Wide-angle vs. Fisheye (converted in PS)

[Antithesis]

I'm looking to get myself into a wide angle lens but I keep hearing about using a photoshop plug-in to correct a fisheye. Will the images be as good as shooting with a normal wide-angle? It would be nice to have the verstality of both a fisheye and a wide-angle in one lens.

The two lenses I'm looking at are the Tokina 12-24 AT-X and the Tokina 10-17 AT-X fisheye. I'm looking at these because of the cost and it sounds like the build quality is unrivaled. The wide-angle has some CA issues, but not even much more than the nikkor 12-24 and is easily corrected in PS.

 

[Zatodragon]

Well, i've heard you can get pretty decent results with converting a fish-eye picture, but it still doesn't match a wide-angle lens with aspherical<sp> correction. From the results of the 12-24mm i've been very impressed with and would suggest that one.

 

[jstuedle]

If you shoot Nikon, Capture NX does a good job converting Nikkor fishys to W.A.
It needs to be a Nikkor lens as they are what is mapped in the software. The software picks it up in the EXIF data.

 

[Antithesis]

If you shoot Nikon, Capture NX does a good job converting Nikkor fishys to W.A.
It needs to be a Nikkor lens as they are what is mapped in the software. The software picks it up in the EXIF data.

Would you say that the IQ would be as good as an actual wide-angle?

 

[Sideburns]

Would you say that the IQ would be as good as an actual wide-angle?

Image quality is usually good, but the perspective is weird and distorted still. You're basically stretching an image and twisting it to look the way it's supposed to.

 

[jstuedle]

In Capture NX the IQ is very close. If you want 11X14 and larger prints, CA will start to show. But the average photo Looky-Lue won't notice.

 

[Antithesis]

I'm going to be using it for a 300 level photog course and I'll probably be printing in about 11x14's. Sounds like it might be an issue.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

JMO, the sigma 10-20 would be more useful. It goes wider, than a 12-24, and doesn't need any defishing.

 

[Antithesis]

JMO, the sigma 10-20 would be more useful. It goes wider, than a 12-24, and doesn't need any defishing.

Aren't the AF motors on those kinda glitchy?

 

[shorty6049]

mines fine. I got one and it didnt focus right, but i sent it back and the new one works fine

 

[Sw1tchFX]

Aren't the AF motors on those kinda glitchy?

I know what you mean, it was with D200's, and as far as I know, it got fixed long ago.

 

[Antithesis]

I found an excellent condition Tokina 12-24 locally for pretty cheap ($400) with one of the nicer Hoya filters and I'm going to pick it up. Thanks for the advice though, I guess the fisheye will have to wait a while longer.