Complete Lens Bag
Posted 13 September 2004 - 02:26 PM
Problem with either of these lenses is that you won't get the magnification you think you will because of the working distances. If you are expecting 1:2 or better I think you'll be disappointed. Good for fish portraits. I've used it for sharks and for frogfish.
I used a Tamron 28-75 with the Aquatica/Kodak on the last trip behind the Aquatica 8" dome. It lacks the close focus of the Nikon 24-85D but it worked (quite well, in fact) in a pinch. I've also been looking for a midrange zoom with decent macro performance for the same reasons Robert has. I think the 24-85 is an OK solution using DX sensors but full frame complicates matters. I've looked on the Canon side and it seems that Canon doesn't offer midrange zooms at all with decent close focus capability. Tamron makes a 28-135 with OK close focus but I have no experience with it. The long end may provide enough working distance for full frame and reasonable magnification.
Eric, you prefer the 17-40 over the 16-35? The 16-35 would appear to have the edge in autofocus because of the extra light but the extra length and lighter weight would be nice on the 17-40. How does the 17-40 AF work underwater using your 1D* bodies?
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
Posted 13 September 2004 - 03:18 PM
I used a Tamron 28-75 with the Aquatica/Kodak on the last trip ...
You've been holding out on us big time.
What do think of this setup? Where are the photo?
Canon 5D; Aquatica housing; 2 Inon Z220 strobes; Canon 100mm macro, 17-40mm ; Sigma 15mm FE, 24mm macro, 50mm macro
Posted 10 October 2004 - 09:24 AM
Dream kits do depend on what you shoot and where you shoot, I tend to favour 50/60 macros in our murky temperate waters. I really like the 12~24 and despite having switched to Canon still keep the 12~24 just in case ......
Paul Kay,Canon EOS5DII SEACAM c/w S45, 8-15, 24L,35L, 60/2.8 (+Ext12II) & 100/2.8 Macros - Sony A7II SEACAM 28/2 & 50/2.8 Macro - UK/Ireland Seacam Sales -see marinewildlife
Posted 28 February 2005 - 09:14 PM
I have the 10.5 and 60 (Nik) already.
For long lenses: the Sigma 100-300 f4? Sig 70-200? Nik 70-200? (both sigs have integral focus (HSM), the Nik has internal focus (AF-S) and VR). With 1.4x TC? Still thinking...leaning Sig 100-300 w/ 1.4X TC...for value and reach.
What thinkest thou ... if anything?
And of course a D2X in a Subal or Seacam when the early adopters move on ...
All the best,
Subal ND70 + 2X DS125 ... mostly 10.5, 16, and 60
Posted 01 March 2005 - 10:03 AM
Aquatica Pro Digital housings for D-800, Sigma 8mm & 15mm Fisheye, Nikon AF 14MM, AF 17-35mm, AF 20MM, AF 60MM, AF 105MM, 4x Ikelite Ds 160, and TLC arms exclusively
Posted 02 March 2005 - 05:50 AM
Yes, the Sigma 15 FE looks good ... but the Nikon 16 FE fits behind the same Ike port as the Nkon 10.5 FE (the Sigma doesn't, according to Ike's chart) .
And...I just bought (yesterday) a lightly used Nikon 16 FE for less than the new price of the Sigma. Gotta be quick!. As I save the cost/bother of an additional port with this lens, this choice is doubly appealling. So my UW lens set up looks like 10.5FE and 16FE, with a 60 Nikon for macro. Fisheye man. And I get to remain a Nikon glass snob, for at least one more lens!
In the next year or two, I'll think about longer macro, probably Nikon 105, or Sigma 150 -- I look forward to hearing more about the Sigma, and hope that it fulfills its promise and that Ike will figure out a way to house this HSM macro lens. Comments?
After that, when the wallet has stopped smoldering, I may add recitlinear WA lenses (Nikon 12-24 or Sigma 10-20 plus Sigma 14?). Assuming I'm still in an Ike housing at this time, the Nikon 12-24 uses the same port as the Sigma 14 ... which can also be used with the 60 mm ... keeping my dive clutter at a somewhat less unreasonable level.
Then it'll probably be time to look at upgrading the body/housing...to the D3Z with an unobtanium housing featuring a Plusgrand IMAX sensaround viewer and quadruple sync bulkheads supporting x-TTL.
Jean, I like the look of the Nikon 70-200, with AF-S and VR, but it is probably too dear for me. So, when I can afford it, I may try the 100-300 Sigma + 1.4X TC (HSM, but no OS) -- only a stop slower, reputedly sharp, longer, and less money. This seems like a more useful lens than a 70-200 for me. Thanks for the heads-up on the compatibility issues; I will read up on it and test carefully.
Thanks for all the help!
All the best,
Subal ND70 + 2X DS125 ... mostly 10.5, 16, and 60
Posted 02 March 2005 - 06:13 AM
I couldn't help but notice you have a 70-200mm canon now you swapped over. (from UWP)
I was considering buying one too as it is a great land lens too. I am not sure Sea and Sea houses it though .. I could be way wrong there, but that would justify buying it if it could be housed as well. I would also like to know how it acts underwater .. even though we have different cropping i don't think I have even seen anyone discuss that lense in underwater use .. maybe I just haven't looked.
