Jump to content

UWphotoNewbie

Member
  • Content Count

    857
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by UWphotoNewbie

  1. This is a really cool fxeature. Its great to help folks get in touch and just to see where everyone is from. But what would be really useful is some way to post dive locations, along with the KML/KMZ files for GoogleEarth. Photos could also carry this information linking you to the dive site where a photo was taken. With several free applications, its trivial to upload these to your GPS, or just cruise around and look at the satellite pictures of the area to plan your next trip.
  2. I've been shooting with this lens on the D70 and find it very fast. Ken Rockwell has a review of it on his site and claims that it is not reliable on a D3 or D300 like it is on the older cameras. I don't have either a D3 or D300 to test. Any experience?
  3. Nikon 70-300mm AF F4-5.6 lens in excellent condition. This lens was barely used. I used it mainly for wildlife photography of Elk in Rocky Mountain National Park. The lens has a long reach and is very sharp when stopped down. This is the more expensive coated version of this lens. The lens is in excellent condition with no scratches on the outside or optical elements. It includes both lens caps, hood, a UV filter and the original box. This lens has an aperture ring that allows manual aperture setting so its compatable with more cameras than the new lenses. It works perfectly setting the aperture automatically with the D70/D80/D100/D200/D300/D3 or can be used with anchient Nikons that don't have automatic aperture control. $150. Buyer pays shipping and Paypal fees. See prior posting for pictures.
  4. Price reduced to $150. I need to get rid of this lens as I'm moving soon.
  5. Wow. I would have thought based on the rave reviews I've seen that the 70-200 would be the alpha and omega of lens design. This has been an education. It looks to me like it will take another 5 years and (and thousands of dollars) to shake this out through camera and lens updates even at the top end. The Ken Rockwell 60mm AFS review hints to the same issue wrt vigenetting as well. When those of you in the know look into your crystal balls do you see a like for DX 5-10years down the road? Will there continue to be DX cameras at the prosumer level opr will it go the way of the APS? Until this discussion (and the two latest lens reviews) I thought this was a slam dunk. But perhaps there is room for both formats even at the pro level for some time to come.
  6. Ken Rockwell has posted side by side reviews of the old and new 60mm lenses on his site here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/60mm-afd.htm and here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/60mm-afs.htm This mostly confirms what I believe and have heard from others namely that the AFS is sharper in the corners and is fast and reliable, better than the 105mm VR. But he made some interesting points that I was suprised about: 1) The AFS version has slightly more distortion and falloff than the old version 2) The AFS version doesn't focus reliably on the D3 or D300 3) The AFS has even less working distance than the old version. This is no doubt due to the IF. Bjørn Rørslett had a better review of this lens. http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html He stated that distortion was negligable. Light falloff isn't an issue for me as with macro highlighting the subject is a good thing and no one shoots macro at f2.8 anyway. Distortion isn't a big deal underwater either. For you crazies out there the smaller front element will also allow you to use the 3/4T diopters with this lens in the same way you can with the 105mm VR, in case you want to photograph the lint inside your port. Less working distance may be a problem for those that would use this lens as a true macro lens, possibly making it impossible, its so close already. But I use this as a fish portrait lens and the 105mm for true macro so again this isn't an issue AF performance IS the issue as getting even faster results on fluttering fish is important. Appearently Bjørn Rørslett tested this on the D300 and D3 but didn't mention any AF irregularity. I own the AFS version and have had very snappy AF results on my D70. Much faster IMHO than with the older AF lens. But I don't have and haven't tried this on a D300 or D3. Can anyone confirm Ken's findings on a D3/D300?
  7. Have you played with this on Ikelite? I would guess the 12-24mm gear would be a close fit. Maybe a modification of the foam thickness? Is it wider than the 12-24mm?
  8. I'm so sorry for your loss.... I hope it was insured. Let us know if you find the cause. Were you using the 105 when you had the flood? Best wishes.
