groundrush87 0 #1 May 25, 2011 Ok I'll admit I didn't do a very thorough search through the forums, but I did do a brief one about this topic and saw that the last post was in 2007... so here goes; What is everyone currently using for their stills lens for tandems? I'm particularly interested in those folks using canon bodies, but I'm still very interested in other brands as well. Thanks for any input! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sinjin 0 #2 May 25, 2011 canon 15mm fixed. canon 10-22. nuff saiddont let life pass you by Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #3 May 25, 2011 Tandems? Kit lens at 18mm. Light and cheap; reasonable quality. When I want something better? Canon 15mm. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #4 May 25, 2011 QuoteTandems? Kit lens at 18mm. Light and cheap; reasonable quality. When I want something better? Canon 15mm I concur. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lewmonst 0 #5 May 25, 2011 Quotecanon 15mm fixed. canon 10-22. nuff said lol, ya buddy... but here's my take: living in a van at the dz: Canon kit lens 18-55 (taped on 18mm) living in a nice trailer on the dz: Canon 10-22 renting a room in a decent house nearby but too cheap to pony up for the canon 15: Sigma 15mm after a year of the Sigma 15, frustrated with the not-quite-so-good photos, pony up for the: Canon 15 been doing this way too long, live in a house, photographing some celebrity: Canon L-series 16-35 top mount only All that being said, I prefer the canon 15 for regular tandems. It's worth the extra $ over the Sigma.http://www.exitshot.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AHoyThere 0 #6 May 25, 2011 Canon 20mm is the lens that I use the most with tandems. Been using it for a long time. http://consumer.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/products/professional_cameras/ef_lens_lineup/lens_wide_pro/ef_20mm_f_2_8_usm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PharmerPhil 0 #7 May 25, 2011 I jump the 15mm fisheye Canon for tandems. Although last weekend I borrowed a Tamron 10-24mm lens and loved it. I was jumping it @ 10mm for freefall, and would zoom in to 24mm for landing shots. Plus it isn't a fish-eye! Thinkin' I might have to get me one o' them. Besides, I need a super-wide zoom for non-skydiving stuff too (rationalizing,...). FWIW, I think the kit lens (18-55mm) is too narrow for my flying style, and can sometimes have a hard time focusing in less than ideal conditions. It sure is cheap and light though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
projekt9 0 #8 May 26, 2011 Tokinia 10-17 on my Rebel XS. Awesome lens! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #9 May 27, 2011 Tamron 10 -24 on a Nikon D70s. i too, will adjust the lens manually, sometimes during the course of the skydive, from 10 up to 20 or 24. the wide setting is nice for In the plane photos. also use the 18 -55 which came with the camera. NIKON jmy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnskydiver688 0 #10 May 28, 2011 Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 on a Nikon D90Sky Canyon Wingsuiters Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thrillstalker 0 #11 June 1, 2011 anything below 35mm is considered a "fish eye" lens."Never grow a wishbone, where your backbone ought to be." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PharmerPhil 0 #12 June 1, 2011 Quoteanything below 35mm is considered a "fish eye" lens. That isn't true. It is true that the wider a lens gets, the more it has to distort the image. A lens is effectively looking at a sphere (i.e., the world), and is projecting that image onto a flat surface (i.e., the imager or piece of film). The wider a lens is, the larger a portion of the sphere it sees, and the greater portion of the sphere it has to distort. How it distorts that spherical shape defines whether it is referred to as "fisheye" or "aspherical." It is easier to build a fisheye lens, but the better lenses use aspherical distortion to give a more natural appearing image. In an aspherical lens, the horizontal and vertical planes are preserved (hence no warping of the skyline). But is has to distort somewhere. Usually you can see this on the diagonals of the image if there is something there. If someone's head is in the corner it will appear on close observation that their head bulges towards the corner. But this is usually more natural looking than a curved skyline, or a curved wall that the viewer knows is actually straight. Of course it is harder to build a good asherical lens, and hence the astronomical cost and weight of lenses like the Canon or Nikon 14mm. On zoom lenses it can get complicated because the image shifts from wide to tele. And usually the distortion varies from being slightly fisheye to slightly pincushion (the opposite of fisheye, where straight horizontal or vertical line curve towards the outside corners). But better zoom lenses like the Canon 10-22mm give a reasonable balance without being considered fisheye. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thrillstalker 0 #13 June 1, 2011 it is true. the most common are 16mm and smaller, but if it is below a 35mm you start to get the "fish eye" distortion. of course if you buy an l series it wont be."Never grow a wishbone, where your backbone ought to be." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildcard451 0 #14 June 1, 2011 I have an out of print Sigma 14mm asph - fucker weighs 2.2lbs by itself.... /hunk of friggin glass Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #15 June 1, 2011 Quoteit is true. the most common are 16mm and smaller, but if it is below a 35mm you start to get the "fish eye" distortion. Um no it's not. Like PharmerPhil says. You're confusing fisheye with barrel distortion I think. Totally different. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thrillstalker 0 #16 June 1, 2011 http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&sa=X&ei=00_mTc-YFs22tgfn1bDcCg&ved=0CCUQBSgA&q=35mm+fisheye&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=8b5a7a9984220ba2&biw=1600&bih=813 if 35 mm is a fisheye, wouldn't smaller also be a fisheye. who know's maybe my college teachers were full of shit"Never grow a wishbone, where your backbone ought to be." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #17 June 1, 2011 I'll bite... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PharmerPhil 0 #18 June 1, 2011 Quote if 35 mm is a fisheye, wouldn't smaller also be a fisheye. who know's maybe my college teachers were full of shit 35mm isn't necessarily fisheye, nor is 15mm necessarily fisheye. It depends on how you design the lens. Re-read what I wrote above, and/or go back to school... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thrillstalker 0 #19 June 1, 2011 i swear that it what i learned, but ill throw in the towel "Never grow a wishbone, where your backbone ought to be." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
velvetjo 0 #20 June 2, 2011 Here's an example of a shot from a Canon 10-22mm lens on a Canon Rebel XTi at 10mm without fisheye distortion. Hope that helps you make more sense of what folks are saying above. And the Canon 10-22 is my favorite lens for freefall shots, to go back on topic for just a moment. Lance Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thrillstalker 0 #21 June 2, 2011 thanks for the example. i'll admit when i am wrong, thus the throwing of the towel "Never grow a wishbone, where your backbone ought to be." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites