justin-branam

Justin

What exactly are you thinking of doing? I might be interested but I would need to know how reliable your "invention" is. Failure of a "modified" Ike part is not an option...

-Brian

i can try to explain it. there would be a short (1-2") port-like piece that would go on the housing. the end of the piece would be opened and would flare out to at least the width of the end of the 16-35. this piece would also have 2-3 more ikelite port clips on it (to replicate the front of a housing). then another piece would be machined to thread onto the dome port (replacing the stock piece that is threaded on there) and attach to the previously mentioned open ended port. so, you would put on the 1st port piece, then attach the lens to the camera, and then snap the dome port on with the larger opening already threaded onto it. only problem is, since you will thread the wider opening onto the dome port, it would only be able to be used for the 16-35 unless you want to keep threading on and off the standard piece back on and off as needed, or made another stepdown ring (then this would have effects on the distance the dome is away from other lenses though. so does that make any sense at all? im going to bed now. maybe ill draw up a sketch of it.

Hmmm, Justin, I think Dave has a Nikon, otherwise I like your suggestion. He may want the Nikkor 105 f/2.8.

Dope! In that case, get the Nikkor like Deep6 suggested.

actually that is the retail price for the housing suplied with both the Aqua View Finder and the standard eye piece, the retail of the housing with its satndard eye piece is 2999.00

I stand corrected. Sad thing is i still cant afford $3K for the housing, so my choices are limited by my budget. Maybe someday  

Also, I think that most people who choose the 16-35II over the 17-40L also choose a different brand of housing.

Just a thought,
James

Thats what i was kind of thinking but if there was interest it would be a fun project for me. i personally like the 17-40 better.

I was leaning toward Ikelite, but then learned that it couldn't house the 16-35, which was a bummer. So what do you guys think I should go for?

/Best regards, Bjorn

Depends on how much youre willing to spend. I personally use ikelite, because they are priced fairly low and they fit my needs. I have friends who have aquatica housings and will never go with anything else.

I look at it this way, you cant use the 16-35 with the ikelite but you can use the 17-40. The cost of the ikelite housing is $1520 at bh photo right now. The cost for the aquatica housing is $4188. For a price difference of $2668, i would personally use the funds to buy the 17-40 and a good set of strobes. However i have never had the chance to use an aquatica housing since they are out of my price range, but if you can afford it, the quality may be worth the price difference. This is where getting your hands on each of the brands housing could be a big benefit.

Good luck with your decision, i know it can be a hard one choosing between new goodies!