Don't have the 1.1.4 but I do have the 1.1.3 in my computer if you want it...
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Sure, if needed, because...why not?.
Probably lower resolution = less sharpness & higher noise level?
If you're packing a $10k tele prime or a 24-70L2 on a ff sensor, cropping might not deminish iq - but for the rest of us like /me with a 17-40L & 70-300L, the lens' sharpness is only so-so and severe cropping really shows as you cannot "downsize-sharpen" that much.
Good for you PBD. I'd love to see some nice creative shots with your work with fisheyes, stretched or un-stretched. There is many users who enjoy fisheyes and seen great shots with them, but I still have no need for one.Again, speak for yourself. I don't own a fish eye and never would own one but a rectilinear UW gets much use. I do believe many have asked for a sharper 17-40L.
If you are in the 14mm rectilinear market, and many are not, then the original Canon EF 15mm fisheye defished beats the pants off many, including, in my experience (with two different models), the Canon 14mm MkII.
The fisheyes are way more than just a silly niche, they can be put to very creative use, software expands that potential exponentially and at very high IQ levels.
Can you tell which are fisheye, which are rectilinear, which are fish and which are defished?
This is not quite deep-sky, but might be "landscape".
This is a composite image of the 2012 Perseid Meteor shower taken with a Canon 1DX and a rented Canon 8-15mm f/4.0L lens. The underlying background is a single image. I captured meteors throughout the night and picked the brightest ones to copy onto the background image. LightRoom and Photoshop CC were used to make the composite.
Thanks for looking,