72 replies to this topic

[buddy]

 

Surely there are some other brands to analyze, Jack, and actually I'm doing so! Nothing yet decided so far, I've just talked about Subal because its easies to access the camera controls were being talked about. I know yet Ikelite housings (which I own) and am checking out also Nauticam, Seacam and Aquatica. Any other suggestion is very welcome!

Valeria

 

I do not want to leverage this too much, but the newest Subal housings like for D4 and D800 are just astonishing. All camera functions are easily accessible by your fingers without to remove your hands from the regular hand positions. the latest ports AND extension rings have a port-lock, inside is a leak-warner for sound and sight. My housing comes with 2 additional unused M14 threaded port holes for accessories. One of them I have used recently for a bulkhead with a HDMI cable inside the hosuing for an external monitor outside of the housing. with this I am using the Atomos Ninja2 HDMI/ProRes Recorder/Monitor in a Dive and See monitor housing for uncompressed 220 Mbits video recordings. The other is still unused, but could be used e.g. for a leak sentinel...

 

these are just a few items to know. But also, this stuff is (too) expensive...

[eyu]

 

I read carefully the 70-180mm review, Elmer, and must say that got specially worried about the drawback signaled on the text: "Autofocus Speed. Slowish and tends to hunt in low light situations. The limiter switch helps improve speed, but this lens isn't fast by any stretch of the word". So, how do you feel about it? I also followed your discussion with Tim regarding the diffraction, thank you for the links!

 

Valeria
 

Valeria,

 

I personally do not mind the autofocus speed of the 70-180 mm lens, but it would be nice if it was faster.  Autofocus speed is a two edge sword, the old 105 mm lens was slow and the new one is fast.  The new 105 VR may misses the focus point by zooming past it, thus the convenience of a manual override on the Subal port.  But some prefer the slower older 105 mm lens since the slowness with focus it does not tend to over shoot the focus point as much.

 

In regards to hunting in low light, this is a common problem in underwater photography. In general a faster lens, f 2.8 will hunt less then a f 4 lens, but all lens will have hunting problems with focus in the dim light (ie: under ledges, in holes, at dawn or dusk).  A good focus light should be a standard feature in ones underwater photo setup to alleviate this.

 

I agree with Buddy's excellent comments.  But note that a Subal 105 VR port comes in a type 4 as well as a type 3 port.

In regards to housings for the D800, try the different ones at a dive show and see how they feel in your hands.  The ergonomics and it's access to the different camera controls will make your photographic experience while diving more enjoyable.  But, my personal opinion, is the quality and ergonomics is directly proportional to the cost of the housing.  This hobby requires very deep pockets/pocketbooks, I could buy a new car for what I have in underwater photo equipment.  A very nice car at that!

 

Elmer

Edited by eyu, 19 July 2013 - 05:16 AM.

[divegypsy]

Valeria,  I'll hop in again with a few thoughts on both macro lenses and on housings.  

 

First the macro lens.  As I have said the 70-180 is my most used lens underwater due to its flexibility.  And technically, at the optimal apertures, it is probably not as sharp as the new 60mm and 105mm Micro-nikkors.  But in most practical shooting situations, those optimal apertures, f5.6 or wider open, do not give you adequate depth-of-field.  And if you stop any of those lenses down to working apertures like f11 or even f16 to get more depth-of-field you lose some sharpness to diffraction which tends to "even" the difference between the lenses.  And getting the shot, any decent shot, is far more important than such technical differences.  This is where the advantage really goes over to the 70-180 UNLESS what is most important to you is subjects that are very small and where the difference between shooting at .75x and 1:1 is really important.  Concerning the fact that the 70-180 isn't f2.8 for ambient light shooting, you also have to make a judgement on whether the absolute lack of depth-of-field, which you would have when you shoot a macro shot at f2.8 or f4, is going to produce a professionally acceptable image.  Pehaps you might be better off upping the ISO until you can shoot at an aperture with more depth-of-field.  

 

Second - housings.  I feel that as long as a housing is of reasonable construction, the controls it has or doesn't have, plus how easily you can use those controls, is the single most important factor in choosing a housing.  As I wrote, I've just bought Subal housings for my D800's, making a switch from Seacam.  I changed because Subal has controls for camera buttons that Seacam does not have.  These include the auto-focus on, preview, and function buttons.  Subal also has a port lock which keeps a large dome port from starting to dismount accidentally.  I had to add this to my previous Seacam housings.  And Seacam still does not have one despite a multitude of complaints.  

 

I shoot using TTL flash with Ikelite 161 strobes, which I think are the best strobes for TTL.  Inons work reasonably well slaving off of the pop-up flash on the D800, but Inon's are powered by AA batteries that need to be changed every dive or two.  And slaving off of the pop-up flash drains the camera battery much faster requiring camera battery changes which may be very inconvenient, depending on which housing you have. The Ikelite 161's have proprietary battery packs that can give you hundreds of flashes over dive after dive before they need recharging. Particularly their new Lithium battery packs.  

 

Back to housings.  On Seacam, it is almost impossible to reach the control that depresses the flash compensation button when your left hand is on the handgrip of the housing.  To access this small lever you need to take the housing down from your eye and hold down the flash comp lever while simultaneously turning the front input (also the aperture control in manual mode) control dial.  This is a two-handed operation and you probably need to first push the info button so that you can see what changes you are making on the camera's rear LCD panel. Then you do the two-handed gymnastics to increase or decrease the output of your TTL strobes via flash comp. By the time you've done all that, the shot may be gone. With Subal the flash comp is a push button that I can just barely reach with my right index finger with my hand on the housing's handgrip. I will modify this control to make it more easily reachable and make it possible for it to be locked down. 

 

Please feel free to contact me directly about housings or about lenses for Nikon. Like you, I'm a full-time professional photographer.  My pictures and stories been published in many of the world's best magazines.  When you come up to Florida, please let me know as far in advance as you can.  If I'm home, I'll do anything I can to help you.

 

Fred

Edited by divegypsy, 19 July 2013 - 12:30 PM.

[divegypsy]

Valeria,

 

If you are seriously interested in the super-macro end of macro shooting, you may be interested in my recent post under the 200mm Micro-nikkor topic.

 

Fred

Edited by divegypsy, 19 July 2013 - 06:29 AM.

[divegypsy]

Hello Valeria and others,

 

I've had a chance to put together a few shots that show the versatility of the 70-180 Micro-nikkor.  

 

Two pairs of shots show the variation in framing you have with this lens from the same shooting position.  The first, with the shrimp and bubble coral, was shot from a closer distance than the shots of the moray eel.  These pictures were taken only to show the difference in picture area at 70mm vs 180mm.  The fifth and sixth shots are a bit better in image content and show two fish, a small sand perch which is only three or four inches long and a larger tomato grouper about eight or ten inches long.  The sand perch is a shot that might also be shot with a 105mm, but under the dive and vis conditions, it would have been impossible to back off far enough with the 105mm to get the framing which shooting at 70mm allowed and still get reasonable sharpness.  These were shot using the 70-180mm and a flat port, all taken on the same dive, which was only my second dive ever with the D800 in one of my new Subal ND800 housings.  A small dome would have give me a wider view, not as good for the sand perch but better for the grouper.  These are "unprocessed" images resized with Photoshops script tool going directly from the NEF to 800 pixel jpgs with no adjustment in exposure or sharpening.  The Ikelite TTL provided the consistently good exposure of the shots.

 

Fred 

Attached Images

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[eyu]

I'm with Fred, his above examples show the flexibility of the 70-180 mm micro lens.  I just wish Nikon would update this lens so it did 1:1.

 

Fred, have you noticed problems with diffraction with your D800 and the 70-180 mm micro lens?  Are you able to crop down to f 22 without annoying distortion diffraction to get better depth of field?

 

Elmer

 

correction, poor word choice.  I should have used diffraction, not distortion.

Edited by eyu, 19 July 2013 - 03:31 PM.

