Jump to content


Got D700, where go next

  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 rept


    Sea Wasp

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 23 September 2010 - 02:08 PM

I have a D700 and I've been reading and searching the net about info on UW housings and lenses.

I currently own the following lenses:
Tamron 28-75 2.8
Nikon 50mm 1.8
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR

As for the UW housing I'm more or less set on the Nauticam housing based on the review of Alex Mustard.

Now for the lenses, this is much more difficult. If you shoot DX then the choice seems to be a no brainer with the Tokina 11-16. Now it's a big harder.

Which lens should I go for first? And will I need additional ports for the housing?

I've been looking at the Nikon 16-35mm but this probably won't give me any closeup possibility. The Nikon 100 2.8 VR great for Macro. And I read the Sigma 15mm FE is great but probably less usable in our waters?

I dive mostly in holland, zeeland, so visibility is not that great. But I also do diving trips to other countries: Egypt, Australia, Croatia, ...

For strobes: people here seem to be happy about Inon.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

#2 okuma


    Great Hammerhead

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 884 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Anaheim, CA USA

Posted 27 September 2010 - 07:24 PM

I would suggest a 60 mm macro.
The 105 macro is more specialized and tends to "hunt" a little.
Additionally, the 60 would be better in the reduced vis in your area.

Do not over look the Tokina 1 - 17. It probably is the most popular W/A U/W lens!

Underwater Photography:
If it is so easy every one would be doing it!

Nikon D 500, Subal Housing, Inon Z 240 strobes.

#3 Alex_Mustard


    The Doctor

  • Super Mod
  • 8591 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peterborough

Posted 27 September 2010 - 11:15 PM

The DX lens you both mean is the Tokina 10-17mm - to avoid confusion.

For macro, generally I find the 105mm lens much more of an all-rounder than the 60mm on full frame (FX). See this thread for more details. Note that a 60mm on DX is actually more similar to a 105mm on FX than the 60mm. However, Okuma makes a good point that in Zeeland the 60mm might be useful because of the reduced viz. However, because backgrounds in Zeeland are not attractive (muddy) the longer lens does make it easier to crop them out of your photos. I would get the 105mm VR.

I would then get a Sigma 15mm fisheye. The close focus of this lens would be a definite bonus in your conditions. It is very capable in your waters. It opens up the most space and allows you to shoot from very close, minimising backscatter. I always use this lens in the UK. You can even add a 1.4x kenko teleconverter to it, to reduce its coverage - basically giving you two lens options.

The 16-35mm is an excellent performer underwater, as long as you have a large, high quality dome port. I use the Zen 230mm, which really allows me to realise the full potential of this lens. These two shots, taken on Saturday, (of the same subject) show the flexibility this range offers. Neither is cropped.

Posted Image

Posted Image


Alexander Mustard - www.amustard.com - www.magic-filters.com
Nikon D5 (Subal housing). Nikon D7200 (Subal housing). Olympus EPL-5 (Nauticam housing).

#4 fforbes


    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 170 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Los Angeles area
  • Interests:diving warm and cold, photography, golf, travel of every kind

Posted 29 September 2010 - 07:42 PM

I have a D700 ( Nikon's full frame body), love it, and second Alex's choices. Nikon's 105 mm VR and the Sigma 15mm fisheye are my 2 "go-to" lenses in the often pea-green waters of California. One for macro, one for wide angle and both let you get close. I am still happy with the Nikon 17-35 rectilinear with a 2x... but would grab the 15mm FE as the first choice for wide angle. Good luck!


Nikon D800, Subal, Sea&Sea D1's