I'm thinking to add a wide angle lens to my gear and I need your advice.

I own a Nikon D5300, and my options are the:

10.5mm f/2.6 Nikkor fish eye or the 10-22mm f/4 Sigma wide angle zoom.

I think fisheyes are fun to use, and add very dramatic effect to the photos, but not all the pictures look great and the exaggerated distortion could be annoying sometimes to watch.

The Sigma it is a rectilinear wide angle, and I think it would be more useful, and will need less post-processing if I don't want the extreme distortion.

I'll be taking pictures of architecture, narrow spaces in colonial cities of Mexico, and rooms. Most of the time using tripod, so I think the aperture difference won't be a problem.

What would be the best option for those requirements?

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ For your listed usage, fish-eye really isn't an option, unless you really like dramatic and fun bent houses. \$\endgroup\$
    – Imre
    Commented May 13, 2015 at 16:20
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I think you answered your own question.. \$\endgroup\$
    – SailorCire
    Commented May 13, 2015 at 17:27

1 Answer 1


The ultrawide is what you want, not the fisheye. The fisheye will always render things with distortion and curves.

I shoot both an ultrawide and a fisheye--they each have their place. But for architectural stuff where it's more typical to want straight lines rendered as straight lines, you really want a rectilinear lens. I use a fisheye for interior shots, but that's only because I shoot 360x180 panoramas and need the scene coverage. An ultrawide lens is a typical choice for the type of shooting you're describing. And if the aperture does make a difference (since you mentioned shooting interiors), there is always the Tokina 11-16/2.8.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.