Posted 02 March 2005 - 06:26 AM
BTW....I use the 80-400VR topside and it's an awesome lens IMO....lots of fun to use and very sharp....
Posted 04 October 2006 - 07:21 PM
I would like some recommendations on wht you would take to the Galapagos for a week... I'm shooting a Canon 5D and so is the wife so we can have 2 rigs topside...
Here are my choices (all Canon):
85mm f/1.2L - This is fast becoming our favorite topside lens
14mm f/2.8L USM - This is my UW lens so I'm takin' it
100mm f/2.8 Macro USM - The wife's UW lens so this one is coming too!
24-105 mm f4 L IS - Nice range but maybe too slow?? A little soft?
300mm f/4L - Heavy but... what about those critters...
135mm F/2 L USM - Fast lens. Great for Bull Riding shots!
EF 1.4x II Teleconverter
The 1.4x fits on the 300 and the 135
So as you can see if I bring all of these plus two bodies plus.... plus...
Is the 24-105 worth bringing? The 300 seems to be a definite front runner.
Current thnking is that for land the 300 would be mounted on one body and the 85 on the other... bring the 1.4x extender.... The 14mm doesn't weigh too much to pack to the mountains
Or do we bring the macro? It is a nice 100mm lens too.
Tripod seems to be way overkill. Monopod maybe though.
Oh yes, we will be going to machu picchu the week before the dive trip.
I'm soooo confused
Posted 05 October 2006 - 08:11 AM
Canon 5d and 10d
Sigma 15mm FE
EF 28-105 f3.5-4
EF 50mm F2.5 Macro
EF 100mm F2.8 USM Macro
Tamron SP 1.4 TC (same as the Kenko 1.4 Pro)
I may add the 70-200 f4L (non-IS) but do dream of the 500f4L too!
SLS Photography, when your images matter....
Aquatica, Amphibico, TLC, ULCS (Philippines), Stix, iTorch, FIT, Magic Filter Dealer
Philippine Dive Trip Specialist
Posted 05 October 2006 - 03:41 PM
The 1.4x fits on the 300 and the 135
The 135mm is said to work very well with both the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters. The latter would give you a 270mm F4.0 and could make the heavy 300mm F4 redundant.
Sea&Sea 110a, iTorch, GoPro3 BE
Posted 03 July 2008 - 06:41 AM
Interesting thread ... but I am still in the dark on my choice:
My gear: Nikon D200, Aquatica housing
I will be going to the US in 2 weeks and I do not have any UW lense yet. My budget allows 2 lenses and I was thinking about the following ones:
1) 60mm Macro
2) 105mm Macro
3) Sigma 10-20mm
4) Tokina 10-17mm FE
Option (1) is very certain, as I am quite a bit into macro and the water here in Norway gives plenty of small stuff. Unfortunately I do not have experience with any of these lenses. Most of you talk about the 60mm as the absolute standard lense which gets plenty of use for fish portrait and medium size critters. But what is medium size really? Is it worth to invest into the 105mm macro then to go smaller?
Ok, to add complexity to this whole topic: I will be going to Egypt for the wreck tour in November. So a wide angle should be in my bag. Then, option (3) or (4). Many comment the fish eyes as very hard to use for beginners, which I am. Is option (3) then the better choice to start with?
As I said, I can only affort 2 lenses right now. Ultimately I think I will go for all of the ones I mentioned. But htat will take some time.
Hope anyone has some tip for me
SLR Camera: Nikon D200, Aquatica housing, Nikon AF-S 60mm Micro, Tokina 10-17mm FE
Arms and Flash: ULCS arms, focus ligh holder, Inon Z-240
Posted 19 July 2011 - 07:43 PM
Posted 20 July 2011 - 04:55 AM
Nikon D90 Aquatica housing, nikkor 60mm, ,105VR mm, 18-70mm, 17-55mm, 10.5mm FE, 15mm FE, 10-20mm.
Inon strobes, TLC arms.
Posted 23 March 2012 - 11:37 PM
This looks like the PERFECT solution for when I want to go for a hike or carry my camera backpack with my full kit...BUT have my camera out and ready for access to get those once-in-a-lifetime shots.
I was looking at getting the Capture Clip before what I like about the Cotton Carrier StrapShot is that I can take the camera out with one hand. It's another good thing that they have a safety tether in case my hands are slippery. (Gets humid here.)
Anyway, will find out next month when mine arrives. Placed a pre-order to save $20 and got free shipping!!!
What do you guys think about the StrapShot?"
Posted 15 August 2013 - 05:09 AM
Sorry for being the 'New Guy' jumping in with a question right off the bat!
I have a favour to ask anyone shooting Canon DSLR in an Aquatica housing, I need a measurement (mm) from the front of the camera lens bayonet (silver metal part) to the front of the housing port bayonet (the flat face your port sits flush against).
I am a long time underwater DOP here in Australia and I build a heap of my own custom housings for RED, 3D and other oddball cameras. I am experimenting with a few off the shelf port options with one of my creations (happy to post photos as I move along).
I am on MKIII of my RED housings, building this one specifically for the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye which I love the look of underwater.
If anyone can help please let me know..
Thanks in advance.