mvdvorle

Thanks for the explanation! I know what will be in my shoppingbasket next time i virtually shop The 10.5 is such a fine piece of glass but find the angle slightly too wide for the way I want to use it (underwater portrets) Cheers! marco

Hi all, Im quiet interesting too in tis topic. The use of a teleconverter is clear. What isn't clear is that when I look at the Nikon website, it seems that a teleconverter and the 10.5 fisheye are not working together. I attached the nikon overview, just in case...: Nikon overview Could somebody explain why/why not etc etc. (btw, I own a Ikelite housing and a d300) cheers, marco

I have been thinkin about 1 or 2 extra slave-strobes but that's too much hassle. Like I refered in my other reply, I use a tamron 11-18 and at 18mm I still have to come too close to those kids (they sometimes bump into my strobes...). 17-35 would be perfect and make me more flexible, if reliable in a ikelite housing (d300). cheers for now marco

Hi Chris, That less hunting with f2.8 sounds like music to my ears! 16mm is too short. Right now i use the Tamron 11-18 and still at 18mm I almost crush those kids... The 17-35 would be perfect if it would operate reliable in an Ikelite housing. thx marco

Thanks for your reply! The main reason why I would like a big(ger) apenture is to catch as much light as I can, so the tiles at the end of the swimmingpool are (more) visible too. I make portrets of kids while swimming through a big canvas. To get their faces exposed correctly I use 2 strobes. But all that is behind this canvas is black/underexposed. I noticed a higher ISO is possible but then again noise is an issue. Because my current lens (tamron 11-18, f4.5-5.6) needs to be replaced, I might as well buy a good piece of glass... Feel free to brainstorm with me

Thanks, but I read this tread already many times. To be honest, things were not really clear to me after reading. For me cornersharpness is less important, focus speed and a wide® apenture are more important to me. I want to be sure my 1400 eur will be spent well. I tried the same with Nikon's 16-85 which is now down-graded to a 'dry' lens (=it's useless below sealevel). Hope to get some support here... Thanks anyway for your reply! Marco

I'm searching my ... off for information about which lens to choose. I own a D300 in a Ikelite housing and can't make up my mind about which lens to choose. Mainly I use my uw gear to do portrets in indoor swimming pools. Anyone having experience with Nikon's 17-35 f2.8 using a DX camera and a Ikelite housing? Nikon's 12-24 would be a good option, but f4 might not be big enough. I also don't know how Nikon's 10-24 is behaving below sealevel. Could anyone help me out here? Thanx marco

.