
Lol, HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY BAD SHOTS.

Beginners know that wider lenses get more in, and so the pictures must be better. They know that 14mm lenses are expensive because pro organizations like ASMP mandate camera companies to charge more so that only pros can afford them and get the "good pictures." "
>> Anonymous
>>256099
>>256103

It's still the same old Ken, but for once the advice he gives is correct.
>> Anonymous
>>256103
>
Beginners know that wider lenses get more in, and so the pictures must be better. They know that 14mm lenses are expensive because pro organizations like ASMP mandate camera companies to charge more so that only pros can afford them and get the "good pictures." "

Also, Rockwell isn't claiming this, he's mocking it as beginner stupidity.
>> Anonymous
>>255989
Did you take this picture and why did you shoop out the World Trade Center?
>> Anonymous
>>How wide a lens cant you get before you start to encounter distortion?

You are misunderstanding the problem - distortion is measured as a percentage difference in image height. (measured from the center) Some very wide angle lenses have low distortion and some normals have higher distortion. The problem you are refering to is actually the combination of exaggerated perspective and converging lines. This is NOT distortion. If you take an excellent WA lens like a 40mm distagon (about $5000). It still will have that effect.
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
ill throw my weight behind the tokina 12-24.
had mine for a few months now and no complaints r.e image quality. build quality fuckin rules, zoom range is nice. minimum focus distance is real cool for perspective.
only gripe is that its an f/4 lens and not f/1.4 like im used too :P
>> Anonymous
>>256289
this lens is OK out at 24, but it has fairly high distortion at 12 (more than 3%)