Nikon DSLR "Picture Of The Day"

[cincyimages]

^ Nice photo of London.

[shoeytennis]

prospero, i love wide angle shots and yours is quite nice.

[T06]

I had to swerve around this little fellow on my m/bike. This is the look he gave me when I put him on the side of the road.

24-120mm VR

[TNB]

T06,
Cute pic. I'm also glad you saved the little guy.

i love cats eveyrone else feel free to post theres.
d50
50mm

Nice cat photo. Here are pictures of my two cats. If I recall correctly, I took both photos with my D50 and Sigma 70-300mm F/4-5.6. I later made the first photo slightly darker.

[Prospero]

Twism, I love it. Awesome.
Brian, I love your factory shot, too.
Dennis, good to see you back!

Thanks Tori, it's great to be back . The weeks before christmas had been really busy at the university, and the weeks after (that were supposed to be my holiday) were filled with things concerning the funeral of my uncle, so that basically explains my long absence.

[Prospero]

prospero, i love wide angle shots and yours is quite nice.

Thanks Shoeytennis. I also love wide angle; so much that the Sigma 10-20 has become the lens I use more than any of my other lenses .

[TNB]

Thanks Shoeytennis. I also love wide angle; so much that the Sigma 10-20 has become the lens I use more than any of my other lenses .

Have you compared the Sigma 10-20 with the Nikkor 10.5mm? I was comparing the Sigma 10-20mm with the Nikkor 10.5mm a couple of days ago and it seemed like the Sigma was a "corrected" version of the Nikkor 10.5mm. I only write that since when I ran a Nikkor 10.5mm photo through Nikon Capture Editor (using the simple button click option for the 10.5mm), the program automatically straightened the photo out and cropped the photo, appearing to render the corrected photo the same as the Sigma 10-20mm shot at 10mm. Based on that short use, I sort of prefer the Nikkor 10.5mm since it allowed either the wider uncorrected "fish-eye" version or the simple corrected version using the program, as well as having faster glass. I guess it just depends on whether one wants a wider angle with more bend or not. Any other imput would be appreciated since I am leaning heavily toward the Nikkor 10.5mm.

[Prospero]

Have you compared the Sigma 10-20 with the Nikkor 10.5mm? I was comparing the Sigma 10-20mm with the Nikkor 10.5mm a couple of days ago and it seemed like the Sigma was a "corrected" version of the Nikkor 10.5mm. I only write that since when I ran a Nikkor 10.5mm photo through Nikon Capture Editor (using the simple button click option for the 10.5mm), the program automatically straightened the photo out and cropped the photo, appearing to render the corrected photo the same as the Sigma 10-20mm shot at 10mm. Based on that short use, I sort of prefer the Nikkor 10.5mm since it allowed either the wider uncorrected "fish-eye" version or the simple corrected version using the program, as well as having faster glass. I guess it just depends on whether one wants a wider angle with more bend or not. Any other imput would be appreciated since I am leaning heavily toward the Nikkor 10.5mm.

I have not compared the Sigma 10-20 to the Nikkor 10.5mm. There are few places anymore here in the Netherlands where you can try out lenses (and those that still excist, are far away from where I live), so therefore I did not take the trouble to try the 10.5. The Sigma 10-20 is indeed an corrected or aspherical lens, unlike the 10.5.

From a purely technical point of view, there are quite a few objections to defishing a fish eye image. First of all, the image has to be cropped, which results in a loss of resolution. Secondly, due to the extreme barrel distortion of the 10.5 (the fish-eye effect), the center of the frame is larger while the sides are smaller when compared to a normal image. Thus, when defishing, the pixels of the sides of the frame will be 'stretched'. This results in a lower resolution on the sides of the frame, which was, as with any other lens, relatively worse to begin with (especially with lenses with such an extreme field of view). That said, I think (if you are not a pixel peeper), the result will be good enough for almost all purposes.

My biggest objection, however, against using a 10.5 to get a regular images, is that it is much more difficult to compose. What you see comes nowhere near to what you will eventually get. Especially in the case of wide angle shots I think this is a problem. When shooting with a wide angle while pointing it slightly up or downwards, you will get perspective distortion (converging lines). This can be a nuissance, but if well controlled, it can also be a great creative effect. However, when using a 10.5 fish-eye, it is a lot more difficult to control the effect. Of course, when pointing either lens straight forward, this is not an issue.

As you said, the fish-eye is f/2.8, while the zoom is only f/4. The prime is indeed quite a lot faster, but at 10 mm it is very easy to hand-hold shutterspeeds as low as 1/15th second. Combined with ISO 1600, f/4 will be fast enough in even the most subdued lighting (e.g. old cathedrals).

When I would have to chose again between these two lenses, I would still choose the Sigma. That is not to say that I would not like to have a 10.5 fisheye. Having a fish-eye will give you a lot of possibilities for creative effects and it comes in very handy when making panoramas. If you are interested in fish-eye, you might also want to take a look at the new Tokina 10-17.

[Twism]

^ Nice photo of London.

Twism, I love it. Awesome.
Brian, I love your factory shot, too.
Dennis, good to see you back!

Thanks guys, I had to sneak to the top floor of a block of flats to get that shot, nice to know it paid off

[davew]

first attempt at portriat of my oldest daughter
yes i know the bkg and lighting is not good
but it was to test the joe demb system on my flash
http://www.dembflashdiffusers.com/