[divegypsy]

Elmer, 

 

I haven't done any comprehensive tests of this or any other lens. I do want to know about what I consider practical considerations like what the focusing and zoom range of a lens is because this dictates the best lens choice for particular subjects. I am far more concerned with image content than digital era technicalities.  I am not aware that stopping a lens down for depth-of-field introduces distortion, though it can result in some loss of sharpness due to diffraction.  The trade-off of optimal sharpness vs depth-of-field has been well known for a long time and is a more visible concern.  I'm happy if the image reproduces reasonably well and particularly if it lets me make a nice big color print.  My "standard" print for personal use is 16" x 24" and if that looks good I'm satisfied and don't concern myself with whether the image shows a percent or two of pincushion or barrel distortion.  Or slight chromatic aberations which I've read can be corrected with either Photoshop or Lightroom.  I'll learn more about these things as time goes by, but my real focus is to just have fun in the ocean.

 

A long time ago, in the film era, I found that shooting at f32 (as marked on the lens aperture ring) resulted in less sharp images, so I stopped using that aperture. Nikon now shows the effective aperture in the viewfinder, not the aperture that would have been on an aperture ring.  And this varies as you focus closer and closer. My 105mm Micro-nikkor D at 1:1 stops down to f57 and at infinity is f32.  Typically I start with the whatever the most closed down aperture the lens will show then open at least 3-4 thirds of an f-stop.  As an example the 105D at 1:1 would show f57, then as I open the aperture, f50, then f45, then f40, then f36, then f32, then f29, then f25, then f22, etc.  In that example I would try not to shoot beyond f40 or f36 and depending on the subject might feel that f32 might do the job while giving adequate depth-of-field.  

 

Fred

[eyu]

Fred,

 

Thank you for your comments and how you stop down in macro photography.  

I am thinking with the D800 and its mega pixels that diffraction is really not a significant problem in our underwater photography.

 

Elmer

[divegypsy]

Elmer,

 

I don't know why the capturing medium, pixels or film, would make much, or any, difference on the performance of a lens at various apertures.  And on the sharpness loss due to diffraction. But I'm not an optical expert.

 

If you want the real answer, do the test shots.  Shoot a subject with your housing held immovable (on a tripod?) and of a non-moving subject with lots of fine detail.  Then compare the images to see if at f-whatever#1 the images are sharper than f-whatever#2.  And look for particular patterns like increasingly less sharpness as you stop the lens down beyond 2-4 f-stops from wide open, where is most lenses are at their best optically.  This could be done in any swimming pool or even in the bathtub with a 45-degree viewfinder.

 

It might be that beyond certain distance of water between camera and subject, the sharpness loss due to the water, even the clearest water, makes the image resolution of a 12Mp D700 image indistinguishable from a 36MP D800 image. This is something I thought long and hard about before deciding to switch to the D800, but my final decision was also based on the fact that I'm doing increasing amounts of topside photography and enjoy making really large prints of the images I like.  What you do with your pictures makes a lot of difference (or it should) on what camera you choose to shoot with.  If all you do with your pictures is post them on the internet, a D800 vs a D700 or D300 is a waste of money, in my opinion.

 

One of the things I am interested in testing is at what point in shooting super macro does the loss of sharpness due to added optics and diffraction combined with the difficulty of handling the gear make shooting that way result in less sharpness than just blowing the image up in Photoshop or other software?  As an example, which would give you better final image sharpness?  Shooting a subject at 1:1 with a 105mm Micro-nikkor combined with Nikon's 2x tele-converter, which effectively gives you 2x life-size.  Or shooting the same subject at 1:1 with the Micro-nikkor alone and blowing it up to the same 200% or 2x life-size with Photoshop or Genuine Fractals or whatever?  

 

At what point do all the extra optics and the difficulty in shooting with them actually result in a net loss of quality vs a net gain? And which add-on optics work better than others?  In general, I try to use as few add-ons - extension rings, diopters, teleconverters - as possible and still get the image I want.  I am particularly doubtful about wet diopters which have a layer of water between them and the housing with the prime lens.  I don't feel that the optical alignment between these flip up and flip down diopters is very good and think that they would be a great first test subject for shooting with and without pictures and then using Photoshop to blow up the lens only shot to the same magnification as the lens plus wet diopter.  And then comparing both images side-by-side.  Because I am leery of them, I don't own a wet diopter to do the test on.

 

I hope to find the time to do some of this kind of testing when I get home from my current dive trip to Indonesia and South Australia.

 

Fred

Edited by divegypsy, 19 July 2013 - 05:22 PM.

