Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 fisheye lens mounted on a Nikon D800 (video)

This exotic Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 lens can actually see behind itself. Watch this video for more information:

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses, Weird and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • B!

    Purely insane, Love it!

    • karl

      wondering which is actually rarer – the lens, or the D800 😛

      • T.I.M


      • Haha, came across this since they linked into a newer article. I’m really glad the D800 is a reasonable camera now. I see people around town with it, and I’m not in some mega-metropolis. Grand Rapids isn’t affluent either. Cool lens.

    • CT_Yankee

      I like fast lenses.. I would consider if it was a f 1.4.

      • Eric

        Yeah right. I suppose it would weight 100kg and cost a million $.
        There are optical reasons why you don’t see ultra wide with very fast apertures.
        I think f/2.8 is as fast as you can get below 24mm.

        • flo

          i think he was being sarcastic ^^
          btw: leica 21mm f1.4

        • jj

          lol sigma 20mm 1.8

      • T.I.M


        f/2.8 is plenty for a wide angle lens, who is shoot at f/8-f/11 99% of the time, 800 ISO is now noise free.

        The fast apertures are much more usefull for 200mm (and more) lenses, to get fast shutter speed and minimal d.o.f

        I bought the 200mm f/2 and not the 300mm f/2.8 because:
        1: shoot at 1.9m
        2: wonderfull bokeh
        3: make a 400mm f/4 with the TC20E-III keeping the same f/2.0 bokeh (a 400mm f/4 would have more d.o.f, the converters does not increase d.o.f)

        • SoftonDemand

          Hey Tim,

          I so wanted the 200mm f2 (so tempting), however I got the 300mm f/2.8 because it was more practical even though I don’t shoot sports. Mostly indoor plays and theaters. How is the 200 f2 with teleconvertors ? still sharp clear and fast? Should I trade my 300 for it?

          • I have a TC20E-III and I am using it often with a 200 mm but not the f/2.0 (70-200 f/2.8 VRII). It works great, like so many people are saying.

            This gentleman has tried it with your lens (200 f/2.0): and no surprise, says it works really well with it.

            However, like I wrote here: , a teleconverter is a compromise. So I don’t recommend it unless you need it. Basically, it’s better to have BOTH the 200 f/2.0 and the 300 f/2.8. And you will say “thanks I know but that’s both very expensive and very heavy”. Fair enough, that’s why I am saying TC are a compromise. In this way, a 200 f/2.0 + TC20E-III make more sense than a 300 f/2.8 alone. (My 2 cts!)

          • T.I.M

            The 200mm+TC20-EIII give incredible results, I can’t see any lose of sharpness, I took pictures of the full moon last friday and I was able to see the licence plate on the Apollo XI eagle lander !
            (ask Peter to send me your email adress and I’ll send you the file)
            Just try it and I’m sure you’ll buy it ! (I have the VR2 version)

        • Steve C

          Thanks for the info, I wondered about that. Makes sense regarding the practicality against the 400 f/4. I did have a play with the 200mm f/2 whilst at Grays.

    • Photo Harpist

      Heyyyy Nikon we want those times back !!!, and please man do not profane such beauty by mounting a plastic and rubber falling camera:) like d800 is, more MPs more electronics more…. more….. more… what at the end?. Leave that old camera, is the timeless fact, the true Nikon spirit sits in that pair. Okay I accept it just as a demo to show us the beauty you possses, but please as fast as you can remove that from lens’s back:).

  • Spy Black

    The f/5.6 is a much more practical optic. Not nearly as expensive and far more handy.

  • David

    Only been there once but I recognised the shop within seconds!

  • texajoe


  • Vlad

    Question is… will it blend?

    • quintana

      Haha, I like!

    • Calibrator


    • Art

      Actually, Tom Dickson (the star of “Will it Blend?” and owner of BlendTec) is a friend and their factory is just down the street from mine. If someone would buy the lens, I would be happy to give him a call. I’m sure he would be quite pleased to put it up on YouTube. (He has everything else.) ;-p

      Perhaps we could get him to blend a 5DMIII ….

