Canon 15mm vs Sigma 15 or 8mm Fisheye

[SnapKAt]

Have any of you put these lenses to the test?
In terms of optics, which is better? I've traditionally stayed away from Sigma or Tamron and have kept to my fav L-series. But in this case, Canon is not making a high-end fisheye and I've heard some good stuff on the Sigma.

Any opinions?

[tiktaalik]

The Canon 15mm fisheye is a first class fisheye! The Sigma 15mm is also very highly regarded and some prefer it. You can't go wrong with either really.

The Sigma 8mm is also a nice lens, though there is chromatic aberration at the edges (can't really avoid that, though). It produces quite a different look than the 15mm lenses. If you want a fisheye to get a wide view on a crop body, then the 15mm is the answer. If you want a real fishy look, then go with the 8mm. The Sigma 8mm is a bit pricey, though...

[J Rabin]

Have any of you put these lenses to the test?
In terms of optics, which is better?...opinions?
Regarding the 15mm, funny you should ask, because I posted yesterday on FM Forum about this, which I will cut and paste here:

You'll have to make up your own mind, for your own needs. But, my user's opinion is this is one time when the Sigma lens outperforms the Canon example.

1. The Sigma has a nicer, smoother, manual focus ring. It is not dampened, but it is smooth, and broader than the Canon. Neither lens is great in this feature, but the Siggie wins. I manual focus this lens most of the time, so the slow mechanical noise is a non-issue, for me.

2. The Sigma has a maximum magnification of 0.26x at its close focus of 0.15 meter. This is almost double the Canon max. mag. of 0.14x at 0.2 meter. Since, for me, I use a fisheye as a "photo essay story-telling lens," pulling people into the image like: http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Plants_or_Fungi/Blueberry_Shots/slides/Blueberry_Duke_05.htm this was a make-it or break it feature in favor of Sigma.

3. The Sigma has a 7-blade aperture while the Canon has a 5-blade. No one buys a fish for quality of out-of-focus areas, and both are coarser than circular aperture lenses, but the Sigma is pretty good. Here's a couple of f/4 windy day playing shots with 1-DMkII:
http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Plants_or_Fungi/FishEye_Lens_Fun/slides/Daisy_in_Vetch_1.htm
http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Plants_or_Fungi/FishEye_Lens_Fun/slides/Poppy_in_Vetch_3.htm
These are from my 1-DMkII, with backgrounds chosen the show the barrel distortion.

4. Image quality and sharpness. I bought my Siggie used for $335 off FM Forum, and it is sharp enough at f/2.8. Beautifully sharp by f/4, and only gains depth of field, not sharpness beyond. Can't comment on the Canon.

5. Color rendition. I do not have the yellow off colors, maybe because I use Whi-Bal in workflow. My images are very neutral, like catching the cloud reflections in this 63kW solar panel energy installation: http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Industry/slides/BlewFarmSolar.htm Note this shot was with a 30D, not full frame. With careful composition, and bubble level in the hot shoe, the fence edges on frame left are remarkably straight, as is the barn on extreme frame right.

6. Chromatic Aberrations. OK, so the Siggie Fish lens has them. What ultra wide angle lens does NOT have them? None in this price range. In PSCS ACR Canon RAW workflow, depending on the outdoor scene contrast, this fixes readily in Adobe Camera RAW 3.4 with anywhere from a -12/+12 to -25/+25 correction. Can't comment on the Canon fish, did not experiment.

7. The Siggie comes with a nice hood cover that permits a normal lens cap to attach. A nice feature, along with a very nice padded carry pouch. The canon no pouch..

The most I do with it is a 1-DMkII. This MkII shot is certainly sharp out near margins: http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Plants_or_Fungi/FishEye_Lens_Fun/slides/AlmacoSoybeanPlanter_2.htm. Just tilt the 1-DMkII to a funky angle of the landscape or horizon, and distort the heck out stuff, like these haybales on a small rise: http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~rabin/Plants_or_Fungi/FishEye_Lens_Fun/slides/RoundBales_Fisheye_5.htm . Full frame I can't comment on. A full frame 5D will really stress the performance of this lens at the frame edges.

I like this lens, carefully used, and not over-used. Forgeting cost, on performance alone, it out-does the Canon. The savings is gravy. Sigma makes some worthy lenses. I like this one and the 150mm macro. Most of the rest are me-too boring.

Hope that helps. Jack

[dputz]

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m172/dputz1/CRW_6367.jpg

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m172/dputz1/CRW_6111.jpg

http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m172/dputz1/CRW_5950.jpg

Some images from the Sigma 15mm fisheye...excellent build and image quality...