What can be read in test reports through this adapter, also corresponds to my experience. For the low price of this part provides a very good sharpness, dimmed up in the corners. At maximum aperture imaging performance in the corners diminishes naturally, which is of course the lens, but that goes for the professional lenses alike. The combination of 16 mm / ECF1 must not hide here. I have previously photographed with the Canon 10-22. In terms of sharpness the difference is not earth-shattering. A bigger problem is the fisheye effect itself. In contrast to the 10-18 fisheye effect with 15 mm small picture focal length is clearly visible. That's when the envisaged use of the adapter no wonder. However, there is a danger that you can also quickly tired looks at this effect and then it wants a "real" Wide. At least to me it's gone so what made me then move to the 10-18. But I have also been a few years as a "wide-angle photographer" behind me. I'd rather watch this adapter as an experimental supplement and gimmick than as a substitute for a genuine wide-angle lens. But as such it is highly recommended. Lightroom users should be aware that the information is output to the image are not correct. The adapter does not provide information to the camera. Lightroom reads (like any other software as well) from the information of the 16 mm lens. So at open aperture is always 16 mm f2.8 and is output, even if the recording is carried out with 10 mm and the adapter always costs a diaphragm. For most who want to occasionally make times a Wide Shot, should even be enough of these adapters. A wide-angle lens, it can not substitute for the fisheye effect, however. Who only makes wide-angle shots or in this focal length range aspires professional quality, should look at the 10-18 4.0.
