Jump to content


synthetic

Member Since 10 Sep 2004
Offline Last Active Aug 07 2017 12:17 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Which lens set up to photograph Sharks?

07 August 2017 - 12:19 PM

I would use a fisheye if they are feeding the sharks. If they're not feeding, I would use a wide zoom like a 16-35mm or 17-40mm (full-frame.) 


In Topic: improved zoom ring for tokina 10-17mm (nikon mount) on Nauticam housing?

27 July 2017 - 01:39 PM

$200 for a zoom ring and you have to drill your own set screws? 


In Topic: Canon 100mm or Tamron 90mm Macro Lens

25 July 2017 - 03:41 PM

I haven't tried the Tamron. However, I used to shoot with a Sigma 100mm and switched to a Canon 100mm (non-IS). The Canon focuses soooo much faster than the Sigma. Not only was the motor quicker, but it grabbed focus where the Sigma would hunt and hunt. Tiny juvenile fish were impossible to shoot with the Sigma and simple with the Canon. Based on this, I've been wary to buy a non-Canon lens. 

 

I do have a Sigma 15mm lens and this one focuses well, so maybe the 100mm was just a fluke. However focus is not as difficult on a fisheye as on a macro in my experience. 


In Topic: 60mm vs. 100m

08 July 2017 - 10:07 PM

On full-frame I prefer a 100mm. If you want to get closer then try a doubler/wet diopter like the SubSee or Nauticam SMC.

In Topic: Canon 17-40mm UW

07 July 2017 - 02:27 PM

It's my wide zoom as well. I've used it for sharks, dolphins, and other big animals. The 16-35mm seems to be more popular, but I can't see much difference between them except being a stop faster and over double the price. The only downside is that when I zoom all the way out, I need to be around f18 to have sharp corners. I'm not sure if the 16-35mm has the same limitation in the water, or if it's just my rig (Ikelite/5D2.)