Olympus 8mm Fisheye Review

[@evanmcknight2566]

Great review Darren. I believe this lens would be popular with a lot of scuba diving photographers where a fish-eye may be one of their main go to lenses. The f1.8 would be a very nice feature underwater since the is inherently less ambient light.

[@georgepenrose7407]

The latest firmware update for Olympus cameras now has distortion correction in camera and may make this 8mm fisheye lens more desirable. I think this lens is at its best for architectural photography, especially inside those fantastic churches and mosques, but living in NZ we don't have any cool stuff like that, but we do have open landscapes. I do have the 9-18, but cannot really see the value in upgrading and if I do need extra wide I can just do a pano of 2 images. That said landscapes are all about absolute clarity and the focus stacking function available with the Pro lenses may further tip the balance.

[@AerialLensVideo]

Hello George Penrose - I too have the 9-18mm and could not justify this or even the Panasonic 8mm for my Olympus M10II and now M5II. I do real estate photography and wanted to capture more width on occasion (though the 9-18 is just great 99% of the time). What I ended up doing -- and very happy I did -- was to get the very sharp Meike 6.5mm F2 fisheye made to fit Olympus and Lumix MFT directly, at just 135USD or about 200 dollars in NZ. What I do is adjust the crazy but very good IQ 190º image barrel distortion in post and then crop to a more "conventional" 120-or-so angle of view. The results are excellent either way. Sometimes cheap = excellent. Give it a look!

[@djrbfmbfm-woa]

one thing about this lens i really like is it's ability to keep things in the centre looking as normal as possible. big asset. j.

[@rickbear7249]

Darren, when it comes to product reviews, you are always my first point of call. Prospective buyers should also be aware that you can do rectilinear correction to remove the barrel distribution in post production. So this true fish-eye also doubles as a rectilinear super-wide-angle for subjects like real estate photography. Rick Bear Professional Photographer in the UK

[@DrGeta666]

Thank God for all the costume changes. I would never have been able to understand the review without it.

[@shiznuts]

Another great and honest review. Agreed. With a fish-eye it's all about that interesting and fun look, hardly about the pristine quality. It's kind of a one trick pony and a whole series of just fish-eye shots would get old real fast. So you'd use it scarcely. If you're looking for native electronic control, weather sealing and best performance, then perhaps sure, but for the occasions that I need to throw in a fish-eye shot, I'll get out the Nikon D5300 with 8mm f/3.5 fish-eye or adapt that lens with a Fotga adapter or R.J. Lens Turbo to either E-M1 or GH4. Your review of the 7-14mm f/2.8 PRO actually helped me make the choice to get that one. Enjoyed it a lot last week when I was surrounded by mountains and lakes. Hefty price, but there honestly isn't much like it. Now just need to get rid of some gear and buy me the 40-150mm. Then I woud have the whole 7-14, 14-40 and 40-150mm trio dreamteam. Do have the 45mm and 60mm as well. What Olympus primes concerned the 75mm f/1.8 is still high on the wishlist.

[@mikejankowski6321]

Great review, great shots. Loved that San Diego stuff, one of my favorite places.

[@DarrenMiles]

Mine too! Missed it last year because of the pandemic :-). One of my favorite cities in the US.

[@carlycruise]

Truly enjoyed this review, even tho I will probably never buy one, you made think about it in a way I never thought. You give probably the best perspective to what m4/3 users want from reviews. Great job

[@DarrenMiles]

Neverland Traders What a kind thing to say! Thank you very much!

[@johnnythegreek112]

As there is a crying need for more MFT reviews that are unbiased, direct, practical, and well thought-out, kudos to you. I also agree that this lens is very specialized and overpriced for what you get with the performance of the Rokinon/Samyang/Bower 7.5mm f3.5 fisheye which suits most people's photography needs. Keep up the good work! Maybe a review of the Olympus 12mm f2 lens in the future?

[@GrenlandUnderVann]

There is one area of photography where fisheye is not an obscure option namely under water photography. Until now the only option was basically the Panasonic 8 mm lens as manually focused lenses are a pain to use underwater and generally not supported by the housing manufacturers. Also Olympus offers their own under water housings, but without a dedicated fisheye lens the only option was to use a panasonic lens redardless. The added proximity of the Olympus focusing should make for some interessting under water photos compared to the panasonic fisheye.

[@DarrenMiles]

GrenlandUnderVann Thanks for this, truthfully, I hadn't even considered it as it's an area of photography that I haven't participated in it. But I can also see f/1.8 being very useful in dark aquatic environments.

