I have been shooting Canon for about 40 years. About three years ago I finally got into digital with the 7D. Less than a year ago I bought the 5D3. Great cameras! I have a nice variety of primes and zooms (all Canon) and it is always nice to have something super-wide. I bought the Rokinon 8mm for the 7D and was very happy with that lens! Since I am shooting moistly FF now, I decided to sell the 8mm and buy a mint Canon 15mm on eBay. It is the highest S/N that I saw and is quite mint. I have to say that I am just a bit disappointed with the lens. The Roki had a really nice snap and contrast to it that I am not seeing in the Canon. I used the Roki on the 7D and the Canon 15mm on the 5D3 doing very similar shots, at night games, in our SF Giants ballpark. I believe the coverage is about the same. I sold the Roki to make room in my wallet for the Canon. Seriously, the photos are fine until you go pixel peeping. There is a lot of CA and they just do not have the contrast, color rendition or feel of the Roki. Is anyone out there using the Canon fisheye? Do you feel that it is sharp? I think I shot mostly at f5.6 since it was night and at pretty high ISO's (never an issue with Canon, IMHO). The physical size and all is really perfect. It works out to about a 24mm when on the 7D body, which is nice. In the wide range I have the 24-70 f4 and the 28mm f1.8 prime. I am just curious to hear from other users about their thoughts about the quality of this lens. Is it worth sending in to Canon to have it evaluated? Nothing seems to be wrong with it, but it simply does not seem to live up to the quality standards that I expect from Canon. Thanks so much!
Community thoughts on Canon 15mm f2.8 fisheye lens
- Thread starter craiglove
- Start date
Sorry to hear you are having problems with this lens. Take a look at the review at the digital picture and see if you think your is off. It does talk about stopping down for sharpness, and he does not seem really exited.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-15mm-f-2.8-Fisheye-Lens-Review.aspx
About 8 years ago I made the jump from Nikon to Canon, and I love fisheye, so this lens was on my list. But I recall reading that the Sigma was as good or better, and I bought it. When the 8-15mm came out I sold the Sigma 15mm and I have to say, I frigin love the 8-15mm. It is always sharp, seemingly always perfect. The versatility of the zoom is a great help
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-15mm-f-2.8-Fisheye-Lens-Review.aspx
About 8 years ago I made the jump from Nikon to Canon, and I love fisheye, so this lens was on my list. But I recall reading that the Sigma was as good or better, and I bought it. When the 8-15mm came out I sold the Sigma 15mm and I have to say, I frigin love the 8-15mm. It is always sharp, seemingly always perfect. The versatility of the zoom is a great help
Upvote
0
I think that the Canon 15mm FE is supurb. If yours is having a issue, it might benefit from a tuneup.
I'm selling mine simply because I don't use it enough. I had a Samyang 14mm, it was so bad that it went back after 1 day.
I'm selling mine simply because I don't use it enough. I had a Samyang 14mm, it was so bad that it went back after 1 day.
Upvote
0
My story is very similar to yours with the difference that I was using a Sigma 10mm on my 7D. When I jumped into FF (5D3 as well) I decided to buy a fisheye and was evaluating the Sigma 15mm and the Canon 15mm. Finally, I got a mint Canon EF 15mm and honestly I'm happy with the pictures it takes. Contrast is OK and sharpness too. Some CA but easily fixable using LR.craiglove said:
Upvote
0
I also bought mine second hand from eBay, pretty good condition with a slight dint on the hood. Overall this lens is fantastic, mine is very sharp at 2.8 and iq is excellent. You might have bad copy, but I've never used the roki so I can't compare, I have many L lenses and the 15mm is as good 
Upvote
0
The Rokinon 8mm is a rebranded Samyang lens, and the later company has announced a FF version of the 8mm fishsye, which is available for pre order.
As for the Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 fisheye, I have & love it. It does have purple fringing in the corners, and I often improve the colors in post processing.
As for the Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 fisheye, I have & love it. It does have purple fringing in the corners, and I often improve the colors in post processing.
Upvote
0
Mr Bean said:
The Zeiss 15mm is rectilinear, and much more expensive than the fisheye lenses discussed in this thread.
Upvote
0
i just love the 15mm, i normally shoot it at f/8 but its good wide open too. i mostly use dxo, it does a really good job of de-fishing if thats what you want. you can do it all or partially in real time.
the van is partially de-fished at f/8 the baby pic is uncorrected (i don't think "un-de-fished" is a word) at f/2.8
the van is partially de-fished at f/8 the baby pic is uncorrected (i don't think "un-de-fished" is a word) at f/2.8
Attachments
Upvote
0
I've had mine for many years. Perfectly sharp until recently when I dropped it! Still works but not as sharp.
Maybe yours could do with a tune up!
Maybe yours could do with a tune up!
Upvote
0
I have played with a number of fisheye lenses from Nikon, Pentax, and Canon. Both on native mounts and with adapters for the EOS, and the Canon 15 is by far the best fisheye lens I have used. I have not played with the Sigma, or the Samyang lenses, and I have no experience with any of the zoom fisheye lenses.