[eyu]

Fred,

 

I appreciate your thinking and comments.  I agree, testing in the water is the way to verify at what f stops diffraction will be present, if present.  I have changed from a D2Xs to the D800 and have found that the dynamic range is better to my eye with the D800. But this may be less or non apparent if I changed from a D700 in regards to 12 Mp vs 36Mp.  I will be in Tulamben and Komodo next month and will do some testing with different f stops on the 70-180 mm and 105 VR lens.  

 

Elmer

[divegypsy]

Hi Elmer,

 

It sounds like we may be ships passing in the night.  I'm in Tulamben now and start a Komodo cruise on Monday.  Then a month in South Australia before returning to Bali for September and October.  I'll probably start at Tulamben when I return from SA.  That's on September 6th. If it turns out we can hook up, that would be nice.

 

Fred

[eyu]

Fred,

 

I would love to hook up with another 70-180 mm micro guy!  I will be in Tulamben the last week of August, then to Bima and Komodo.  

Unfortunately we will be ships passing in the night, but may be fortunate enough to bump into you another time.

 

Elmer

Edited by eyu, 21 July 2013 - 08:40 AM.

[divegypsy]

Elmer,

 

Don't forget to try your 70-180 behind a small dome if you haven't already.  Not quite as good for really small stuff. Maximum magnification only about .4x behind the dome I use. But much better for bigger fish and critters. Like the barracuda that sometimes hangs out at the Tulamben Liberty shipwreck.  Or even some of the jacks in the school.  The attached shots were done with the 70-180 and a small dome.  They're scans of film shots taken a few years ago before I switched to digital. I probably use the 70-180 more behind the dome than behind flat glass.

 

Fred

Attached Images

• 
• 

[eyu]

Fred,
 
Thanks for the small dome tip, I just need to figure out what extensions to use with the 4" Subal DP-54b dome.
I remember you mentioned it in another thread that a small dome works well with the 28-85 mm f 2.8-4D lens set on macro.
I will need to try both.
 
Thanks,
Elmer

Edited by eyu, 21 July 2013 - 09:02 AM.

[davichin]

 

Hi, Davi, thanks for your suggestion about the Sigma 150. I heard from someone here in this forum that its focus is too slow, that's why I haven't get interessed on this lens. Before having started this topic specific for the use with the D800, I believe I've read all topics around here which discussed about macro lens (mainly 60mm vs 105mm), so I guess the statement about the slow focus of the Sigma was said by someone who was discussing about the same as us. How do you like its focus, both for UW and topside shoots?

 

 

That is strange, because it is a fast to very fast and accurate focus lens. It is a 2.8 HSM lens. Maybe what you read was about sigma´s 105mm which a slow focuser...

[Valeria Lages]

I am not shooting macro that often and like more wideangle and big fish, but being twice in Lembeh recently. I was shooting so far macro with the Nikon's 70-180mm maccro zoom in the original (long) Subal macroport FP70180. This port lets you switch underwater from AF to manual focus. Autofocus with this lens is ok at conditons with good available light. It might hunt a bit in bad lighting condition, but it is still ok. But I can always switch very fast to manual focus which is the best way for macro anyways IMO (e.g. you want to focus on the eye and NOT want to recompose the frame...however, Alex Mustard recently described here on Wetpixel a method using modern Nikon's like D800/D4  AF-C with 3D-tracking and thus focusing on the eye with the selected focus point and then recompose....).

 

The 70-180 is a pretty sharp lens and as others said already very versatile due to it s zoom functionality. But is not enough for smallest objects, especially on FF. It renders only up to 1:1.3. I was using sometimes a 5T with it to get almost to 1:1. The negatives: It is rather a long lens and requires a large macro port. The housing with this lens and port gets front-loaded in weight and negative boyanacy and tends to swap over. The other thing is that Nikon does not make this lens anymore and it seems to be quite hard to get a used one due to its many believers (I have heared that it sells today used more than original...I myself also would never sell this lens...and furthermore, Subal does not make that port anymore...)

