I use the Nikon 10.5 fisheye occasionally, was the owner of a Sigma 10-20mm, and was eyeing the Tokina AT-X 10-17mm 3.5-4.5 AF DX fisheye
for some time. Here are my remarks/observations:
- Not sure about the astro-part: isn't the magnification of a 10.5 (even 11-16mm lens too small to catch stars?
- I have a set of photos here
where you can see what kind of images you can produce
- My lens was tested there
. You can see that it's very sharp even wide open, but has some color-fringing problems. My mini-review including results from "de-fishing" is over here
- The Tok-fish was tested there
- You can produce photos where the fish-eye effect is almost invisible (keep the horizon going through the center) but most of the times you get the typical distortions.
- get close, close, close and you get some very effective into-your-face perspective when you view the image up close
- With any wide angle but esp. so with a fisheye it is almost impossible to escape some very nasty into the sun shots. So any flare/glare could easily ruin a photo
- With such an extreme focal length a zoom is always handy, because zooming with your feet is a no-no when shooting landscapes.
B.t.w.: The Tokina 10-17 fisheye and the Nikon 10.5 have the added benefit of becoming a circular fisheye on an FX-body - if you dare to cut the short remnants of a shade off.
Summary: I rarely use the Nikon 10.5 today and would assume that I had more use for the Tokina 10-17 fisheye. As to straight ultra-wides I have restricted myself to 14-24mm by now, which is fine with me, even on a DX body.
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews
, My Pictures
, My Photography Blog