Lens Options

I am researching a new lens purchase for my T3i (600d). I am looking at getting either a 35mm or a 28mm. I sortof lean to the 28mm for the little extra width, my issue is does it "fisheye". I don't have the ability to test either of them at this point but I need something a little wider than my 50mm for areas that are a little closer. I really hate that fisheye look which is why I do not have a gopro (yea I have seen where they use software or whatever to flatten it out but I have no desire to mess with that and do not believe it to keep quality). If there is no problem with the 28mm, how far can you actually go down without getting that fisheye look. So although I plan on getting both at some point (provided the 28mm does not fisheye) which is the one I should get for my kit (I currenlty have the 50mm f1.8 ( which I plan to eventually upgrade to the 1.4 and eventually the 1.2 as they have better DOF and a larger focus ring), the kit 18-55 and a 70-200. I am working to get a fixed prime set as am not really a fan of the zooms for personal reasons).
 
You generally won't get to fisheye range until you get down to 12mm and below usually.. 14 can be right on the cusp. But it's somewhat dependent on sensor size too.

On an APS-C sensor like your camera has, 28mm is pretty much 'normal' visually.. as in, pretty close to normal field of view with they naked eye.

The rokinon 14mm, for example, can have a bit of fisheye pincushion effect, but depending on the subject matter, that can go unnoticed, and be pleasing -- wide expansive landscape shots, for example.

The tokina 11-16, in fact will go very wide on an APS-C, with very little noticable pincushion in a lot of scenarios.

Anyway, the short answer, none of the options you referenced in your post would be anywhere close to fisheye. ;)
 
You're not happy with 50mm 1.8 and want to go down to 50mm 1.4?

I don't really get this .. there is an extremely small DOF with that 1.8 to the point where it is unusable for most shots in a film without a dedicated and talented focus puller
 
You're not happy with 50mm 1.8 and want to go down to 50mm 1.4?

Agree, better to add light and ND filtration than blow a bunch of money getting an extra stop faster lens.

Unless this is the OP's subtle way of saying they like to shoot in the dark, in which case.. the same applies, better to add light and ND filtration. :lol:
 
You're not happy with 50mm 1.8 and want to go down to 50mm 1.4?

I don't really get this .. there is an extremely small DOF with that 1.8 to the point where it is unusable for most shots in a film without a dedicated and talented focus puller

I do love the 1.8 but the main reason I want to go to 1.4 is I cannot get a gear to stay on the 1.8 so I cannot use my follow focus on it. The 1.4 focus ring looks about twice the size and setup different, better. Although I just saw some images on google for 1.8 that might work. Not the same lens as what I have though.
 
You generally won't get to fisheye range until you get down to 12mm and below usually.. 14 can be right on the cusp. But it's somewhat dependent on sensor size too.

On an APS-C sensor like your camera has, 28mm is pretty much 'normal' visually.. as in, pretty close to normal field of view with they naked eye.

The rokinon 14mm, for example, can have a bit of fisheye pincushion effect, but depending on the subject matter, that can go unnoticed, and be pleasing -- wide expansive landscape shots, for example.

The tokina 11-16, in fact will go very wide on an APS-C, with very little noticable pincushion in a lot of scenarios.

Anyway, the short answer, none of the options you referenced in your post would be anywhere close to fisheye. ;)

Thanks a bunch. I may just try to go for the 28 then since it will have a slightly wider frame.
 
the canon thrifty 50 was a pain to use with FF when I had one. What finally worked was using a thick rubber band on the focus ring. I could then get the gear ring to tighten enough to stay on the lens.
 
Back
Top