[@simon5665]

love the reviews! really pro stuff.

[@DarrenMiles]

Simon Auger Thanks Simon!!

[@AWEdio]

Think I am going to have to invest in one of these puppies, thinking about going to iceland to try to capture the aurora borealis :) Thanks for the review.

[@gsansoucie]

Thanks, I have never owned a fisheye. And I continue to never own one. I’ve always wanted one, I remember looking at one at a local camera shop in the early ‘80s, I’d wanted one for my OM-10. But it was too niche, just like you said. I might rent one though and finally get it out of my system.

[@tonylouisvisionvideography3469]

Thank you for sharing another fantastic review. I currently use a Samyang 7.5mm T3.8 Cine ED UMC Fish-Eye on my Panasonic GH2. The F/1.8 of this Olympus 8mm fisheye may be a temptation for me to upgrade.

[@hzubovi1]

Thank You for the video, it would be sweet if you could compare this to a panasonic equivalent and the rokinon. Thanks

[@paristo]

The fisheye really requires photographer to know when it can be used. And it very rarely can be in normal photography. So I very well understand the 7/10 value for the money. But that f/1.8. It is the selling point for the whole thing. Astrophotography and under water photography just thanks Olympus for that. To be able use 1.3EV faster shutter speed or lower ISO or so on makes it just excellent in those.

[@jak-crow]

This would be a great lens for underwater photography.

[@robbyboyo]

Great review as always. Nice looking lens. I use the samyang 8mm EFS with a speed booster.

[@DarrenMiles]

robbyboyo Thank you, the lens is GREAT, the price, not so much :-)

[@djrbfmbfm-woa]

after many, many pix with this. i simply cannot believe this piece of glass. however, i've found it has a hot spot, dead center. so, to combat this, i use the spot meter setting with this. totally amazing. j.

[@djrbfmbfm-woa]

darren, hi. thx so much 4 response to my comments, on the faulty lenses. anyway, this is an audio query. could you tell us here what apps, etc you use to put your excellent quality videos together? the sound, and i'm a credited audio engineer here in australia, is certainly better than tony northrup/matt granger. this would help to illuminate quite a few things for us all. the notion of have high quality audio with high quality pictures is enormously engaging. j.

[@Footloose1949]

I really like your review, though you made what I consider one mistake/omission which is that Olympus also made a 4/3rds version of the 7-14mm superwide zoom, (which I also own and use on my original E-1 The optical and mechanical quality of that is also stellar. Big hint - As far as I am aware, no-one has ever done a comparison shoot-out between the newer and older lenses ..... Getting back to the f1.8 8mm fisheye, I bought s/hand the much cheaper f8.o 8mm version, but its construction is really poor. Night-time photography is one of my interests, so the lack of 'distortion' of this lens and close focussing has put this on my shopping list. Regarding the EM-1 Mk IIII body, I wish Olly would position the On/Off switch in the same place it is on the E-1. Ok, so you can configure the E-M1 Mk III so that you can use the AEL/AFL switch instead, but it's not as well-positioned for rapid street-shooting grab-shots, which is why I still use my E-1.

[@WMedl]

Dear Darren, hesitating between the Loawa 7.5 mm f2.0 and the Oly fisheye I want to ask you whether ever you have used defishing. There are some interesting discussion inputs and videos on using this fisheye quasi as a ultra-ultra-wide rectilinear lens when doing defishing either in the camera (unfortunately only on jpegs) or in post processing (e.g. Olympus viewer).

[@marknorris8615]

darren, thanks for this review, i've always wondered when to use a fisheye, the logic area of my brain has never understood how a distorted image could be good or useful, looking at your video and photos here gives an excellent idea of application of this lens but please explain who uses this lens and why its used, i think owning this lens for a few weeks would be useful, that would be the ability to compare the photo with the scene being photographed, even if you could say "i like this photo because" , i have always been confused how distorted faces would be good, thanks, keep up good work

[@DarrenMiles]

Mark Norris thank you for the kind words - to me - Fisheye is more about fun and wildly distorted views of the world - there is some real application at weddings (ring closeups, venue shots I've also seen some very creative shots that put the bride and groom in the center of the image with all the guests around them), but again, only for a few shots and it goes back in the bag - just my opinion. Though as several have now mentioned and something I hadn't even considered as I don't do it - underwater photography is something that fisheyes are very useful for and with an f/1.8 aperture underwater in the dark, that would be very useful. However, it also entails buying the housing, which alone costs nearly as much as the camera or the lens ($899.) But if you're into underwater photography, that's just part of the cost of doing business.

