Wide angle for Nikon

[Bennvdm]

Viltrox 16mm f1.8 for z-mount appears to have been relased in some markets. Good review for milky way shots from Richard Trotti - Nightsscape images on youtube. Removable hood & takes 77mm filters. He rates it better than the Laowa 15mm f2. Looks to be around 550usd when converted.

 

[BobK]

I have an Irix 15mm and I love it. Manual focus, but at that wide an angle, who needs autofocus...

 

[BertieB]

.... And I have been offered to try a Laowa 10mm from a friend who will be there too

Elsa, how did it go with the Laowa10mm?

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

Elsa, how did it go with the Laowa10mm?

Bertie I am hoping to try it out in June.
A couple of us are going to the Cederberg 7-9 June to freeze our
derrières off shooting the milky way. One of the guys will let me try his lens then.

In the interim I actually managed to sort out my 16mm fisheye - so I will be playing with that too.

 

[BertieB]

Got notified that the Loawa 10mm will be shipping from HK next week, so hoping to have it with me back in the DRC by end of May.
The 16mm Viltrox f1.8 looks like a good option with less aberration issues than the 10mm with milky way photography

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

Got notified that the Loawa 10mm will be shipping from HK next week, so hoping to have it with me back in the DRC by end of May.
The 16mm Viltrox f1.8 looks like a good option with less aberration issues than the 10mm with milky way photography

Ya I think you are right - and 10 might be just too much. But it looks like one would have to ship from the States when it becomes available

 

[MikeJ]

Ya I think you are right - and 10 might be just too much.

My concern, too, Elsa. I sent an email to to Lensrentals asking if they were going to carry the Laowa 10mm as I'd like to try it out before I buy it and find out it's too wide for astro. They responded that their purchasing team is aware of the 10mm, but they haven't gotten a yes or no to if they are going to carry it. Guess time will tell!

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

My concern, too, Elsa. I sent an email to to Lensrentals asking if they were going to carry the Laowa 10mm as I'd like to try it out before I buy it and find out it's too wide for astro. They responded that their purchasing team is aware of the 10mm, but they haven't gotten a yes or no to if they are going to carry it. Guess time will tell!

Interesting response from them -

 

[O]

I use the 16mm fish eye F2.8 Nikon, just love it for astro which it was originally designed for as it has a 180 degree field of view.
I do street and landscape photography with it as well, driving it is the key to good outcomes and artistry.
The all round do it all $600-$700 USD, is the 14-24 F2.8 g i think has a 135 degree field of view. I suggested the 14-24 F2.8G as an option based on budget and versatility for other use. I can do everything else brilliantly as well. Its sharp great DOF, can from memory get as close as 6 inches. At the moment there is a tone of then for sale dirt cheap.
Its also one of my favorite landscape and paparazzi lenses.
For astro i come back to even F4 at times, 3200 iso 15-25 seconds for the milky way.

Only an opinion

 

[Roy]

I use the 16mm fish eye F2.8 Nikon, just love it for astro which it was originally designed for as it has a 180 degree field of view.
I do street and landscape photography with it as well, driving it is the key to good outcomes and artistry.
The all round do it all $600-$700 USD, is the 14-24 F2.8 g i think has a 135 degree field of view. I suggested the 14-24 F2.8G as an option based on budget and versatility for other use. I can do everything else brilliantly as well. Its sharp great DOF, can from memory get as close as 6 inches. At the moment there is a tone of then for sale dirt cheap.
Its also one of my favorite landscape and paparazzi lenses.
For astro i come back to even F4 at times, 3200 iso 15-25 seconds for the milky way.

Only an opinion

You do understand a 14mm is wider than a 16mm and is therefor a wider FOV.
confusing the diagonal FOV with the horizontal is probably the cause...

 

[O]

1

You do understand a 14mm is wider than a 16mm and is therefor a wider FOV.
confusing the diagonal FOV with the horizontal is probably the cause...

14 -24 is a 114 degree FOV, for 16 mm fish eye it's 180 degree FOV, it is built specifically for astronomy, doing this on my phone flying a plain sorry

 

[MMoretti]

I keep forgetting I have a copy of the 16/2.8! How do you think it’ll perform for astro with my vintage D1X’s CMOS sensor?

Feel free to opine after you land…

 

[joe43]

I use a Irix 11mm f4 manual focus lens in a Nikon F mount. It comes in two versions, Firefly and Blackstone. The Firefly costs less as it has less metal in it than the Blacktone. I have used it for star trails not milky way shots. Both are on sale right now. I have the Firely version.