 

The images from Lembeh on my webpage are all shot with this setup: http://www.jvpictures.com/welcome.html

 

Contrary to this I got now the 105 with a new Subal macro port. This setup is more elegant and way more slick. The port is for manual and Autofocus (and does not even requires a lever to swich between these modes. Just use AF ( I am using exclusively AF-ON only technique by pressing AF-ON button combined with AF-C) and be able to change to manual by just turning the focus knob on the port. The port does not even require a focus gear on the lens since the internal focus wheel goes directly on the rubber barrel on the lens).

 

The 105 VRII lens itself is just superb. It yields 1:1. the largest aperture of 2.8 means that the view finder is about double time brighter than with a 5.6 lens, which is especially for macro shots in bad lighting conditions a big plus. And this lens is probably the sharpest lens Nikon ever made in the range of "standard professional lenses" (maybe the 200mm /f2.0 is even sharper...but this is not for underwater!).

 

But beware, for Subal I believe it requires a type 4 bayonnet diameter, since this lens is thicker than others. Off course, as others said, there are other good underwater housings available.

 

So rather a long story...

 

Juerg

 Juerg,

 

Thank you a lot for your feedback. I was quite convinced to buy the 105VR to pair with the D800, but after some advices about the 70-180mm, I must say I'm a bit confused about which one should I choose for now, that's why I asked you about your experience with the referred lens. Indeed, after have seen some pics took with this lens (from you and others) I'm really with in a problem Did you take all the photos from the Lembeh album with the 70-180mm? I like specially the follow ones: #77, #95, #97, #103 and #118.

Interesting to know you can switch from focus to manual (which I do believe is the best way for macro too) with the mentioned Subal port. But what's the use of it if for a future buyer like me - besides the difficulty of finding this discontinued lens, if Subal doesn't make this port anymore? BTW: I did read the Alex's article talking about the 3D-tracking as an option for focus while shooting macro when he has published it some time ago (I read almost everything I could find about the D800), and even I'm curious about how does it work, I don't like much to have to recompose every single frame I wanna shoot.

So, I'm wondering: even if I'm able to fin an used lens like this after a devoted search on Internet, how would I manage with the lack of a proper port to pair with? I can see the housing manufacturers saying something like: "Sorry, but there's no meaning to remain producing dedicated porters for discontinued lens". Also: if this lens is so versatile and top desired as you and others say, why did Nikon stop to produce it?

Anyway, after having bought the 105VRII + the new Subal macro port, are you saying that nowadays you prefer this brand new setup for macro or I've misunderstood you? And what you mean by the type 4 bayonet diameter required? This spec is supposed to be asked whenever I order the housing or it has to do with the port itself? Sorry, but Subal is quite a new world for me...

Thanks again,

Valeria

[Valeria Lages]

 

[...] the newest Subal housings like for D4 and D800 are just astonishing. All camera functions are easily accessible by your fingers without to remove your hands from the regular hand positions. the latest ports AND extension rings have a port-lock, inside is a leak-warner for sound and sight [...] these are just a few items to know. But also, this stuff is (too) expensive...

 

Yep, Juerg, so far I've researched about, I do believe Subal is the Ferrari (at least for the D800), mainly due to its ergonomics. When I say I've not yet decided about which housing brand I'll marry to after upgrade to the D800 it means that it has not only to do with how expensive it is, but also the cost/benefit I will get after-sale (support, assistance and maintenance) because I live in Brazil, so, talking about Subal, it's a condition far different from you guys who live in Europe. Anyway, the best place for whatever I need in terms of rig assistance, is the USA, so any decision for me has to do with how things work in the USA as well.

Valeria
 

[Valeria Lages]

[...] Autofocus speed is a two edge sword, the old 105 mm lens was slow and the new one is fast.  The new 105 VR may misses the focus point by zooming past it, thus the convenience of a manual override on the Subal port.  But some prefer the slower older 105 mm lens since the slowness with focus it does not tend to over shoot the focus point as much.

 

In regards to hunting in low light, this is a common problem in underwater photography. [...]  A good focus light should be a standard feature in ones underwater photo setup to alleviate this.

 

[...]  note that a Subal 105 VR port comes in a type 4 as well as a type 3 port. In regards to housings for the D800, try the different ones at a dive show and see how they feel in your hands.  

