ShipleyNW
Well Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2025
- Posts
- 142
- Solutions
- 1
- Likes Received
- 321
- Points
- 63
- Name
- Ken Shipley
- City/State
- PNW, USA
- CC Welcome
- Yes
I recently stumbled on a used copy of an RF version of the Laowa 4mm f/2.8 210° Circular Fisheye lens for APS-C cameras. I had a Sigma 4.5mm circular fisheye briefly pass through the quiver several years ago, and I kinda missed that lens. I found the Laowa lens at a "why not?" price so I decided to give it a go.
Right off the bat I ran into 2 hurdles; one small, one not so small.
First, this lens it totally manual, a first for me. It focuses manually and you set the aperture manually. Other than the physical mount, there is no connection between the camera and the lens. My Canon R10 couldn't even tell there was a lens mounted at all, so it wouldn't release the shutter. The solution to that was to go into the camera settings and set "Release Shutter w/o Lens" to "On." Hurdle cleared.
The second hurdle was a little higher. This lens has a 210° angle of view. It can see behind you. The lens only sticks out about 1.5 inches from the body. The RF version sits back far enough on my little R10 that the lens can see the camera's grip. And if I have the audacity to try releasing the shutter using the shutter release button, the lens can watch my hand doing that as well.
In LRC I developed 2 sets of masks: One for where I held the camera and one with the camera on a support. The masks just do a circular crop that takes out a chunk of the perimeter. Why did they make this lens 210° in the first place? 180° is plenty, and even that might be too much for a lens that's this short and sits so far back in a Canon body.
So second hurdle cleared, or at least addressed, it's time to take it out an see what it will do.
I mentioned I'd played with a Sigma Circular Fisheye, so I kind of had an idea of how to work a fisheye lens; what it sees, what I need to look for in the frame, how I need to behave to accommodate this stupid-wide angle of view. It's challenging, but I knew that coming in.
The first thing that caught my eye was this tree shadow. But the combination of 'first thing' and 'first time' caught me stumbling with the basics of doing stuff manually that I usually let the camera take care of. I wasn't too happy with the results, but I'll take the blame on that one. It could have been nice though. This scene actually worked pretty well in a fisheye composition.
One thing I pretty much ignored was the manual focus. With a lens this wide, infinity starts at, maybe, 1 meter, 3 feet. You have pretty much infinite depth of field. Much of this tree image is soft. By the focus scale on the lens, minimum focus distance is 0.1m. (The other markings on the scale are 0.2m and ∞.) I don't know where the focus ring was, so I'll take the blame.
I brought along a tabletop tripod. Like I said, the field of view discourages hand holding this lens. But I used that tripod mainly as a handle. I angled it out to the side and back, held it with my left hand while I waited for a 2-second delay after pressing the release and putting my right hand behind me. It sounds like a little much, but everything is an adventure with a circular fisheye.
After a little bit I got into a rhythm with this lens and made some shots I like. I still need to play with it a little more to see if the optics are any good when it's used correctly. But I'll probably keep it. It cost me practically nothing used, and even new they go for $200.
Another thing I learned from that Sigma is that you have to go out specifically to use a fisheye. You'll never run across a scene and think, that would look best in fisheye. I find a fisheye lens very challenging to use and that's what made me want another one. It's hard to wrangle 180° worth of view into a presentable composition. Every once in a while it's fun to try.
Right off the bat I ran into 2 hurdles; one small, one not so small.
First, this lens it totally manual, a first for me. It focuses manually and you set the aperture manually. Other than the physical mount, there is no connection between the camera and the lens. My Canon R10 couldn't even tell there was a lens mounted at all, so it wouldn't release the shutter. The solution to that was to go into the camera settings and set "Release Shutter w/o Lens" to "On." Hurdle cleared.
The second hurdle was a little higher. This lens has a 210° angle of view. It can see behind you. The lens only sticks out about 1.5 inches from the body. The RF version sits back far enough on my little R10 that the lens can see the camera's grip. And if I have the audacity to try releasing the shutter using the shutter release button, the lens can watch my hand doing that as well.
In LRC I developed 2 sets of masks: One for where I held the camera and one with the camera on a support. The masks just do a circular crop that takes out a chunk of the perimeter. Why did they make this lens 210° in the first place? 180° is plenty, and even that might be too much for a lens that's this short and sits so far back in a Canon body.
- Join to view EXIF data.
- Join to view EXIF data.
So second hurdle cleared, or at least addressed, it's time to take it out an see what it will do.
I mentioned I'd played with a Sigma Circular Fisheye, so I kind of had an idea of how to work a fisheye lens; what it sees, what I need to look for in the frame, how I need to behave to accommodate this stupid-wide angle of view. It's challenging, but I knew that coming in.
The first thing that caught my eye was this tree shadow. But the combination of 'first thing' and 'first time' caught me stumbling with the basics of doing stuff manually that I usually let the camera take care of. I wasn't too happy with the results, but I'll take the blame on that one. It could have been nice though. This scene actually worked pretty well in a fisheye composition.
- Join to view EXIF data.
One thing I pretty much ignored was the manual focus. With a lens this wide, infinity starts at, maybe, 1 meter, 3 feet. You have pretty much infinite depth of field. Much of this tree image is soft. By the focus scale on the lens, minimum focus distance is 0.1m. (The other markings on the scale are 0.2m and ∞.) I don't know where the focus ring was, so I'll take the blame.
I brought along a tabletop tripod. Like I said, the field of view discourages hand holding this lens. But I used that tripod mainly as a handle. I angled it out to the side and back, held it with my left hand while I waited for a 2-second delay after pressing the release and putting my right hand behind me. It sounds like a little much, but everything is an adventure with a circular fisheye.
After a little bit I got into a rhythm with this lens and made some shots I like. I still need to play with it a little more to see if the optics are any good when it's used correctly. But I'll probably keep it. It cost me practically nothing used, and even new they go for $200.
Another thing I learned from that Sigma is that you have to go out specifically to use a fisheye. You'll never run across a scene and think, that would look best in fisheye. I find a fisheye lens very challenging to use and that's what made me want another one. It's hard to wrangle 180° worth of view into a presentable composition. Every once in a while it's fun to try.
- Join to view EXIF data.
- Join to view EXIF data.
