I have no experience with this lens on the *ist-d but the 17mm fisheye shows enough distortion to look like a
24mm lens with extremely bad barrel distortion. It's neither fish nor fowl. I wouldn't invest for that sole purpose.
The lens itself has a great reputation for what it is and on a 35mm camera I'd love to have it, but not for the *ist-d.
(Just my opinion but you may not mind barrel distortion).



Mark Stringer wrote:

What is known about the Pentax SMC-A 16/2.8? Any opinions?  It is a
fisheye.  On an istD would the fisheye be as extreme as on film?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=15240&item=383874
9108&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW


Mark Stringer






--
I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime.
--P.J. O'Rourke





Reply via email to