Dawid Loubser
Member
This beautiful farm (a game farm, i.e. having only wildlife on it) is a couple of hours drive from us. A close friend and colleague owns a share in it, and it is a wonderful place to just "get out there".
It's extremely cold and dry here during the winter.
I really enjoy making landscape photographs using a fish-eye lens, where the composition ends up not looking like a fish-eye at all. The distortion produced is so often much more natural than what a wide rectilinear lens produces. What do you guys think - worthy to print large?
(Technical: Hand-held Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk.II, M.Zuiko 8mm f/1.8 Fish-eye at f/4.0, ISO200.
Processed using the open-source RawTherapee running on the Arch Linux operating system )
Dawid,
This is especially interesting to me as it seems that the lens has cradled the two rocks in the center left and that's where the fisheye lens' 3D drawing is uniquely remarkable. This may be because the flattening of the fisheye sphere to make the image means there is not the same amount of detail represented at the periphery. So when it is "corrected" data there has to be "created" by extrapolation and the finer detail cannot be as rich as in the center which needs far less correction.
A 50 mm fisheye, when corrected would make for a very special portrait lens as it would so naturally provide more emphasis on the central core of the subject.
Would love to read your report of the print!
Asher
It's extremely cold and dry here during the winter.
I really enjoy making landscape photographs using a fish-eye lens, where the composition ends up not looking like a fish-eye at all. The distortion produced is so often much more natural than what a wide rectilinear lens produces. What do you guys think - worthy to print large?
(Technical: Hand-held Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk.II, M.Zuiko 8mm f/1.8 Fish-eye at f/4.0, ISO200.
Processed using the open-source RawTherapee running on the Arch Linux operating system )
Dawid,
This is especially interesting to me as it seems that the lens has cradled the two rocks in the center left and that's where the fisheye lens' 3D drawing is uniquely remarkable. This may be because the flattening of the fisheye sphere to make the image means there is not the same amount of detail represented at the periphery. So when it is "corrected" data there has to be "created" by extrapolation and the finer detail cannot be as rich as in the center which needs far less correction.
A 50 mm fisheye, when corrected would make for a very special portrait lens as it would so naturally provide more emphasis on the central core of the subject.
Would love to read your report of the print!
Asher
Last edited by a moderator: