22 replies to this topic

[chewie70]

I'm doing a Guadalupe trip in Sept. and wanted to know if a 12-24mm lens is necessary. I'm planning on shooting primarily with a 17-35mm. I just want to know from people that have done the trip if I will be missing some great shots by not having a 12-24 available or should I suck it up and drop the cash?

Later,
Matt

[onokai]

The 17-35 did all that I needed to shoot them last fall. I'd save the $$. I was shooting that lens on a film body(f5)that does change the angle some. Never needed a wider lens. Wish I had shot some 105 or 60 for eye close ups.Mark

[chewie70]

Thanks Mark, that's wht I figured. I just don't want to get out there and have regrets. I probably just spend the cash on a good strobe. Even though I may not need it, I would feel better having one on hand just in case. I wonder if Aquatica will ever come out with a port for my 500mm:) Talk about an eye shot.

Later,
Matt

[kriptap]

There is quite a lot of discussion on the 12-24, I seem to be one of the few who think it's a great lens, sharp right to the edges, so yes as far as the lens goes, it's great.

[NWDiver]

Used mainly the 17-35 but after reviewing all my photos wished I had used the 12-24 more to get Shark&Cage&Diver shots. Also full body shots when the got really close. Here is a link to a slide show almost all taken with the 17-35:

http://www.photodex....l=2405487&alb=0

[chewie70]

Thanks everyone! You know, you're not helping my bank account:)

[Alex_Mustard]

I have seen many excellent 12-24mm shots at Guadalupe - it seems to be the lens of choice for Nikon DSLR shooters there.

The advantage of the wider lenses is that you will get better image quality if the sharks come close (as you will be able to shoot more shark through less water), than with a longer lens like the 17-35mm. But it will be easier to fill the frame on the 17-35mm - and you would probably find that lens better for the earlier dives. The 12-24mm might be a bit frustrating on your first few dives if the sharks don't come close.

Alex

[kdietz]

I own the Nikon 12-24, but if I was buying today I'd give considerable thought to the Tokina 12-24 at half the cost....reviews show them even in quality

Karl

[Kelpfish]

For those who shoot the 12-24 on the Guadalupe trip, do you use the +2 diopter or stick with the basic setup and forego the diopter. I don't think the camera will focus to infinity with the diopter on as I recall from a black seabass dive.

[chewie70]

Ah yes, the longer this post goes, the lighter my wallet is getting:)

Alex, that's exactly why I was asking. I kind of assumed that as the days wen t on and the sharks got more adjusted, that I would regret not having an ultra wide (weitwinkel).

Karl, I've been looking at the Tokina and Sigma mainly because of price. The only thing of concern would be whether or not the Aquatica zoom gears would fit. I guess I'll have to contact Aquatica unless you or anyone else here know the answer to that.

Joe, from posts I've read on this site, it seems that you have to use a +2 ior +3 diopter.

Many thanks to everyone. This site is awesome and has helped me tremendously.

Later,
Matt

[jdaley]

I used the 12-24 exclusively last year in Guadalupe and I found that if the sharks were too far to decently fill the frame at the 24mm end of the lens the pictures were not going to be that great anyways. However when they came in close, and they will if you have some good topside wranglers, the 12mm end with a little strobe (for some pop) yielded some excellent results. If I were to go again I would definitely take my 12-24.

James

[Kelpfish]

You can use the 12-24 with or without a diopter. My question is more related to whether those shooting great whites in Guadalupe use a diopter of go with the bare lens.

[jdaley]

Kelpfish,

I used a +2 diopter with the 12-24mm like I always do, I did not test the lens without the diopter.

James

[Alex_Mustard]

Not a great white - but a similar sized subject:



Shot with the 12-24mm and a +4 dioptre. I know that others prefer different setups - but this one works for me.

Alex

[Kelpfish]

Can you focus to infinity with a diopter on the lens?

[chewie70]

Hey Alex, whatta you mean similar sized? That's just a baby or an appetizer for a great white, depending on how you want to look at it:)

Awesome shot by BTW. I always enjoy looking at your photos.

[NWDiver]

At this time I think you have to have Aquatica make a special gear for the Tokina 12-24, I tried the Nikon 12-24 gear and a couple others I had around, no luck. Went with the Nikon.

[chewie70]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the Nikon 10.5 will work at Guadalupe, or is it too wide? I have a chance to get one pretty cheap, just not sure if I would be wasting my money.

[Alex_Mustard]

On the WP trip to the Bahamas - where plenty of people had been to Guadalupe, many of the tigers were bigger than the average sized whites at Guadalupe, especially at September time.

The 10.5mm is a great UW lens, but not likely to be that suited to Guadalupe. But would be well worth taking if you were planning to dive in other locations in the future.

Alex

p.s. Glad you like my pictures. I have never seen a GWS.

[chewie70]

I'm sure there are some big tigers out there. That WP Bahamas trip sounds like alot of fun. I've only seen them a few times while surfing. It kind of stops your heart and takes on a whole new meaning. There's nothing like being bumped to the bottom of the food chain. I may or may not pick up that lens, haven't decided yet.