Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye Lens Review
The Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 fisheye lens is the go-to budget fisheye lens for photographers using full frame DSLRs. At only around $225, it allows you to have a fisheye lens in your bag without breaking the bank on something you might use sparingly (or not, if you’re me). Regular readers of the site will know that I’m a big fan of fisheye lenses (perhaps to a fault), as I think they can bring a unique look to photos. With that comes great potential for overuse and a look that a lot of people dislike for being gimmicky, but I think when used in moderation, a fisheye lens is a great lens to have. Just be careful, because that potential for overuse is great. I say this as a recovering fisheye addict who has been able to substantially decrease my use of fisheye. Still, I agree with others who argue that fisheye lenses are more than a gimmick.
Before moving from crop sensor to full frame, my biggest concern was that the Rokinon fisheye lens that I love would no longer work and I’d have no suitable substitution (if you’re a using a crop sensor camera, that’s the lens for you, not this one). If you’ve read my review that gushes over that lens, you know I’m a huge fan of it–not only for its cheap price, but for its great quality and unique characteristics. If someone were to let me choose between that lens and the Nikon that costs triple the price, I’d choose the Rokinon, even if both were free. Even though it’s a crop sensor lens, for the first several months I had my full frame DSLRs, I continued to use it, and just cropped out the dead, black space.
Fortunately, earlier this year, manual lens junky Corey Dorsey tipped me off to this Zenitar fisheye. I was skeptical at first, and there weren’t many reliable reviews of it out there. I bought it on a whim anyway, figuring I could eBay it if it didn’t meet my expectations. It arrived with ‘interesting’ packaging that looked like it was smuggled out of the USSR in 1990 (thanks to that, I’ve dubbed it my Soviet Fisheye). You can’t judge a book by its cover (or box…whatever), and I quickly found that the lens met my expectations and then some. In fact, despite looking very different, the image profile of the photos this lens produces strikes me as very similar to the Rokinon. I don’t know if the optics are somehow similar (doubtful as the Rokinon has a bulbous front, is larger generally, and is not f/2.8), but whatever the case, it produces very similar images.
Much like that lens, this lens is incredibly soft wide open. Don’t look at that f/2.8 minimum aperture and think that this lens will be a great low-light lens. It won’t. In fact, I generally don’t use this lens at any aperture below f/8 because it’s soft up until that point. (It’s unusable below f/5.6.) Some people may consider this a con, and it absolutely might be if you intend upon shooting in low light situations without a tripod. Maybe it’s because I never shot with my Rokinon below f/8, but I don’t see this as a significant con. I’m rarely shooting with a fisheye in low light situations without a tripod–I pretty much always try to have my aperture around f/11 or f/16. Fisheye lenses aren’t made for shallow depth of field, so that’s not an issue.
On the topic of the lack of shallow depth of field is the other big con that some people might perceive, and that’s manual focus. This is literally no issue. At all. Manual focus is is not something to worry about with a fisheye. The natural depth of field is so great on a fisheye lens that you almost never have to focus the lens. I set my focus on 3 feet when I bought the lens, and have only adjusted it to move it back to 3 feet after I inadvertently move it away from that. Shallow depth of field is pretty much unheard of with a fisheye lens, and when you’re shooting between f/8 and f/16, you almost have to make a conscious effort to produce photos that are out of focus. In fact, when I tested the Nikon 16mm fisheye a few times last fall, I ended up putting it into manual focus to avoid waiting for it to grab autofocus.
If you’ve previously used the Rokinon fisheye lens, you’ll probably noticed that this lens isn’t quite as wide (comparing them side-by-side in front of Grauman’s Chinese Theater, I was surprised to find that it’s a good bit less wide) as that lens. The fisheye effect also isn’t quite as pronounced. Since I already have a rectilinear ultra-wide angle lens, I consider this the lens’ biggest con. It’s still fish-y and wider than an ultra wide angle, but I don’t think the look isn’t quite as exaggerated.
In terms of the Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 fisheye‘s strengths, the biggest is image quality between f/8 and f/16. I previously called the Rokinon fisheye the sharpest lens in my bag. Before comparing samples for this review, it seemed to me that the Soviet Fisheye isn’t quite as sharp as the Rokinon. However, my comparisons don’t bear that out. I think it might be that I now have the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 and other ridiculously sharp lenses, so this Zenitar isn’t quite as impressive as compared to those. The big difference between those lenses and this fisheye is that they all cost exponentially more than this one. The Soviet Fisheye is still tack sharp at those apertures, and I think the sample photos in this review demonstrate that.
I mentioned image profile before, and I was ecstatic to find that this lens easily produces the same starbursts and sunbursts that the Rokinon produces. At apertures of around f/8 and up, the lens produces a very visually-pleasing 6-point starburst. Not only do you get this nice “twinkle” look on smaller light sources like street lamps, but when shooting into the sun, you get long “fans” rays of sunlight without sunspots or a bunch of unpleasant artifacting.
Whether this is truly a “pro” is a your mileage may vary thing, but I love it, and I think it gives a very interesting and engaging character to my photos. Other lenses I have don’t burst as easily, and when they do, they produce more points of light in their star/sunbursts (the number of points is determined by aperture blades). Many other lenses also don’t fan rays of light, but go sort of berserk when shooting directly into the sun. The exact character of the bursts/flare/rays varies from lens to lens, but this is my absolute favorite look. Again, just my opinion—your starburst preferences may vary.
