1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Samyang 7.5 mm Fisheye or Wide Zoom

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by Carrera_C, Jan 6, 2015.

  1. Carrera_C

    Carrera_C Mu-43 Rookie

    13
    May 8, 2011
    Scotland
    I'm looking for a cheapish wide (<10mm) angle lens for my OMD. It would mainly be used for landscapes so I don't really worry about having auto-focus, manual will do just fine.

    I think the Samyang could be a nice cheap option for me but I'm worried that it may have too much distortion to give natural looking landscape shots. Does anyone want to weigh in with their experience with this lens. If anyone knows how it compares to something a bit more expensive like the Olympus 9-18mm that's be great to hear?
     
  2. sprocket87

    sprocket87 Mu-43 Veteran

    306
    Jun 29, 2011
    SInce the Samyang 7.5mm is a fisheye and not a rectilinear wide angle, it is IMO not suitable for landscapes. It gives a fisheye look, no bones about it. You can correct for this to a large extent in software (LR profiles for Sigma/Nikon fisheyes do well), but it's not perfect, and not as good as a true rectilinear UWA.

    In every other respect I would recommend the 7.5mm -- it has great optical quality, the MF is no big deal like you said, and it's a tremendous value. But if landscapes are your bread and butter, I think you will be disappointed.
     
  3. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I agree. The Samyang wouldn't be my choice for landscape either. It can be defished pretty easily for sure (and I'd recommend Hugin), but unless ou crop quite heavily, this will result is poor resolution towards the corners.

    There are really only two rectilinear alternatives in the UWA category - the 9-18 and the 7-14. I've had and sold both, but I'm coming back to the 7-14. The 9-18 is OK, but the corner sharpness leaves a little to be desired. OTOH, it's small, light, takes filters and isn't too expensive. However, the 7-14 is an excellent UWA with IQ a step up on the 9-18. The downsides are size, weight and cost. Your move!!

    There's the new Oly 7-14 f2.8 due soon, but that will be even bigger, heavier and more expensive. I really don't see the point of such a lens in the u43 catalogue personally, but obviously that's just a personal view. If you want kit this heavy, you may as well go and get the Nikon 12-24 and a Nikon body and be done with it. The Nikon is probably the world's best UWA zoom bar none.

    Personally, I wish someone would do a nice rectilinear prime in the 8-10mm range. I'd buy that buy that in a flash.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. zensu

    zensu An Old Fool

    Aug 8, 2012
    Southeastern USA
    Bobby
    Me too!
     
  5. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    919
    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    How much is your time worth? If you got the horizon level with the fisheye, landscapes can be readily processed. For architectural shots, you will have to remember ahead of time to keep a lot of sky above the tallest roof and be prepared to lose the edges. The defish process eats that space up, and you toss the corners away. Some images can be fixed with a couple of mouse clicks in Lightroom. Others need to go back into Photoshop to clone in skies, etc. If you use something like Hugin, expect a learning curve and to have lots of fun diddling on the pc.

    Don't forget the cost of the processing software, if you don't already own it, and maybe the need to upgrade an older computer to run it.

    The fisheye is about $250 in the USA, and the 9-18 comes in around $500-550. In my opinion, the extra $300 is worth it. I bought 9-18 first, and the fisheye 18 months later.
    .
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Carrera_C

    Carrera_C Mu-43 Rookie

    13
    May 8, 2011
    Scotland
    Thanks for the feedback, I really wish there was a reasonable rectilinear prime as that would be ideal. I'll probably go for the 9-18 as it's not going to be a heavily used lens, mostly holidays and hill walks, so I don't see the point in going to the Pan 7-14F4 or the new Oly 7-14F2.8. I'm sure they're both vastly superior lenses but I can't justify the price increase for how much I would use it.
     
  7. sprocket87

    sprocket87 Mu-43 Veteran

    306
    Jun 29, 2011
    Don't discount the myriad of 12mm options either. I know 12mm != 9mm, but it can be a nice focal length for landscapes. There's also stitching. A 2 shot panorama can be fantastically wide.
     