[@k6usy]

Darren Miles it’s good for astrophotography as well.

[@mikejankowski6321]

You can de-fish the image using software (E-M1 Mark III can do it in-camera) to eliminate the distortion. Rob Trek noted that doing so resulted in a view even wider than his 7-14 could achieve at the wide end. Go figure. But many subjects can be shot in ways where the distortion is not evident or intrusive. Or crop a tiny bit to get rid of the worst at the edges if you don't just de-fish.

[@k6usy]

@@mikejankowski6321 the E-M5III can also de-fish in camera.

[@mikejankowski6321]

@@k6usy Thanks for the additional information.

[@wesleywang9653]

Will you do the review for M.Zuiko 300MM F4?

[@petegleeson1]

Great review

[@focvl.point19]

don't you just hate it when you forget your camera in the oven?

[@focvl.point19]

and refrigerator and washer and dryer

[@mikejankowski6321]

As long as you don't also forget and leave the oven ON...

[@marcoseirik]

Very nice, honest, and helpful review as usual. I really like that you let the pictures speak for themselves! Must say an 8mm f1.8 Fisheye is a very interesting albeit strange addition to the mFT-system. I most likely won't be getting one as I already have the simple ($270) Samyang 7.5mm f3.5 which does the fisheye thing well enough for my photographic needs. I have one question though: What's the song you used from about 6:54 in the video? I liked that a lot.

[@DarrenMiles]

Eirik Stensland Thank you very much! It's called "Lift it up" and it's available on Premium Beat

[@DarrenMiles]

Eirik Stensland I know this can be an issue on newer Nikon bodies when an older aperture dialed Nikon lens is attached - never heard of this with a Samyang lens - or at least I haven't run into it...

[@ericguizzetti]

I was thinking of getting this to replace a cheap fisheye that I use on a GH5 for skateboard filming. Wondering if you feel this is worthwhile?

[@reg171reg]

Pretty much echoing my thoughts. Great lens but really hard to justify the investment. If a significant price drop happens I may reconsider because it really is a very nice lens.

[@DarrenMiles]

Shane Doyle Ditto! The lens is great, really, it is, it's just expensive...

[@tkarlmann]

As a fellow Wedding Pro, I'm really surprised at your attitude in this video. I think the idea of a 16mm/f1.8 lens is fantastic! Plus, rather than the low-end consumer grade lenses, is in their Pro line! I'm jumping up&down over this lens! I'm soooooo glad that it isn't a consumer grade lens! (Here, Millennials, try THAT on your cell phone!) I don't understand your attitude toward this lens at all, unless your review is intended for a consumer-grade audience. Two points: 1) lose all the repetition of the inside-the-oven shots, and 2) be glad you have this for your Wedding Clients!

[@DarrenMiles]

tkarlmann Appreciate the feedback. I think you're in the crowd Olympus was genuinely hoping for, I'm sure there's a lot of them out there, I'm just not one of them. I.e., I can't justify the expense for something that I might only use for a handful of shots from a given event, that's just me, and the way I shoot. As I mentioned in the review I think the lens is great, I really do, I also think it's just overpriced as for something that's essentially a niche area of photography - even as a wedding pro like yourself, how many fisheye images are you ultimately going to deliver? I credit Olympus for daring to do something different - i.e. trying to turn something that historically has been fun and interesting - into a pro piece of kit - it's certainly daring and has been the MO of the company for awhile. On the whole, I think Olympus is on the leading edge of innovation with what they've accomplished with their M43 bodies and specifically their PRO line of lenses. In fact, this is the first PRO lens that frankly didn't make a ton of sense to me. Again, apart from price and limited use - I think the lens is great. I did give it a highly recommended rating after all... As for the repetition with the oven - I was showing off how clean it was - as a few other folks have mentioned :-)

[@marknorris8615]

tkarlmann tkarlmann, guess trolls just need to troll, that would be you, its an informational platform here, go troll at the news sties

[@tkarlmann]

Mark Norris Aww, did someone rock your lil boat?

[@marcusnz232]

Just picked one up at cost less 10%. Mainly for astro.

[@yyyyyves]

Hello, thanks for review. I'm confused though... I understood this 8mm MFT lens to be 35mm equivalent of 16mm. However, yet from shots shown it seems more of an 8mm than a 16mm field of view. Or did I get something wrong?

[@DarrenMiles]

It's a bit harder to measure with a fisheye lens - not sure if the conversion (2X) is appropriate with a fish eye... Field of view is CRAZY wide though....