You can download a manual form Irix that explains how to use it.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1325632-REG/irix_il_11ff_nf_11mm_firefly_lens_for.html

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

I can do everything else brilliantly as well.

Only an opinion

oh boy

(okey i wasn't going to miss the chance to pull your chain )

thank you though for your opinion - it was useful. I am sticking withe the fish-eye for the event.

I found a little article by the lens designer - rather interesting - https://imaging.nikon.com/imaging/information/story/0053/
He designed the lens when he was 28. Kids these days don't even make their own beds at 28.

 

[O]

oh boy

(okey i wasn't going to miss the chance to pull your chain )

thank you though for your opinion - it was useful. I am sticking withe the fish-eye for the event.

I found a little article by the lens designer - rather interesting - https://imaging.nikon.com/imaging/information/story/0053/
He designed the lens when he was 28. Kids these days don't even make their own beds at 28.

good one, luckily i always make my bed but it depends on who is left in their LOL.

Very interesting article thanks for sharing, enjoyed it. https://imaging.nikon.com/imaging/information/story/0053/

The only reason i mentioned the 16 mm F2.8 180 degree Fish Eye is because you actually have one, its the type of lens that if i spend time with it one can really deliver very creative outcomes from normal to abstract, especially landscapes.

There are all sorts of EXCELLENT different lens options out there enough to do your head in i guess. Some very good as mentioned by people in this post.

It depends on what your doing or want to do, the only reason i mentioned the 14-24 F2.8 is because its dirt cheap USED, its F2.8 very very fast and doubles in other areas.

If your using a Z8 Z9 the benefit of using Z glass because of the edge to edge performance will have benefits, but i think the only super wide lens is the Z 14-24 F2.8 however its chronically over priced.

Good luck,

Only an opinion

 

[O]

I keep forgetting I have a copy of the 16/2.8! How do you think it’ll perform for astro with my vintage D1X’s CMOS sensor?

Feel free to opine after you land…

The lens will work for astro as we know, the 1DX's should work with the lens however i have no experience with that camera.

The 16mm fish eye F2.8 Nikon was released around 1981 form memory and still going today WOW, - it works brilliantly on my Z9 Z8 but its only with manual focus which is perfectly fine anyway, it focuses automatically on my D850 and all the other DSLRs and is very very sharp, at least my sample is.

At F4 F5.6 F8 its an impressive super sharp and wide lens, i have found it to also be very impressive at F2.8 given its vintage, if you can use it creatively to its potential its actually a very good tool and on the Z8 Z9 a breeze to focus with manually.

Its also one of my favorite street photography lenses next to the 14-24 F2.8 G.

I am certain there are plenty of other modern options out there.

Only an opinion

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

good one, luckily i always make my bed but it depends on who is left in their LOL.

Very interesting article thanks for sharing, enjoyed it. https://imaging.nikon.com/imaging/information/story/0053/

The only reason i mentioned the 16 mm F2.8 180 degree Fish Eye is because you actually have one, its the type of lens that if i spend time with it one can really deliver very creative outcomes from normal to abstract, especially landscapes.

There are all sorts of EXCELLENT different lens options out there enough to do your head in i guess. Some very good as mentioned by people in this post.

It depends on what your doing or want to do, the only reason i mentioned the 14-24 F2.8 is because its dirt cheap USED, its F2.8 very very fast and doubles in other areas.

If your using a Z8 Z9 the benefit of using Z glass because of the edge to edge performance will have benefits, but i think the only super wide lens is the Z 14-24 F2.8 however its chronically over priced.

Good luck,

Only an opinion

For a change you spoke some sense
I am not interested in the 14-24, I had an excellent copy before - and never used it - it's also big -in comparison - the 16mm is tiny. You might have solved my problem to a great extent.

 

[O]

One good point on the board for me means a lot especially coming from you, let me see if i can earn another.



FWIW and your last dose...........LOL

The 16mm cant take filters on the front, it as you know can on the back, play with that as you will.

If i need a filter ND or even a CP using the 16mm fish eye i like the old school photographers did simply hand hold a filter in front of the lens, sound draconian, No, it just works a treat.

a) i try it with out a make shift hood extension and just hold up the filter, or b) use some black mat card cut to a strip place around the edge of the lens hood fix it with a couple of strong rubber bands, hold up teh filter when needed does the job perfectly.

I place the make shift hood extended out about 5 to 10mm till i dont see vignetting, easy all of 5 minutes to make and insatll if needed at all.

Now most people couldn't be bothered doing this and i understand, but its a good way to make a determination using what you have got.

But yes spending the bucks for a conventional filter holding lens may make sense


Only an opinion