DA 10-17

I too tried out PTlens - the trial is good though it took me 3 tries out of the free 10 to get something right

Here is a comparisson between fully post processed, distortion corrected (left), and fisheye (right)

I like that shot.
I realize you are tying to demonstrate a good point.
I wonder why it would be needed to use software on that image.
here's why...
the horizon is soo close to the center of the frame, it could've easily been fixed in camera. Merely moving the camera a little and getting the horizon dead center of the frame would've given the same image, with no really noticible distortion.

now using the software to correct a street scene with lots of buildings would really show what the software does!

Although, why would I want to crop out that forground plant, and distort it more?
And would I really want the horizon dead centre?

Plus Id say the zooming effect of the clouds on the corrected one looks pretty good

I did infact not take the shot thinking of having it corrected, so that is why - i just did it for the sake of it. But when you can see a straight horizon, i personally dont like the fact the world is round

I shall be taking a trip into the city (Liverpool) tomorrow, and taking some building shots with it, so ill keep this thread updated with some corrected versions?

just to clarify, what I think is a little misunderstanding...
I said "moving the camera a little" not tilting it, or cropping out important elements... and with the sky as close to the center as it is, might as well have it centered and straight. but it is a nice image. a scene like that does warrant taking some time to try out a few different exposures/angles/shots to see what works best. suit to taste...

I was thinking about that image and I reckon that you could get the same effect by using the 12-24mm lens. Actually rather better probably as the straight line of the horizon would be naturally straight. I'm not sure you need a 10-17mm for that shot.

Fisheye lenses are not the easiest to use, so a lot of experimentation is a good thing.

Oh I completely agree, I didnt set out taking the shot knowing I was going to correct it, it just seemed to work when i did!

And as for fisheyes being not the easiest to use, its certainly different, you have to look at things with a complete new attitude - thinking about the 170 (its 180 diagonal) degree effect.

One of the difficulties with the fisheye is making sure you fill the frame with something more interesting than just a lot of bland sky or grass/water. The example above has a lot of interest in the sky, which helps a lot.

I've been using the 10-17mm for a while now and I must say I am very impressed by its optical quality, including its excellent control of flare, which is particularly important with such a wide angle of view.

The construction quality is also excellent and inspires confidence.

I am using the lens for a variety of landscape and architectural purposes and I'm very pleased with the way that it can be used to produce very wide landscapes with little apparent distortion, even when buildings are included. Of course, tilt the lens and the world goes haywire, as we would expect. The key to distortion free shots is very careful composition that hides the fisheye effect. This is great in woods and forests.

I did wonder if this would be ab expensive and seldom used gimmick, but it's not. It's as useful a lens as any other and broadens the possible repertoire of shots available.

I don't mean to be provocative, byt why do you get a fish-eye then get some software to "de-fish-eye" the results?

I'm guessing it would be for the same reason as correcting pictures taken on dull and lifeless days from dull and lifeless.

Drew

Good question, but I think you've mis-read me. The purpose of the fisheye was the ability to move close and still have a staggeringly wide field of view. It isn't software that can de-fisheye the result, but careful placement of objects in the frame so that nothing gives away the bending effect. It's still there, but especially in woodland it's possible to compose to disguise the curved lines.

Tip the lens and all is instantly revealed.

So no software involved at all in this.

As for why, it's to create and utilise the ultra ultra wide angle for creative purposes. And sometimes it's to get that fisheye effect, but if we keep on doing that it just gets boring!

Yes, I have found that my favourite pictures taken with my 10-17 are ones that dont include straight lines and therefore, no distortion, just incredible wide angles to fit in my subject