    • Wolfcat


  • Tu Dong

    Too bad who ever buy this lens will put it in the box or inside the glass for display only. my 10.5 with cut-hood also have the 220 degree approximately way lighter and get lots of use for VR 🙂

  • Dormant

    As unboxing videos go, this one’s quite good.

  • Dweeb

    Pretty old stuff for some of us. Nikon used to parade this around with their 2000mm cat in the eighties back when they produced a full line of lenses. The 6 is 220 degrees if I remember. One application was inspecting pipes.

  • Nikon Shooter

    You know the lens is expensive when it comes with a camera for a rear lens cap. Made me smile. Though for the price paid a fancier “D4 lens cap” would’ve also been appropriate. Congrats to the lucky owner.

  • Marc W.

    I was expecting so much more from this video. Oh well.

  • R!


    • derWalter


    • FX DX

      Yeah. You totally convinced us by going all caps.

  • D700guy

    It’s like having the Loch Ness monster model a bathing suit. It’s alleged to exist, but no one has ever really seen it.

  • Nathan

    Well, that answers that question. I thought the rear element extended so far into the mirror well that there was no way that this lens would have been used on a D800 since there’s no mirror lock-up. Since it’s running on live-view/video though, I guess that works. Looks like I’m wrong though since the rear element doesn’t seem to stick out all that much.

    • derWalter

      a mirrorlockup would be, attaching no lens, going into movie record live view mode and then attaching it to the lens…

    • bikinchris

      This 6mm f2.8 and the smaller 180 dgree wide 8mm f2.8 both work like normal lenses. They do not extend into the mirror box.

  • Zeb

    They were about £6,800 in 1980. I seen a few and most had fingerprints on the lens because they’re so front heavy and topple forwards.

  • bigeater

    With Nikon there are so many weird and wonderful lenses and accessories that the only limit on your creativity is you (and your wallet).

  • PLockPLock

    I want it so bad that I’m willing to pay 1 dollar for it.

    i need it

  • James

    this might be a stupid question, but does this lens have a focus ring? Or is everything in focus always.

    • Bob

      Yes it does … check the video at 1:00.

  • WSY

    Being able to use old Nikon lenses was only of the only reason I chose Nikon over Canon and this video just reinforced that idea!

    Although a GBP 100,000 lens wasnt in the original plan 🙂

  • OMR

    Where is the lens hood?


    • Nathan

      Can’t use filters either.

      • nonbeliever

        The filters are already built in – in a revolver!

    • JLK

      With the coverage of that lens it would be more of a camera hood. 😉

      • This made me laugh


  • neversink

    Yeah… They used to have one of these on display at the Nikon House at Rockefeller Center in the good ol’ days…… I loved going there. Wish they were still in existence. And I wish Nikon would still come out with surprising products like this…..

    • Harry

      I remember that Nikon House! Had many things repaired there for like $10 bucks a pop! They were awesome and it was always a treat to see all the lenses they had on display. It was a sad day when they left.

  • Vin

    I saw a photographer with one of these 25 years ago, it was on a F3, it was $35,000 usd.
    then. he was shooting the Blue Angels jet planes.

  • markogts

    I was nearly there to buy one, but then I realised it can’t take filters 🙂

  • Aldo

    There’s one of them exposed in the Nikon service office in Paris Boulevard Beaumarchais.

  • Ric

    I just piddled.

  • Samas

    So – practically, other than showing off in videos like this, what is the real use of this lens? He took it out, played around with his hand (220 degree coverage), closed it dramatically. It is worth more than the condo I live in. Is it really practical?

    • Nathan

      I guess if you need to take pictures inside of pipes it’s priceless.

    • Dormant

      I can imagine lots of scientific uses. Remember, this lens is from the days before digital and combining images from multiple cameras.