  8. edmsnap

    edmsnap Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Dec 20, 2011
    Edmonton, Alberta
    The 4/3 9-18mm eBays frequently for $250-350 (and I usually see one good sample going for $200 or less each month). Beautiful lens, more consistent performance across the frame than the ยต4/3 version, and is one of the 4/3 lenses optimized for use with CDAF. The cost of the MMF adapter would need to be considered if you don't already have one, but it's a pretty cost-effective way to get an extraordinary lens that meets your ultra-wide-angle needs.
     
  9. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
     
  10. Dave in Wales

    Dave in Wales Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 5, 2011
    West Wales
    • Like Like x 2
  11. duke

    duke Mu-43 Veteran

    420
    Dec 4, 2010
    Tulsa, moving to Houston
    Duke
    I actually love the fisheye for landscapes and it's easy to make them de-fished if you really want to. Here are some examples in no real order:
    P5271827.JPG

    P6303362.JPG

    This one isn't even de-fished, just line up the horizon and you're good to go ;)

    P5282052.JPG

    P6303376.JPG

    P6303393.JPG

    P6303421.JPG
     
    • Like Like x 4
  12. ex machina

    ex machina Mu-43 Top Veteran

    806
    Jan 3, 2014
    Northern Virgnia
    I have both the 7.5 and the Oly 9-18, bought the latter because sometimes I want to travel light with just one lens, but Dave in Wales is right, the 7.5 is a brilliant and very sharp and reasonably inexpensive lens. Defishing does add a little to your workflow, but it's trivial in Lightroom with the right profile, which you can find on this and other forums. If you level your landscape horizons you'll find you won't always want to defish.

    My advice is to look through this forum's sample archives for each lens to get a feel for what each can provide.

    Another option, especially if you don't think you'll be using it that much, is to check out the Oly fisheye body cap lens. Not as sharp as the other two, but surprisingly good for what it is. Again, check this forum's sample image archives. Hope this helps!

    Here are a couple landscapes from my 7.5 with no defishing:

    14710934179_f416b8926e_b.
    After the rain stopped for five minutes
    by lewisfrancis, on Flickr

    14895136291_19023281b6_b.
    P4420517
    by lewisfrancis, on Flickr
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2015
    • Like Like x 4
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. letsgofishing

    letsgofishing Mu-43 Veteran

    352
    Nov 21, 2012
    South Africa
    Mike Kaplan
    Me too x100!!
     
  14. Paul80

    Paul80 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jul 6, 2014
    Sorry for the stupid question but does the Samyang 7.5 have the full 180 angle of view on a m4/3 or does the x2 crop factor still apply and it acts like a 15mm.

    Thanks

    paul
     
  15. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    It's got a 180 degree FOV across the diagonal. Effective FL will be 15mm, but when you get into fisheye geometry, the FLs tend to matter less. The Canon FF fisheye is a 15mm IIRC.
     
  16. maritan

    maritan Mu-43 Veteran

    388
    Oct 30, 2014
    I'm in a similar situation, but want a large aperture for night (foreground-milky way) photography. Been looking for suitable lenses for the last few days and here's the list I've compiled so far:

    1. SLR Magic 10mm T2.1 (f stop slightly larger)
    2. SLR Magic 12mm T1.6 (f stop slightly larger)
    3. Olympus 7-14mm f2.8
    4. Voigtlander 10.5 f0.95
    5. Olympus 12mm f2
    6. Kowa 8.5mm f2.8 (not the best choice since the aperture is smaller)

    I'm not sure what other options are available. I would prefer to stay away from fish eye primarily because the max aperture is f3.5 (for that particular lens) and I'd like to keep my ISO as low as possible.
     
  17. Paul80

    Paul80 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jul 6, 2014
    Hi

    What's the process for de fishing these images.

    Paul
     
  18. ex machina

    ex machina Mu-43 Top Veteran

    806
    Jan 3, 2014
    Northern Virgnia
    Search the forums for "samyang defish" and you'll find many useful threads.
     
  19. Paul80

    Paul80 Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Jul 6, 2014
    Will do, Thanks
     
  20. Carrera_C

    Carrera_C Mu-43 Rookie

    13
    May 8, 2011
    Scotland