Finally, the Soviet Fisheye has great build quality since it’s made of metal, and it also has great, compact size. There’s not a lot of room in my camera bag for lenses, so it’s great that I’m able to stuff this in the “extra junk” pouch in my bag, rather than put it in a dedicated, padded lens cradle. In terms of the build, it’s built like a tank (perhaps it was built for Cold War photography?) with better quality than you’d expect from a $225 lens.
So there you have my pros and cons of the lens. If you go back, the cons really aren’t even all that negative, they’re more about adjusting expectations. I swear I haven’t been co-opted by the Russians, some crazy underground band of Soviet-sympathizers, or whomever makes this lens to write a flowery review of it. Overall, I think the Soviet Fisheye lens is a great addition to any full frame shooter’s camera bag who already has a well-rounded lens lineup, or anyone who really likes the fisheye look. I think it’s the perfect fun “Disney” lens as the distortion plays well with the whimsical look of the parks, allowing you to use the fisheye in creative ways, but fisheye definitely is not for everyone.
If you do want to purchase this lens—or anything else from Amazon, please use the links here (like this one). Using the links here help support this blog at no cost to you, and help us continue to provide you with great borderline-okay content.
If you’re looking for other photography equipment recommendations or photography tips in general check out a few of my top photography blog posts:
Photography Buying Guide: Everything from Underwater Cameras to Software
Best Books for Improving Your Photography
5 Indispensable Tips for Better Vacation Photos
Choosing the Best Travel Tripod
Choosing the Best Camera Bag for Travel
Your Thoughts…
What do you think of the Soviet Fisheye? Is it something you’d consider buying, or are you scared that the Ghost of Reagan will forever smite you if you do? 😉 Share your thoughts about this lens in the comments!
Tom, I first want to compliment you on your photos and your reviews. You have converted my anti-disney wife into a believer and a trip is being planned as we speak.
My only issue is your reviews have left me with a dilemma, to get the Zenitar or pay the approximately $300 for the Rokinon 12mm 2.8. I will be shooting on a D750.
This lens will be for super occasional shots. Some skateboarding pictures, maybe the odd motocross shot. Skateboarding shots seem to look really funky with the fisheye look. Most likely in daylight. I may even pull it out for some interesting artistic shots while on travel so some of those will be at night. I really don’t believe it will be highly used in my lens collection though.
Based on that, I am really curious about your recommendation. Most of my lenses are pro or high quality enthusiast lenses (16-35 F4, 24-120 F4, 50 & 85 1.8, 70-200 2.8. I normally would always go with the high quality lens but in this case I am not sure the price will be worth the usage.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. If you have another lens in mind let me know, I am even cool with used. But the Rokinon/Samyang 12mm is definitely at the top of budget. And if I can buy through your links to help you out I will for sure will.
Thanks,
Neil
Given your circumstances, I’d just go with the Zenitar. The image quality is actually quite good considering the price, and the savings are more important, in light of how little you’ll use it.
hi, im from malaysia and the price is rm699- around 220 usd here. for now, im only having a 50mm f1.8 for my 5Dc, and for a new lens for my lineup, im confused to having uwa lens or fisheye. my subjects more on street photography + travel.
this shop in malaysia too, selling mir 20mm f3.5 superwide russian lens. the price is a bit higher, around 290usd. what do you think for my new lens? your opinions much appreciated!
thx! 🙂
Hmmmm…… I’m really tempted to pull the trigger on this lens. However, I still have my Tokina 11-16mm which works well on my full frame, at 16mm. I wonder if the fisheye effect is strong enough to justify the purchase. Your opinion would be appreciated.
It depends on what other lenses you have. If your kit isn’t already well rounded, I’d add other lenses before adding a fisheye. I carry both an ultra wide angle and a fisheye, but I also have an otherwise complete bag.
I’ve been thinking about picking up this lens for a while now. Your review is giving me the final push to pull the trigger.
I’m glad I bit the bullet and bought it. There’s almost no good information about it online, so it was tough for me to take the plunge, but I’m glad I did.
Players gonna hate! Don’t listen to the whiners, your fish eye shots are WORTHY… and besides…. don’t hate the player hate the game!
But seriously, the key to being able to use these low cost lenses is knowing what their limitations are and being able to work around them. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this and other camera equipment. It’s great to read a review of something like this, especially because there is not a lot of info on this category of lenses AND because it’s a ‘user’ based review, versus some sterile, laboratory statistic, engineering measurement, mumbo jumbo type of assessment!
~Joanie
Haha, I think it’s “haters gonna hate.” Although players might be hatin’, too! 😉
This lens definitely does have limitations that you have to work around, but in my case, it’s not so much working around those limitations as them not really being things that matter. No doubt, if the f/2.8 aperture were sharp, I’d try to get creative on dark rides, etc., but I’m coming from the Rokinon, which is also soft wide open, so it’s not really an issue. Especially for $225!
I hate sterile, lab reviews. Those are for pixel-peepers who don’t actually take photos, but spend all of their time analyzing things. I only care about real-world performance.
In Soviet Russia, eye fishes YOU!!!