  9. Well, Jean has had a port for this lens for some time but I haven't seen any pictures yet so you may prove to be correct. The silence is suspicious. The reports I have seen topside have been very good for this lens however. It will be interesting to see what the results are from the Tokina 11-16mm as its an F2.8 lens. None of the other DX WA zooms have been that fast. The old 14mm F2.8 should be a great lens as well when housed on a full frame. The corners aren't as good as the 14-24mm but it should be simpler to house and will be wider than anything else rectalinear on DX. Maybe everyone will end up shooting their D3X in DX mode
  10. FF will be lower noise all around and much better for WA. The new 14-24mm is much wider, sharper in the corners and faster than anything rectalinear in DX. The viewfinder will be wider as well. The D300 will be a great camera. If you have something to shoot and don't already own a DSLR get it. Remember, even IF Alex is right it won't be available until Christmas at the earliest and probably next April before there are housings. So thats a year of pictures that you'll be missing now. The D10 (or whatever its called) will certainly be more expensive than the D300 too. I have the luxury that I'm pretty happy with my D70. It would have to be worlds away for me to want to spring for a new housing AND camera. IMHO FF is the only thing thats truly missing from DSLR photography to bring it back to the level of maturity that the F100/F5 had. Of course, once I get FF I'll start wining about how I want a FF Foveon sensor, and THEN we'll finally be there.
  11. Wow. Seems like a lot of task loading on one dive. Try it again when you have the opportunity and diving is simpler. I've done the same with similar results. We spend so much time landlocked with these new toys that once we get into the water its everything at once. Not the best way to get good pics. I need less hobbies and WAAAY less gear.
  12. Its bound to happen sometime soon, a full-frame D300 class camera. I had always assumed that it would be the D400 and be at least a year away. I like your D10 theory though. Canon kept the 40D line in APS-C and added a new line of small bodied FF cameras in the 5D...so Nikon could do the same thing. I like the idea of getting one sooner rather than later. Mike, for me FF is the swinger that would cause me to upgrade my D70. The D300 is nice, but its evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Its not light years away from the D70. In the meantime I'm enjoying using the D70 even more now that I know its not worth a fortune and is replacible. I just took it on a 4-day canoe trip in the desert and got fantastic shots. If I had treated it like I did when I first got it I never would have taken it into the wet, silty, sandy environment I did--and never would have gotten the memories. Its nice to have an old camera you can treat as a tool rather than a jewel....
  13. I have the new AFS 60mm. I can't tell if its sharper or not but if so it doesn't matter. The 60mm is already as sharp as it gets so any improvement would be marginal at best. There are 4 reasons to get the new one: 1) AF-S is faster even on the 60mm which wasn't bad to start out with, this one goes from macro to infinity in an instant. 2) AF-S is required for a D60 etc. 3) The lens is IF so it doesn't change length when focusing allowing for a smaller port. In my cas it means less port extensions to carry along. 4) If you like to manually focus the 60mm (Which I don't) then AF/MF switching is easier with AFS since the lens had its own MF switch that could be tricky to switch in a housing. IMHO manual focus is more important on the 105mm.
  14. Hi Michelle, Its possible that in mounting the port that you bumped the AF/MF button on the lens. The upgraded port bodies are wider in diameter, I presume so that you don't brish the buttons when mounting. For me I only brush the VR switch but I could see that you might have hit the other ones too. In this case, I would expect that you could trigger the shutter, but I would not expect that the green light would be on unless its in focus. As far as the port length goes, it does look a little long , but the focus wheel/paddle contacts the focus ring albeit on the end. It takes a bit of pressure to make it turn. This is only a problem topside. Once underwater water pressure takes care of it (it says this in the manual too). I had the same problem with the .16 topside as well but when I used it underwater there was no problem. If all you want to do is shoot the 105mm then the .16 is ideally a better fit. Unfortunately, it won't work with the 6T diopter that way. I prefer using the .22 because that extension works with the 12-24mm and the diopters on the 105mm. I had to send the .16 I tested back to Ikelite. Try it again with the buttons taped up to see if the MF switch was your problem. Then try it again underwater and see if you are still having trouble. Happy shooting.
