Neewer 0.43x 72mm Wide Angle Lens with Macro for Canon

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Nemo, Aug 27, 2011.

  1. Nemo

    Nemo Guest

    Nemo, Aug 27, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Nemo

    DanP Guest

    Forget it, it will give you soft distorted pictures with chromatic aberration.
    And at widest point your pictures will be enclosed by a black circle.

    Either stitch photos together or buy a proper wide angle lens.

    DanP
     
    DanP, Aug 27, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Nemo

    Robert Coe Guest

    : Forget it, it will give you soft distorted pictures with chromatic aberration.
    : And at widest point your pictures will be enclosed by a black circle.
    :
    : Either stitch photos together or buy a proper wide angle lens.

    Stitching photos together is a hobby in its own right. If you enjoy it, do it.
    But if your objective is simply to get pictures you can't get now, buy a
    proper WA lens. Unless your time is truly worthless (i.e., you're in prison or
    something), the time saving will soon pay for the lens. (Yes, I know there are
    excellent stitching programs available. But there's still plenty of hard work
    you'll have to do yourself.)

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Aug 28, 2011
    #3
  4. []
    Bob, with a program like Autopano Pro there is virtually /no/ hard work to
    do other than taking the original photos, where you may benefit from using
    a fixed exposure across the set. No need for a tripod or pano head. Try
    it and see for yourself:

    http://www.kolor.com/

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 28, 2011
    #4
  5. Nemo

    Nemo Guest

    Is that based on actual experience or just 'too good to be true'
    cynicism/realism, similar to my own?
     
    Nemo, Aug 29, 2011
    #5
  6. In my experience with shelves full of these WA converters,
    I have run across only a few that perform well *with lenses
    that optically match them* (the final image quality depends
    almost as much on compatibility as on the inherent quality
    of the attachment). *IN GENERAL*, if you want a not-quite-
    full-frame-fisheye attachment, some of the .43X attachments
    do work well on many ***camcorder*** lenses (but NOT still
    camera lenses). Also, the highest-quality converters have
    relatively small rear elements, making them impractical for
    use on large front diameter lenses. And, the best results
    are to be had with the deeper multi-element converters rather
    than the flattish one or two-cemented element converters.
    For camcorders, the ones that tend to work best and purport
    to be low in linear distortion (but this is not true for any
    but the Sony, and especially the Raynox converters (the Sony
    "HG" series, and the Raynox ".66X" series [the latter are
    all the same, but with different built in thread mounts
    [up to 62mm], so it's usually best to buy that size and use
    a thin stepping ring for smaller diameter mounting threads],
    but these do not zoom over a wide range away from widest
    angle [the Canon .7X 58mm-threaded converter does, but it
    has very high linear distortion]). I've never been very
    impressed with the relatively expensive Century converters
    in wider than .8x (although several of these are made with
    72mm or larger mounting threads). Bottom line: I don't think
    you will find what you want, and must do what "DanP" and
    others have suggested, especially since your lens mounting
    thread is so large.

    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Aug 29, 2011
    #6
  7. Nemo

    DanP Guest

    I am embarrassed to say I have purchased the 58mm model one and a half year ago. I have maybe 3 shots taken with it, weird close ups.

    The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is now on my wish list but my wallet says no.


    DanP
     
    DanP, Aug 29, 2011
    #7
  8. Nemo

    Savageduck Guest

    The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is a great lens, and you should twist your
    wallet's arm until she gives up and says yes.

    This was taken at 11mm.
    < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DNC_0348_Nw.jpg >
     
    Savageduck, Aug 29, 2011
    #8
  9. Nemo

    Nemo Guest

    Thanks David and DanP, you've convinced me. I'll not be wasting my time
    on it. A small, lightweight wide angle lens for 1/20th the price? -
    dream on :-(

    For the relatively few occasions I need wider than 18mm (full frame
    equivalent ~29mm), I'll stick to photo-stitching for the time being.

    Incidentally, I find Photoshop Elements 9 does quite a good job of
    stitching shots without a lot of fuss.
     
    Nemo, Aug 29, 2011
    #9
  10. The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is now on my wish list but my wallet says no.
    A somewhat lower-cost and lighter alternative, that has a rather wider
    zoom range and hence is more versatile is the Tamron 10-24mm. It does
    have a smaller maximum aperture though.

    http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_10-24_3p5-5p6_n15/

    Might be worth a look. I've been pleased with mine. The Tokina lacks the
    focus motor required by some cameras.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 30, 2011
    #10
  11. Nemo

    Robert Coe Guest

    > The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 is now on my wish list but my wallet says no.
    : >
    : >
    : > DanP
    :
    : A somewhat lower-cost and lighter alternative, that has a rather wider
    : zoom range and hence is more versatile is the Tamron 10-24mm. It does
    : have a smaller maximum aperture though.
    :
    : http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_10-24_3p5-5p6_n15/
    :
    : Might be worth a look. I've been pleased with mine. The Tokina lacks the
    : focus motor required by some cameras.

    It does? That sounds backwards to me. I thought recent 3rd-party lenses for
    Nikon cameras always had a motor, since many lower-end Nikon bodies now don't.
    The Canon version, which I have, has to have a motor, of course, because Canon
    bodies never did.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Aug 31, 2011
    #11
  12. Nemo

    Savageduck Guest

    Mine works just fine on my D300s & my D70, but it is dependent on the
    in-camera AF motor. So it would not be a good choice for the D40, D60,
    D3000, or D5000 where you would be limited to manual focus.
     
    Savageduck, Aug 31, 2011
    #12
  13. According to the ever-reliable Ken Rockwell (ahem), it has no motor.

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm

    Photo.net agrees:

    http://photo.net/equipment/tokina/11-16/

    Perhaps there will be an updated version sometime? It stopped me buying
    the lens.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 31, 2011
    #13
  14. Nemo

    Savageduck Guest

    Savageduck, Aug 31, 2011
    #14
  15. Nemo

    J. Clarke Guest

    DPreview claims that the version of the 11-16 2.8 for Canon has a motor.
    Be tough selling into the Canon market without one.
     
    J. Clarke, Aug 31, 2011
    #15
  16. Depends on the brand. Practically all Tamron lenses introduced in the last
    few years do have built-in AF motors, but most Tokina lenses do not. I think
    all Sigma lenses now do, but I'm not really so familiar with the Sigma line.
     
    Neil Harrington, Sep 1, 2011
    #16
  17. Yep. Too cheap to be any good, and it isn't really a lens in and of itself
    anyway -- it's a wide-angle converter that you screw into the front of your
    camera lens. You can pretty much count on something like that being horrible
    in image quality. There are some good wide-angle converters but they are
    much bigger and much more expensive as well.
    Frankly, you're not likely to find any serious reviews on a piece of crap
    like this.
     
    Neil Harrington, Sep 1, 2011
    #17
  18. Nemo

    PeterN Guest

    Yes autostich works in many cases. But with any stitch technique, I have
    yet to see a successful scene simulating an angle of 150 and a close up
    foreground object that is under 1' from the film plane.
     
    PeterN, Sep 1, 2011
    #18
  19. Nemo

    Savageduck Guest

    That might be true for that extreme example, but if it is impressive
    panos you want it is time to step up to GigaPan.
    < http://www.gigapansystems.com/ >
    < http://gigapan.org/gigapans/fullscreen/46074/ >
     
    Savageduck, Sep 1, 2011
    #19
  20. Nemo

    PeterN Guest

    No question.
    To automate the process in theory, one would have to mount the camera on
    a concave track around the foreground object.
     
    PeterN, Sep 1, 2011
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.