I've been doing some environmental portraiture with a Widelux camera, but its limitations (fixed focus, no really slow shutter speeds, etc.) make me want to try a full-frame fisheye on my Elan 7. My question is, how much difference is there between the Canon 15mm fisheye and the Sigma. The latter is half the price! I know this is a very subjective question and that probably very few people have tried both of them. But I would welcome any opinions.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), January 30, 2002

Answers

I've never tried either of them. I suppose the Canon is better for the extra money, but oviously I don't know. What I do know is Fisheye lenses are fun, but not used that often by most of the people that have them. I like wide lenses and fisheyes but even the Sigma would be more than I'm willing to pay for one. They're fun, but not that usefull.

For a lot less money, I picked up a Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 fisheye in a M42 Screw mount with EOS adapter. Manual focus and manual aperture with stop down metering just doesn't matter with these things, so who cares. It's sharp & it takes great pictures.

I have heard rumors that the Elan 7 has trouble metering with non-EF mount lenses, but there are work arounds for that as well.

-- Jim Strutz (j.strutz@gci.net), January 30, 2002.

My opinion on fisheyes? Buy the cheapest one that will fit your camera because you ain't gonna use it enough to justify the cost of an expensive one.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), February 02, 2002.

According to the german "Foto-Magazin" the Sigma is slightly better than the Canon. The optics of the Sigma was rated with 8.8, the Canon with 8.0 (10 ist best).

I once had to make the same decision. I am doing snowboard/surf photography and so I am working a lot with the fisheye lens. Although I don't like and use third party lenses I went for the Sigma because of the price. I am very satisfied with the lens. It is very well built, with a metal lens mount and the noble EX finish. The image quality is very satisfying although you've got to stop down at least to f/4 to get also the edges sharp. But this is a common problem of fisheye lenses due to the angle of view of 180 degree, so the Canon will definitely not beat the Sigam at this point.

I've never tested the Canon fisheye but I suppose it has one advantage: the AF speed is faster. The AF speed of the Sigma is in my opinion pretty slow. But this is not really significant for a fisheye lens.

My tip: go for the Sigma and save a lot of money! The results will be convincing.

-- Ralf Bernert (ralfbernert@gmx.de), February 02, 2002.