Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Lens for mid-size animal portraits on 5D3


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Alex_Tattersall

Alex_Tattersall

    Great Hammerhead

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 872 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 29 April 2014 - 05:26 AM

Hi all,

 

I wonder what people are using as a lens of choice falling between the 100mm macro and the 8-15 Fisheye.

 

Thanks in advance

Alex


www.flickr.com/photos/alextattersall

www.nauticamuk.com
www.uwvisions.com
Exclusive official importer of Nauticam products into the UK and Ireland

#2 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 817 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 29 April 2014 - 06:48 AM

Looking at the Nauticam port chart your only option for full frame is the 24mm lens? LOL

 

Ideally you would want a 35m behind a flat port to give you the standard land 50mm portrait format but seems like this does not exist for full frame in terms of nauticam ports?


Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#3 bvanant

bvanant

    Giant Squid

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 1530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles (more or less)
  • Interests:Science, photography, travel

Posted 29 April 2014 - 07:40 AM

Why not the 16-35? It is pricey but a great lens.

Bill


Bill
Canon 7d, Nauticam, Lots of glass, Olympus OMD-EM5, Nauticam, 60 macro, 45 macro, 8 mm fisheye, Inon, S&S, Athena Strobes plus lots of fiddly bits.
www.blueviews.net


#4 diverdoug1

diverdoug1

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sarasota, Florida
  • Interests:UW photography, Cave diving, Trimix, Spearfishing, Saltwater fishing, Freshwater fishing, Skiing

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:15 AM

16-35 for me as well.



#5 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:31 AM

or 17-40



#6 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 817 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 29 April 2014 - 09:49 AM

Was the 17-40 on the port system not apsc?

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#7 AndreSmith

AndreSmith

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:32 PM

The 17-40 works on full frame or APS-C Canons if that is what you were asking



#8 howeikwok

howeikwok

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 178 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Singapore

Posted 29 April 2014 - 08:37 PM

Hi Alex. I have the 16-35 II with the gear but have not used it underwater yet. 

 

Wanted to try it on sharks last year at Palau but that got cancelled. Maybe this june with the leafies in aussie. 


Canon 50D/60mm macro/100mm macro/Tokina 10-17mm FE/Nexus Housing/Inon Z-240s

#9 JimG

JimG

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Yorkshire, UK
  • Interests:Photography - underwater and avian, natural history

Posted 29 April 2014 - 11:29 PM

I use the 17/40 with an 8" dome with a +2 to help with the corners. Super sharp lens with really good contrast. 9" min. focus. The corners are not a problem for me - I just shoot to crop if that's not heresy. Much cheaper than the 16/35 which is better at the corners I believe.

Other than tose two, the only other option is the 24/105 which few people use and seems to attract mixed reviews. 18" min. focus is a drawback I think.


Jim Greenfield - Canon 5D Mark 3/Aquatica
My Web Site


#10 pmooney

pmooney

    Orca

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1229 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cairns Australia
  • Interests:Growing Grapes

Posted 30 April 2014 - 03:15 PM

Canon 50mm Macro works perfectly for fish portraits on the full frame - shoot it using a compact port base and 15mm compact port.



#11 cotedenuits

cotedenuits

    Hermit Crab

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Location:Cambridge MA
  • Interests:music

Posted 01 May 2014 - 02:34 PM

Anyone used the Sigma 50mm f/2.8 Macro?



#12 errbrr

errbrr

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 219 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 01 May 2014 - 04:30 PM

I had a go with the 24-105, probably with the wrong extension rings, and it didn't work well (at all). I've been trying to decide between the 16-35 and a 50mm. The only thing that would stop me going prime would be how many people are using the 16-35 for video.



#13 StephenFrink

StephenFrink

    Great Hammerhead

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 713 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Key Largo, Florida Keys

Posted 07 May 2014 - 02:42 PM

Between 8-15 and 100 macro I use 16-35 II a lot. If fish portraits the Sigma 50mm macro with either flat or dome port, depending on probable size of fish targeted.

The 16-35 II is quite useful, and the Sigma 50mm goes to 1:1, which is likewise handy and it is quite sharp. It is the only non-canon lens I use, and only because the Canon 50mm macro does not go to 1:1.
Stephen Frink - www.stephenfrinkphoto.com
Publisher - Alert Diver Magazine
Distributor/North America - Seacamusa.com
Travel - Waterhousetours.com

#14 escape

escape

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 323 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Republic of Korea

Posted 07 May 2014 - 06:25 PM

16-35 II or 17-40mm.

I like to shoot video with 16-35 because is bit more sharper.