Here's a guy who is using the 14mm 2.5 prime a lot with the wide angle adapter and portfolio he took. Very good quality if you are not incessantly pixel peeping and in fact he's pretty good at using it no doubt!!I know my two main primes will be the 14mm and 45mm. is the DMW-GWC1 good on the 14mm or should one just go with the 7.5 and defish? Anyone have and use both?
Personally, I never find 9mm or 18mm equiv FF all that wide at all and is closer to a 11mm with the adapter. I find 7mm or 14mm equiv FF much wider and more worth while. I looked into the 9-18mm, but then I'm basically paying for the 9mm f/4 end for like $400 refurb or $600 new for a rather slow lens. My m43 is already 2 stops behind full frame, so why am I intentionally buying much slower lens to work with the m43? Which was why I went with the converter route; in this case I already have a Nikon 0.75x lens handy and it works with both my Lumix 14 and Olympus 17mm f/1.8 lens giving me both an equivalent 21mm FOV and 26mm FOV full frame with very little loss of light. I'm still a stop and more ahead of the 9-18 zoom, giving me more flexibility and dynamic range as I work in the lower ISO ranges as opposed to someone who needs to shoot higher ISO because of the f/4-5.6 variable aperture. So what if the extreme corners are a bit smeared and soft, you can not manufacturer less noise, additional detail due to wider DR when working in lower ISO with Photoshop or DXO Optics Pro. It meant that I can print bigger with a lower ISO than someone who is forced to print smaller due to added noise and reduced DR range.You can't compare a 7.5 mm fisheye and a 11 mm rectilinear lens.
If you don't want fisheye images, I think it's a bad idea to buy a fisheye for the following reasons:
- In the viewfinder/LCD you won't see the defished image.
- defishing works only with images taken with much care on the orientations
- corners are just ugly on an defished image. you will need to reframe and the final image would be taken from a portion of the full sensor.
It's great to have the option to defish images sometimes, but in my opinion, it doesn't make sense to make it your principal use.
I didn't take exact angle of view measures but a defished image with the 7.5 mm seems much wider than a 7.5 mm lens.
I compared to my 10-22 canon lens at 10 mm, which is supposed to be equivalent (in terms of horizontal angle of view) to 8 mm approximately.
If I cut 25% of my image I got the same horizontal angle of view, so I think it makes an approx. 6 mm rectilinear lens when defished.
(anyway, if you want a decent quality you will reframe a little to avoid the extreme corners which are just ugly when defished).
In terms of angle of view, comparing a defished rockinon with the 14 mm + adapter is like comparing a 25 mm and a 45 mm.
In the end it all depends on what you want.
If you want a fisheye, the rockinon is great.
If you want a rectilinear wide angle, the GWC1 is a quite cheap way to get one (not very wide), the 9-18 is another (more expensive and more versatile) option.
Okay, I have a few questions:Now, I have a 10.5mm on the 14mm f/2.5 (21mm equiv @ f/2.5)
The Nikon wide angle converter gives my Lumix 14 a 10.5mm focal length, which is equivalent to a 21mm lens full frame -- the same as with the former Coolpix that it served for. The real Lumix converter gives you a 11mm focal length, which is equivalent to a 22mm lens in full frame. Focal length is a measurement of the subject matter taken in "INFINITY". That's how all manufacturers derive their focal length numbers for all lenses. The exception would be for lenses that can not focus at infinity in exchange for close focus ability.So, is the 14 + wide angle converter confirmed to be 10.5mm? I thought it was 11.5mm? Lord forbid actually specs be easy to find
You know, if it really IS a 10.5mm, and since I only have $100 tied up into it, and it's an f2.5, maybe keeping the converter is the right decision vs getting the 9-18 f4-5.6.
You see, there's a lot of difference between 11.5 and 10.5. There's also a lot of difference between 10.5 and 9. BUT, as I already have 10.5 (I think) and since getting that 9mm would be $500 (minus $100 for selling the converter), maybe keeping the 10.5mm is good. But, I've been saying "11.5" months and no one has corrected me. Hmm, I'm going to try to look that up now!
Lumix 14 with converter combo = 11mm. My Nikon combo = 10.5mm Don't confuse both.Okay, I have a few questions:
Exactly how wide IS the 14 + converter combo? Since it's 0.79x would it be simply 11mm?
How do you guys use the combo? Do you leave the adapter ring on and twist the converter on and off (which isn't fun) or do you simply treat the converter like a filter and screw it on and off as you need it? (Also not fun.) Considering Panasonic is nice enough to give you a cap for the adapter ring itself, I'm assuming the first is the recommended way, but I like the second method better, actually.
If I get a 37mm-46mm stepup ring I could use the lens on my 12-32. It would make it a 9.5mm, but probably vignette. Anyone try?