    • vertigo

      It’s great for street photography.

  • Vlad

    I propose to mod the lens for use in colonoscopies.

    Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 goes to Uranus. Omg.

    • Alan

      I think you’d also need to mod the colon…

      • BartyL

        That would almost certainly result from inserting the lens.

  • Jim

    I wonder what size UV filter it takes…I’d sure hate to scratch that glass

  • I wonder if I could order one as a loaner through Nikon Professional Service?

  • TheInconvenientRuth

    I pre-ordered one 3 seconds after I read about it in Color Photo Magazine in march 1979. I put a cheque in an air-mail envelope and sent it to Tokyo. It’s been 32 years, I should be close to the top of the queue right? Has anyone else received theirs yet or should I start checking in random Jessops and hope they have one or two in stock?

    • who cares?


  • whmitty

    Given the value of this beast why did the fellow wipe dust off of it with his hand?

  • T.I.M

    It seems to have a little tiny amount of distortion.
    A 300mm f/2.0 would make me more happy.

    • +1!

    • SoftonDemand

      yeah and heavier

  • Rich

    I know, me too! Thought the music was kinda funny, all intense for nothing. But there is something beautiful about that big piece of glass.

    • vertigo

      I wish people would stop putting intense music on their videos, especially the ones where they then talk really quiet between the music. What’s wrong with people on youtube?

      • Nathan


  • Donald

    I’ll bet the bokeh sucks……

    Actually, WOW!

  • Nikon D4

    OMG !! £100,000. *_____^

  • Sun

    Haha, want to see it on a V1 🙂

  • König

    DONT!!! mount a canon on it, then it will just drop 80K in value

  • Louis Phan

    Wondering what is the serial number of that brilliant lens???

    • fava

      The SN is 628024 from the youtube description.

  • Don

    No VR on it ?????

  • 103david

    Ya’ know, somehow, no matter where I stand, I’ve never been able to take a picture of the back of my own head.
    At last, a dream fullfilled…
    On to the next dream. Can I order two of them? I want to latch them up to a matched set of Nikon F’s (consecutive serial #’s, of course )and make the coolest stereo camera ever…I’ll need the requisite matched F36 motordrives w\appropriate battery packs…speed finders too (one for each eye…) better add a single bubble level; a small boy to pack it around for me…I’ll call it “The Howdah!”

  • inginerul

    I love how he mounts the camera to the lens. I expect the image quality to be quite poor, but hey, it’s 220 degrees, right ?

  • ajendus

    A £100,000 lens and he fiddles with it in a “lens” cellar for a few and then jams it back into the box. Lenses aren’t meant to sit in a stuffy, dusty old room. They are meant to be used! I want to see what this bad boy can do.

    Either way, though, it is a freakishly amazing lens. Just when I was afraid of the front element on my 14-24, this thing makes it look like it has airbags and a bulletproof vest on.

  • Wolfcat

    What is also great is that a lens produced in 1970 works perfectly on a camera produced in 2012.

  • matt

    Looks like that’s shot at Gray’s. I wonder if that’s the one they had on display all those years. Finally decided to actually sell it?

  • albert

    Meh.. no gold ring… It’s not for pro.

  • CHD

    Just because you CAN build it, doesn’t mean you should. Ridiculous and all but pointless.

  • David H.

    WOW – the ultra rare D800 – I did not think I would get to see one!

    ps. lens looked uber soft?

    I feel more relaxed now with my 14-24mm front element – I would get nightmares about this one! 🙂

  • Bhaswaran

    ….. a must for potraits …. LOL

  • moa

    Great, buy this lens and donate to Scientology (Grays of Westminster).

  • Bb

    So timeless & beautiful, don’t see this any more, £100k is cheap, wish I had a spare million somewhere

  • Wow! £100K for a lens I’d use once or twice. Greys of Westminster are the ‘Daddies’ of Nikon exotica in the UK. Made the shop look huge too!

  • Back to top