[@KKG51]

Hi Darren, what happened to the sunburst for "Beautiful, Sunny, Naples Florida" :( I'm waiting to hear from the FAA on my Part 333 application, they've been running about 6 weeks or so on approvals these days. Kevin in CT

[@DarrenMiles]

KKG51 Keep me posted on the FAA and that whole thing.

[@KKG51]

Darren Miles Will do D. Some old friends are in your town, they've just purchased a new home in Collier Preserve and are there for the closing. I expect to be down for a few days in the Winter as I have a place in West Palm, maybe we can grab a drink? My understanding of the 333 process now is you can now apply with a Sport Pilot's license rather than a Private but I may be incorrect. BTW it's a balmy 92 and muggy here in Sunny SW Connecticut today and it's just about time to crack open a coldie! Kevin in CT

[@GarciaJewels]

do a review on the sigma 24mm 1.4 art lens!

[@DarrenMiles]

Jewels Garcia We'll see...

[@Georg248HD]

17 elements for a prime... not sure if that's much beneficial over 7-14 f2.8, if only for f1.8 aperture. And then there is the price.

[@DarrenMiles]

Georg Arju. Indeed, the price is a hangup...

[@GrenlandUnderVann]

Georg Arju. - The fisheye generally covers a larger field of view - at the disadvantage of a more distorted image. But for under water stills the fisheye is very common to use.

[@terrywbreedlove]

How do the images look when you use the in camera function that straightens them out getting rid of the fish eye look. ?

[@Seanonyoutube]

I've owned this lense for 3 years and never knew this was even an option. I shoot RAW though so it probably wouldnt make a difference for me.

[@halz7]

Will you be reviewing the Olympus 17mm 1.8. I can't decide if it is worth buying.

[@DarrenMiles]

halz7 YES!

[@sabamosiashvili8486]

hi Darren i am just big lover of your reviews , they are really helpful ! I need advice from you about wide angle , may be this question for this video is not appropriate but i still hope to get replay from you. i have nikon 24-70 f2.8 right now , but in this days i like landscape very much and now i think to sell my 24-70 f2.8. value of it gives me opportunity to get tokina 16-28 f2.8 (new) and filters for it .secondly, i can get 14-24 f2.8 (second hand ) . and also i can get tamron 15-30 f2.8 (new) . i can`t decide what to get. i think i should take nikon or tokina . tamron is out because it has same results on images as nikon and it is -1mm. so now i want to know what can you say about this? what to take and why?

[@DarrenMiles]

saba mosiashvili Thanks for the kind words, before I answer, which camera body are you shooting with?

[@sabamosiashvili8486]

Darren Miles nikon d700, i have ordered d810 just a few days ago.

[@DarrenMiles]

OK, depending on what matters most to you - the best image quality will come from the 14-24, it also has better flare and chromatic aberration performance - the Tokina is a GREAT value, but if you can swing the Nikon, I'd get that first - even second hand. I've not used the Tamron, but I hear and see great things, it's a good value too...

[@sabamosiashvili8486]

Darren Miles thanks you very much Darren , are you going to test tamron 15-30? may i can wait and if it is as good as sounds got it?

[@mhsvz6735]

Thanks.

[@Bogdahn17]

What song is it that you played during the video/photos?

[@DarrenMiles]

Bogdahn17 It's called "Lift it up" and it's available on Premium Beat

[@djrbfmbfm-woa]

just purchased,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,wow. j.

[@bovver6092]

Were you in San Diego for Comic Con?

[@DarrenMiles]

bovver wonder No, we were there for 4th of July, left the first day of comic con - we didn't attend :-(

[@bovver6092]

Bummer! Maybe next time! By the way...is there a possibility that you would be reviewing Sony mirrorless cameras and lenses in the future?

[@DarrenMiles]

Yes on the Sony - been playing with the a6000, a7ii and a7s....

[@Rooftopaccessorizer]

Is it worth it? For fisheye shooters it is. If you’re the spec peeping guy that owns 17 lenses and just buys them to look cool? No

[@Horaczkocom]

Nice shirts )))

[@DarrenMiles]

Miroslaw Horaczko Hah!

[@CHNCAT]

I like M43 system. Now I get back to APSC with SAMSUNG.They will work together.

[@mrpwd7322]

7 for value? Laughable. Shows your bias for Olympus. You must be compensated by Olympus for these.

[@DarrenMiles]

A 7 is a "C" - hardly glowing - I'm sure there is a ton of value to this lens for underwater shooters. Not that I feel the need to defend myself, but I am not compensated by Olympus for these reviews, but your comments are appreciated.