Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

UW...Oly 8mm FE or Oly 7-14mm Pro.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UW...Oly 8mm FE or Oly 7-14mm Pro.

    Your choice and reasons please, imagine they cost the same

    I have an EM1 MKll so can defish the 8mm in camera.

    https://www.creativeislandphoto.com/...eye-correction


  • #2
    I need to know - is defishing in the camera only done in JPEG? I'd guess this was the case, in which it would be a no more me. RAW remains king! (or queen!)

    Ian
    Founder and editor of:
    Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net)
    Four Thirds User (http://fourthirds-user.com)
    Digital Photography Now (http://dpnow.com)
    Olympus camera, lens, and accessory hire (http://e-group.uk.net/hire)

    Twitter: www.twitter.com/ian_burley
    Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/dpnow/
    Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/ianburley/
    NEW: My personal BLOG ianburley.com
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Ian View Post
      I need to know - is defishing in the camera only done in JPEG? I'd guess this was the case, in which it would be a no more me. RAW remains king! (or queen!)

      Ian
      From the link.............

      Limitations
      Overall, I have been pleased with the results I have gotten from the new built-in fisheye correction, particularly when using Setting 1. I really like the fact that I get both a jpeg and RAW image that I can work with. The jpeg image quality defaults to LN, not the higher quality LF setting so you may want to change this.
      Since the images are digitally corrected some camera features are disabled. This includes the following;
      • video recording
      • all sequential shooting modes
      • Live Composite
      • Art Filters (Although I don't use the Art Filters too often, I am hoping that in a future update these can be used with the fisheye correction.)

      Comment


      • Ian
        Ian commented
        Editing a comment
        That doesn't make sense - once the sensor data is manipulated it's no longer RAW. I will have to learn more about this

    • #4
      To go back to the original question - the 8mm and the 7-14 are different beasts for different jobs. The only thing they really have in common is short focal length/wide field of view - trying to choose between them is a bit like trying to choose between a kitten and a sheep. They both have 4 legs, which one is better depends on whether you are looking for cute company or a nice dinner

      John

      Comment


      • #5
        Panasonic 8-18 for me

        Comment


        • #6
          The 7-14 is far more useful than the 8mm. I now have a 7.5mm f/2.8 fisheye for those rare moments that I want that particular effect and if by chance I wanted to de-fish an image I have DxO viewpoint that can do it very well.
          Graham

          We often repeat the mistakes we most enjoy...

          Comment


          • #7
            I have both plus that tiny Laowa 7.5/f2.0 and that Samyang 8/f3.5

            I like that 7-14 for the flexibility of that Zoom. and nothing else. That 8mm seems to cover more. I have that Samyang first and I was loving it but at times I miss that AF and it may look sharp through that tiny viewfinder to find it OOF. Same goes with that Laowa.

            After that Samyang I got that 7-14. First off, it is BIG and heavy. But then the AF is excellent. Tack sharp. After my first trip to Bromo shooting those milkyway, I decided to go light. I got that Laowa. It's sharp if and when you get it right. It's not that hard if there is enough light for you to use that 2 manual focus assist. the moment it's too dark, it's a mess in the viewfinder. That 7-14 may be slightly more forgiving in that area.

            Along came that 8mmFE. it small compared to that 7-14. it's f1.8 a tat brighter and with those in camera defish..it's superb. and it's got AF.

            * Henry
            * Location: Subang Jaya, Selangor
            * Malaysia


            All my garbage so far.

            Comment


            • Dave in Wales
              Dave in Wales commented
              Editing a comment
              Thank you, you say you have both.
              Question re the 8mm FE.....The degree of FE effect can be set in camera...1,2 or 3 before taking the shot. Can the shot then be edited ie, defished in camera subsequently or does it have to be done in Workspace?

          • #8
            If one is considering either of these two for purely UW shots, then it has to be the FE, IMO.

            The comparison between the two in this video really brings it home....the FE defished in camera is wider than the 7-14mm, by quite a bit.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35xYr6On8I8

            Comment


            • #9
              Ian commented
              That doesn't make sense - once the sensor data is manipulated it's no longer RAW. I will have to learn more about this

              The JPG is defished, the RAW is the original fisheye image.

              It seems you can't comment on a comment on here!



              Andy
              bengeo.com

              Comment


              • #10
                Originally posted by Bengeo View Post
                Ian commented
                That doesn't make sense - once the sensor data is manipulated it's no longer RAW. I will have to learn more about this

                The JPG is defished, the RAW is the original fisheye image.

                It seems you can't comment on a comment on here!


                I was wondering about that as the micro 4/3 standard for RAW files allows embedded lens correction data to be added which can be auto applied to the image in your favourite editor, (or ignored if you're so inclined) I was therefore wondering if the camera function added to that data so the defish you see in camera can be viewed on the RAW file too...
                Paul

                I didn’t get where I am today....

                Comment


                • #11
                  What we need is a 8mm FE owner to give us the definitive low-down

                  Comment


                  • #12
                    Originally posted by Dave in Wales View Post
                    What we need is a 8mm FE owner to give us the definitive low-down
                    Not sure what more you need to know. I've got the 8mm FE and can test anything you want, but I think Paul Kaye sums it up well here: www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60935102
                    Andy
                    bengeo.com

                    Comment


                    • #13
                      This new forum really take a bit of getting used to.

                      How to reply a post/reply/quote like that #7.1

                      II shot the weekend for the first time with the 8mm using the in camera processing. Let me have a look at what's really going on. I will revert back to you on it. There is a combination of 6 different settings in the camera.
                      * Henry
                      * Location: Subang Jaya, Selangor
                      * Malaysia


                      All my garbage so far.

                      Comment


                      • Dave in Wales
                        Dave in Wales commented
                        Editing a comment
                        Eagerly awaited

                    • #14
                      I've just bought the 8mm and also have the Lumix 7-14mm and use both for underwater. Wrecks and close-up of big marine animals is for the 8mm and the 7-14mm for close-ups of divers and sharks. When I bought the Lumix lens the Olympus 7-14mm hadn't been released and I needed the lens immediately. Would have preferred the Olympus 8mm though. De-fishing not really an issue underwater as 'curved' water looks very much like any other water

                      Steve
                      Old divers never die, they just go down on old wrecks
                      Take nothing but photographs, leave nothing but bubbles
                      My website

                      Comment


                      • JohnGG
                        JohnGG commented
                        Editing a comment
                        Sharks?!?! I think I'd want the 300mm f/4 for those!

                    • #15
                      Originally posted by Dave in Wales View Post
                      What we need is a 8mm FE owner to give us the definitive low-down
                      It's a nice FE lens. But it's an FE lens. It's not (IMHO) a substitute for a rectilinear UWA zoom. They are different tools. Defishing will make your corners look mushy.

                      As to the 7-14 - it has the huge disadvantage that it doesn't take filters (without messy 3rd party adapters). For landscape use, that's a real downside. If landscape is an important use-case, then go get the Panasonic 8-18, or the Laowa 7.5 if you can live without a zoom.
                      Paul
                      E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
                      flickr
                      Portfolio Site
                      Instagram

                      Comment


                      • Dave in Wales
                        Dave in Wales commented
                        Editing a comment
                        Thanks Paul, confusion reigns.
                    Working...
                    X