Upvote
0
I have had this lens for years and I love it. It's a blast to shoot. I mostly use it to get lots of scouts in a frame in a small space. Whatever I see in LR when I process the photos, I fix with Lens Corrections (CA, etc) or a slight crop (Edge Distortion, etc.). Perhaps you should consider getting it checked out. I've never used the Roki/Samy lens so I can't speak to that.
Here are some examples of what can be done with it for events, tight spaces, etc.
Start with image 31...
http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/alliance-hires
Start with image 22...
http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/nasa2012
Start with image 177...
http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/ussfortworth
Here are some examples of what can be done with it for events, tight spaces, etc.
Start with image 31...
http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/alliance-hires
Start with image 22...
http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/nasa2012
Start with image 177...
http://rustythegeek.zenfolio.com/ussfortworth
Upvote
0
Thank you ALL for your replies! Possibly I am expecting too much from this lens. The images are not terrible, not just up to the Canon IQ I am used to. My 70-200 is totally amazing. The 24-70 is great as well. The 135L 2.0 is astounding and the 15mm is just OK. Maybe I should try shooting a test chart. Any thoughts here? It is just when I push in on the image it is simply no where as sharp. Do any of you have experience sending lenses in to Canon to have them checked? Again, the lens looks new. This is my first post and I am very grateful for all of the replies! I am going to attempt to attach one shot from the World Series this year. It was shot at f8, but only 1/40th sec. ISO 320. Yes, I should have bumped the ISO as the light was falling, but there were a lot of things going on!
OK, I seem to be impaired. I have chosen the image like ten times now and it simply does not show up! It is a 300kb .jpg image. I chose "choose file" and the number plus jpg shows up, but nothing shows up in the preview. I tried drag and drop, and again the number of the image shows up in the box, but there is nothing when I hit preview. Thoughts? Thank you all, Craig
OK, I seem to be impaired. I have chosen the image like ten times now and it simply does not show up! It is a 300kb .jpg image. I chose "choose file" and the number plus jpg shows up, but nothing shows up in the preview. I tried drag and drop, and again the number of the image shows up in the box, but there is nothing when I hit preview. Thoughts? Thank you all, Craig
Attachments
Upvote
0
craiglove said:
I've never seen the images show up in the forum post preview. No worries there. All I know is that if the images exceed the size limit, the preview doesn't show up at all. No errors, just no preview at all.
As for the images... well they look fine to me. At least they look fine given the info you gave... 1/40 shutter at f/8, ISO 320 in falling/fairly dark dusk light. Plus, you are likely shaking and the stadium you are sitting in is most definitely shaking whether you realize it or not. You are literally bouncing up and down at least a fraction of an inch as the stadium is moving with all the shifting weight (people) around you.
I would have to see more images with preferably perfect exposure to give the lens the best chance. Keep in mind that a FishEye lens is a pretty big compromise type of lens design. It's designed for ultra width, not ideal and superior IQ. That's why the 8-15L costs $1350 new compared to the (still a bit expensive) EF 15mm at around $500 - $600 used. It's not the easiest lens in the world to make and get well aligned. And frankly, I don't even know if you can AFMA it to your camera. Anyone else know or has tried AFMA on a FishEye lens?
With all that said, the EF 15mm FishEye is usually known for being a pretty sharp and well reviewed lens.
Upvote
0
I believe this was my first lens purchase after buying my first 5DmkII(24-105 kit). Great lens. Sharp as a tack and FUN. I still have it, even after buying the 8-15mm as soon as it was available. I saw no reason to sell it. I'm one of those guys that hangs onto everything. Didn't need to get rid of it to "free up funds" and I feel the 15mm and 8-15mm each have there own uses, especially since the 15mm is a stop faster. Fisheyes and W/A's aren't just about being able to "get everything" in the shot. You can have some fun and get creative shooting WAO at MOD, too.
Upvote
0
My 15/2.8 is great. I bought on eBay then found that I had won a new old stock lens from a closed down camera shop. It's not a lens for every occasion, but when a building has a good roof structure, nothing else will do. I rarely point mine horizontally, it's either pointed upwards or inside something.
Build quality is good, far ahead of the 50/1.8 II which was my first Canon lens. Autofocus is noisy, and there is no full time manual when switched to AF. That really doesn't matter, autofocus is not required. Depth of field is enormous, and there is a scale to work to. IQ seems best up to f/5.6, I guess diffraction comes early at this focal length. The focus ring is good to use, but I usually set it and forget it.
It's no longer listed by Canon UK, but notice that it is still current on the US website.
Build quality is good, far ahead of the 50/1.8 II which was my first Canon lens. Autofocus is noisy, and there is no full time manual when switched to AF. That really doesn't matter, autofocus is not required. Depth of field is enormous, and there is a scale to work to. IQ seems best up to f/5.6, I guess diffraction comes early at this focal length. The focus ring is good to use, but I usually set it and forget it.
It's no longer listed by Canon UK, but notice that it is still current on the US website.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)