 

[...] This hobby requires very deep pockets/pocketbooks, I could buy a new car for what I have in underwater photo equipment.  A very nice car at that!

 

Elmer

 

Wow, Elmer, I was not enough awarred about the differences between the old an the new 105mm regarding to the autofocus performance. I suppose your considerations about the new one referring to the risk of miss the focus point by zooming past it is kinda a housing-command difficult, so this issue is limited to the underwater experience, no? I mean: topside no doubts the fast autofocus delivered by the new 105 is unquestionable?

Nevertheless, as I wish an initial single macro lens for both land and UW shoots, now I'm trying to figure out: if I finally decide for the 105mm, which one of it should I search for?

A focus-dedicated light: no doubts it's essential in UWP. I use one specially directed for helping that, besides two strobes.

Subal port for the 105mm: Juerg has advised me about the type 4 bayonet. Could you please specify what are the differences between this and the type 3 one?

What else you've sentenced: I dare saying it's not just a matter of $, it's a marriage for long as well (in case of new camera+new housing set up as mine), that's why I tend to be ever very very cautious going step by step  

Valeria

[Valeria Lages]

[...] if you stop any of those lenses down to working apertures like f11 or even f16 to get more depth-of-field you lose some sharpness to diffraction which tends to "even" the difference between the lenses.  And getting the shot, any decent shot, is far more important than such technical differences. [...]

 

[...]  the controls it has or doesn't have, plus how easily you can use those controls, is the single most important factor in choosing a housing [...]

 

I shoot using TTL flash with Ikelite 161 strobes, which I think are the best strobes for TTL.  Inons work reasonably well slaving off of the pop-up flash on the D800, but Inon's are powered by AA batteries that need to be changed every dive or two. [...]

 

[...]  Please feel free to contact me directly about housings or about lenses for Nikon. [...]

 

Fred

Hey Fred, being a journalist (even I have never being a photojournalist in such daily news confined purpose), I do completely agree with your statement: "getting the shot, any decent shot, is far more important than such technical differences". And I even must say that sometimes the so called tech perfection bothers me.

housings: for sure the easy of achieving the camera controls and whatever it means is the most valuable. Probably that's my complain about my actual Ikelite, besides its polycarbonate construction. And that's definitely too why I'm seriously wondering about choosing Subal, despite of its very high cost and it's being totally unused in Brazil.

strobes: I own an Ikelite DS125 and a DS160 (not two DS160 as I have said before, I forgot I have returned a defective one and choose to got my money back). I do like their TTL performance at all ambient lights situations, but I think they are too heavy and big (both for balancing gear set up and for checking luggage in before air trips), so I'm wondering about replace them for lighter ones like the Inons (that's why I decided not to accept another Ikelite strobe after I have bought a defective one). I've heard from Ikelite factory assistance's guys that they have the best e-TTL strobe on the market, but I never tried another one while shooting UW, so I can't really evaluate whether it's just a marketing statement or whatever. But something I can surely affirm: Ikelite strobes are very big and heavy. I'm with a huge inflammation on my elbow since a recent trip to Bonaire (indeed probably it's due to have for my whole life ever carried around so much weight during my field jobs - not only UW, must say), so I was seriously thinking about downsize it starting replacing my strobes. BTW: are you using the double connector #4103-52 cord or fiber optic? What about the EV manual controller?

Inons powered by AA batteries which must be changed every dive: yep, it's disgusting! I simply HATE AA batteries, even I know there are lots of people who love it because it can be easily replace wherever you are! My feeling probably comes from the analog camera times, when I was obligated to carry tons of AA batteries with me whenever I left land for sailing because I knew I'd be with no easy energy source for a loooooooong time… Strange to understand, but I stilled hating AA even after the arrival of the rechargeable batteries, though I do have it and its charger for some advices.

Thanks for all your offers, I probably will contact you soon, when finally I deep dive into my new setup buying decision.

Valeria

[Valeria Lages]

Hello Valeria and others,

 

I've had a chance to put together a few shots that show the versatility of the 70-180 Micro-nikkor.  

 

[...]

 

Fred 

 

I appreciated a lot the shots, Fred, they are very illustrative for demonstrating the versatility of the 70-180mm. Where have you took them?

Valeria