1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Showcase no-name 8mm F3.8 4/3” Fish-Eye lens

Discussion in 'Native Lens Sample Image Showcase' started by Bruce McL, Mar 22, 2016.

Tags:
  1. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    This micro 4/3 lens is available on ebay and amazon. Sometimes you will see it with “Fotasy” printed on the lens, sometimes without. The MFT mount is built in. Measurements on my lens: 107 grams, 63mm wide at lens hood, 38mm long.

    It can be found on ebay and amazon for around $70.00. Below is a link to a photo of the lens on my GM5.

    Show us what your adapted lens looks like on your camera

    — Edit September 2016 - Here are lens profiles I use in Lightroom to de-fish my images. These are a modified version of some Rokinon 7.5 profiles. I discuss these in a later post in this thread.

    https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8zQMOs6acYVVEpCZFFJOU5DZHM

    — end edit

    The photos below were shot RAW, with a fair amount of post processing. This is my second day with the lens, and it was raining yesterday.

    The first one is not cropped. It represents the full width and height this lens is capable of.

    P1020064.JPG

    The images de-fish well, I think.

    P1020033.JPG

    I could have dialed in some vertical correction below, but I like the look as is.

    P1020016.JPG

    Below is direct sunlight in a very mildly cropped image. In general I didn’t have a lot of problems with flare today. However, CA and fringing definitely exist - most images needed correcting for CA in Lightroom, and many needed fringing correction as well.

    P1010982.JPG
     
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2016
    • Like Like x 8
    • Informative Informative x 2
  2. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    nice, thanks for sharing
     
  3. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 Top Veteran

    764
    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    I have to say, for about $60 those photos are excellent, quite the bang for the buck. How large is it?
     
  4. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    38mm long, 63mm wide at the lens hood. A lot smaller at the camera mount. I saw something on the web saying the weight was 160 grams, but that is not right - it's 107.

    I think the images are a step up from the Olympus 9mm Body Cap Lens, which I own as well.
     
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2016
  5. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Interesting. I wonder why it's so hard to find? Would be good to see it up against the excellent and affordable Samyang 7.5mm, which optically surpasses even the Olympus 8mm PRO in some respects.
     
  6. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    It is not very hard to find: 8mm fisheye mft | eBay


    I looked into this last year when they first started popping up. Optically, I would say it like a 9mm f8 BCL with an f3.8 aperture and a focus ring. Someone posted some full size samples a while back: Showcase - Unbranded CCTV 8mm f/3.8 fisheye
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    On Ebay, search for 8mm lens and sort by price. They start showing up at $65.00 or so and continue to around $70.00.

    I don't own the Samyang 7.5 or the Panasonic 8mm. I have seen a lot of sample images of both lenses though. This no-name lens is much closer in image quality to those two than to images from the Olympus 9mm Body Cap Lens, which I do own. I can post some RAW images from this lens for download sometime if people are that interested.
     
    Last edited: Mar 28, 2016
  8. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Interesting. The samples I saw from someone else had really bad edges. Sample variation?
     
  9. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    User KenW posted some Lightroom and ACR lens profiles for de-fishing the Rokinon 7.5mm. They actually work pretty well with this lens.

    Rokinon/Samyang 7.5 Lens Profiles: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

    Here are a couple of images using the Stereographic lens profile.

    P1020638.JPG

    P1020626.JPG

    All in all, after a few weeks of use, I think the image quality is quite a bit better than the Olympus 9mm Body Cap Lens, which is slightly more expensive. This lens also gives you a much wider field of view than the Olympus 9mm BCL. The Olympus 9mm is listed as 140 degrees, and this lens seems like a typical 180 degree fisheye.

    If you already have a Rokinon 7.5mm, you are not missing anything if you pass up this lens. If you don’t have a fisheye and want to start with something that’s better then the Body Cap Lens but not as expensive and heavy as the Rokinon/Samyang, this lens is worth considering.

    There are two things about this lens that were disappointing to me. First, the vinyl bag it came with smells very bad, like a burning oil refinery. Second, sometimes there is fuzz at the edge of the image, starting at a corner and running down the short side of the image. I returned my first lens because of this and ordered from a different supplier. Both lenses show the problem, but it’s not nearly as bad on my second lens. Cropping 5 or 10 pixels from the short side of the image gets rid of the fuzz.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. min

    min Mu-43 Rookie

    11
    Jun 3, 2011
    Is the lens hood removeable? The other showcase shows the lens without a hood. Are we talking about two different lenses here? Perhaps that explains sample variations.
     
  11. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    The lens hood is not removable. I have seen two C mount lenses that look a lot like this one. One has two "petals" on the end, the other has none - as in the other showcase. This lens has 4 petals, and is not C mount, it is micro 4/3. I don't know if all three lenses are the same, but I suspect they are very similar.

    I have worked these images over in Lightroom, removing a lot of the fringing and chromatic aberration. Also I try to use F8 - that seems to be the sweet spot. In other words, I could easily produce images that look a lot worse with this lens by going to JPEG and F3.8. :)
     
  12. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    I found some outstanding fringing on some of my photos yesterday. i am sharing one for those who are curious about just how bad this lens can be. Note that this is shot at F8, so there is potential for poorer image quality at larger apertures.

    First, the "after" photo:

    P1020731.JPG

    And now, a full size corner crop of the RAW file with no corrections for fringing or CA.

    P1020731-2.JPG
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    • Like Like x 10
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. shesmu

    shesmu Mu-43 Rookie

    16
    Dec 18, 2013
    Couple more.
    It's sometimes hard to keep fingers off the frame with this lens, especially when shooting from hip using a camera with a grip. Shot at f16, ISO 3200, no post-processing.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 4
  15. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Wow why f/16? You can do hyperfocal shooting at like f/5.6 with such a wide fisheye.
     
  16. shesmu

    shesmu Mu-43 Rookie

    16
    Dec 18, 2013
    F16 is to get max corner quality (because corners degrade significantly with each f-stop).

    Regarding hyperfocal, I've found it impractical to use it with this lens in most cases. Since infinity starts right after 1 meter, hyperfocal may come in handy only if you want to get in focus something that is really close and not covered by DOF at infinity. By really close I mean less than 30 cm or so. In other cases I've found that it makes sense to focus on your front subject. When shooting this guy I was focusing on his face which was about 40 cm away. I didn't actually need sharp background there but if I needed it I'd say it's sharp enough to not bother with hyperfocal (since HF is about acceptable sharpness anyway). :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2016
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    So true!

    Your photos reminded me of a documentary I saw on photographers. It showed a Magnum photographer, a British guy, in a supermarket in the USA. I had to look up the name just now - it's Martin Parr.

    Magnum Photos

    Also, I want to let everyone who has this lens know that they are welcome to post in this thread. That's what it's here for.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. shesmu

    shesmu Mu-43 Rookie

    16
    Dec 18, 2013
    Well, there's two more from supermarket.

    f5.6, 1/50 s, ISO 800, de-fished with Hugin and Camera Raw.
    [​IMG]

    f5.6, 1/400 s, ISO 3200.
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    agreed ... and brighter too!
     
  20. Bruce McL

    Bruce McL Mu-43 Veteran

    I find de-fishing with lens profiles in Lightroom will pull the fingers out of my photos. Earlier in this thread I linked to a post with several RAW lens profiles created by a user here and posted on dpreview forums. Another user here added JPEG lens profiles to the original RAW ones.

    Quick Lightroom De-fishing Tip for Samyang / Rokinon 7.5mm Fisheye Users

    These profiles should work in Camera Raw as well.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1