  15. Bruce, Why do you want a digital format lens? I think the trend has been to make full-frame lenses for professional use on the long end. For long lenses (with narrow FOV) there isn't much to be gained in making them for cropped sensors. Only the superzooms (18-200mm) have had to resort to DX projection. I don't think that any of the superzooms will be suitable for UW use anyway. I use the 18-200mm most of the time topside however. I still think that looking for a used 70-180mm macro would be your best shot. That was a great lens--particularly if you can get a focus port for it. I wonder how auto-focusing would be on a D3 with its faster motors and wider image circle?
  16. Take a look here on the Ikelite website: http://www.ikelite.com/web_pages/newest.html at the posting for 4/9/08. This notice was also included on a yellow paper inside the port box and was emailed to my dive shop that I bought the port from.
  17. I just recieved the focus extension part #5510.75 Focus Extension for the Ikelite modular port system for my Nikon 105mm VR. It works well with the port body intended for the Nikon 12-24mm 5510.22. This combination is preferred if you intend to use diopters. I tested this with the 5T and 6T and there is plenrt of room for either diopter or even both together. The port has just enough room to safely accomidate both diopters stacked but not much more to eat into your very short working distance with this combination. If you do not intend to use internal diopters I would recommend using the 5510.16 port body instead. With this combination the lens alone has less room in front making for a more compact port. The focus knob works by turning a small paddle that brushes up against the focus ring on the lens. The shaft is slightly skewed and the paddle has a rubber O-ring on it to grip the focus ring. Its a slow operation perfect for precise focus, but not good for fast slewing. I would use this with my diopters but rather use AF and a good focus light if I can. Don't worry if the focus knob requires some pushing in to get it to grip the focus ring on land. Underwater, water pressure will take care of it. I tested this in Rocky Point on the demo last fall and it works great. Thankfully, the focus ring on the 105mm is wide, which makes this focus extension work with both port bodies. The port comes with an additional spacer for the focus shaft that can be used with Canon 100mm lenses. The spacer allows the shaft to go in closer to the lens to accomidate the narrower lens diameter. To change the spacer you remove the shaft with the provided allen wrench and substitute the spacer. A recent announcement is requesting users of the 105mm and the modular flat port to exchange their port bodies for a larger diameter version. My old style port body works OK here but its a tight fit and difficult to install without brushing the VR switch. I'll be sending mine back for the free update. Te next step is to get it into the pool for a real test.
  18. Wow! Someone do a search for FX in the D300 firmware!
  19. I agree, wider is better. Go with the 10-20mm. The 17-55 is a great land midrange zoom. Underwater its best as a shark lens. The traditional option is either WA or macro. The 17-55 isn't really a good option for macro and trying to do everything with one lens doesn't work out well for either. The 10-20 should give good WA. Focus on that. Happy Shooting!
  20. I have tried it. I thought it worked well. Its a totally different system than the standard port focus rings. They were planning to change the focus knob from the prototype I tried, so we'll see what comes out. The prototype I tried had a shaft attached to a rubber paddle. The paddle rotates and brishes against the focus ring turning it. There is no focus. clamp or ring. Its slow, but I guess I would want it to be. I would use manual focusing when I want precise focus--not when I'm racking in from infinity to macro. Honestly, I mostly focus with my body when doing this. I think it could work, although I don't have this lens. The shaft slides in and out fairly freely to accomidate different diameter lenses. The only trick is to get the port body the right length to align the focus extension. Hopefully this would be possible without using another extension ring. This is the kind of thing the modular system is all about.
  21. The 8mm produces a circular view. Most people aren't enamoured by circular shots. The 15mm is a specialist lens. The 8mm is really a unique specialist lens. If you just want good reef panoramas, eye popping CFWA, and sharp shots of big creatures you don't want an 8mm. You might also have trouble putting it into a dome. For certain artistic work I could see the value of circular perspective. It does strange things with round objects (inside of a spone perhaps, or a shark's mouth ) And it could be unique. But I wouldn't want it as my first WA. Panoramas is what its for. These could be very interesting underwater. I'd love to see the results if someone wants to try it. But again, there's much more to shoot than panoramas with a normal FE lens. Here is an article: http://www.shutterbug.com/newsletter/062607sigma/
×
×
  • Create New...