... You should try with a good fisheye converter before dismissing the solution ;) I ve been shooting with a Raynox CF converter for 5 years on an OlympusMessage 1 of 43 , Jun 2, 2011View SourcePå Thu, 02 Jun 2011 18:45:27 +0200, skrev Ken Warner <kwarner000@...>:
> I suggest that a compact camera and a fisheye adapter is not really a goodYou should try with a good fisheye converter before dismissing the solution ;)
> way to go. With the higher resolution of modern compact cameras, the flaws
> of any fisheye adapter will be magnified. Soft edges with lots of CA is
> what you can expect.
> I have an LX3 which is one of the best compacts and I tried it with both
> the Nikon fisheye lens adapters -- the FC-e8 and FC-e9 and the results were
> not useable even with 6 around.
I've been shooting with a Raynox CF converter for 5 years on an Olympus C-7070, and it still works great :)
Very flexible solution, as you can zoom from a circular fisheye to a FF and beyond if you need more pixels. I usually shoot 6000x3000 on the 7Mpx sensor.
And I do not get any more CA than with the naked lens. I do get quite a lot of flares though.
But the Raynox is big and heavy (~500g).
I also have a dSLR setup, which I use a lot less for sphericals.
I'll probably buy a Panasonic or Olympus with the 8mm fisheye when I get the money, to get a lighter/smaller setup...
The future is non-mirror system cameras :)
> You can get good wide angle lenses for compacts. Panasonic makes a very good--
> wide angle converter, the DMW LW46 which makes about a 18mm lens. You can
> do 3x6 around and get very good results.
Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - 3D and panoramas.
The problem with adapters is that they need to match the optics of the host camera or there will be various kinds of distortions from vignetting to severeMessage 43 of 43 , Jul 22, 2011View SourceThe problem with adapters is that they need to match the optics
of the host camera or there will be various kinds of distortions
from vignetting to severe chromatic aberration to soft corners.
If you are going for a compact plus wide or fisheye adapter,
you will get the best results with adapters purpose built
for that particular camera. The early Nikons like the 5400
and 8400 worked well (for their day) with the Nikon fisheye adapters.
So if you are getting a P7000, go to the Nikon web site
and be sure it is compatible with the fisheye or wide
angle adapter you use.
Just selecting adapters because they are available is not
necessarily going to give you good results.
> Does any one have experience with Nikon P7000 and FC-E9 fisheye adapter? Apparently they can be attached together using a UR-E22 tube with 46-52mm adapter ring. This is kind of the size I was looking for -- a compact camera with full manual controls and raw files that I can keep in a pant pocket, then pull out an adapter from a backpack when needed for sphericals. I found an example of this on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/raneko/5157116441/
> I'm not familiar with these sorts of attachments, but if I understand correctly the image circle is smaller than the sensor? This seems to waste a lot of pixels; it does also look like a big, fragile thing and I saw some comments about the intermediate adapters not quite fitting right. The only other wide angle attachment I could find for the P7000 was the WC-E75A, but it doesnt seem quite wide enough to be really useful for sphericals. Is there something in between these two of high quality?