In article <558c68$gik_005@onet.on.ca>, JWong@mea.on.ca says...
>In article <32758F31.4D5F@earth.inwave.com>,
> Lisa Martzke wrote:
>>John Wong wrote:
>>>
>>> I would be glad to hear from those who have experience in using a fish-eye
>>> converter. How well does it work? What is the quality of the pictures with
>>> this converter? Who make them? What are their shortcomings? Who sell them?

>>I asked this same question several months ago and was overwhelmed by
>>the "no!" responses. I do know that Porter's sells them - and that
>>you should look for a used fish-eye for just a bit more money!

>I use Hasselblad and Contax cameras. Since the prices for fish-eye lens for
>these carmera are very high and I only occasionally would need a fish-eye
>lens, I am considering the fish-eye converter as an option.

>I am very interest to know how one could get the best results from a fish-eye
>converter. Thanks.

Most are quite poor, even stopped down, on still cameras (though they can
work well on video cameras), but I have found one (no name on it) that did
work well at small stops on still cameras - it is unusual in that it is
in two parts, a close-up lens, and the front part (which when added, made
the [very good] converter). I don't know if there is only one two-part
fisheye converter, but this one is worth looking for.
Hope This Helps