WA lenschoise again

[DuikKees 1]

I have the 10.5, but sometimes it is too wide.

 

I have a couple of choices to go less wide:

Sigma 15mm or Tokina 12-24 (the rest is too expensive right now, if I also want to do some divetrips this year)

 

I intend to buy the Sigma, but is it really a difference?

For the Tokina: I dive a lot in murky Dutch waters, will the focus of the Tokina be good and close enough (for CFWA)?

 

Choices,choices............probably the Sigma.

[Alex_Mustard 0]

The 15mm and 12-24mm will give pretty similar angles of coverage (with the zoom at 12mm).

 

The advantage of the 15mm is that it is smaller for travel and will fit behind the same dome as the 10.5mm without an extention ring.

 

The advantage of the 12-24mm is that it is a zoom, once you have a zoom gear for it.

 

For CFWA usually the wider the lens the better. The 10.5mm will focus right onto your dome and will enable you to do CFWA on some very small subjects.

 

Alex

[marriard 3]

I have the 10.5, but sometimes it is too wide.

 

I have a couple of choices to go less wide:

Sigma 15mm or Tokina 12-24 (the rest is too expensive right now, if I also want to do some divetrips this year)

 

I intend to buy the Sigma, but is it really a difference?

For the Tokina: I dive a lot in murky Dutch waters, will the focus of the Tokina be good and close enough (for CFWA)? 

 

Choices,choices............probably the Sigma.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you are looking cheap but quality consider the Nikon 20mm ($384 @ BH or the Nikon 16mm fisheye ($679 US or $600 imported @ BH).

 

Or of course just break down and buy the 12-24mm Nikon DX lens which I am guessing you probably want. Lenses are unfortunately the place you shouldn't cost restrcit yourself because unlike the camera, they can last you for years.

 

M

[Arnon_Ayal 1]

Another option may be the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6D EX DC HSM .

Its in the same price range and got pretty good reviews on land.

I didn't sow any review or opinion on that lens u/w and especially with the Ikelite domes, bit its interest me also since I want a WA lens in the near future.

[Paul Kay 65]

The 15mm should give sharp corners - a good choice I'd say.

[DuikKees 1]

For CFWA usually the wider the lens the better. The 10.5mm will focus right onto your dome and will enable you to do CFWA on some very small subjects.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes you are right in clear waters, but when diving in the murky dark (no natural light availible)I really can't get to light my subject without terrible blownouts in the corners or, when pulling the strobes even farther away, a dark center (shadow of the housing). I really tried a lot: positioning the strobes everywhere, extended homemade diffusers. The best solution I had was to crop.

 

Since this DMWWA (DarkMurkyWaterWA) is not something many people do (I can't blame them), I want to dive in to it.

[Strmko 0]

Basicly I have the same question... using nikon D70 in ikelite too and did not want to start a new topic.

I am buying 10-20mm sigma and one of the FE primes/15mm or 10.5/. I would like to use the sigma for landscapes too, so it is a priority at this time. I have never had something as wide as 10.5 even on 1.6 crop... Although, I like 10.5 WA shots a lot, I fell in love with some of Alex's WA photos, I have to ask if it is a right choice for me. I mostly dive in the red sea, where I always count on some schools and wall shots. This is where 10.5 shines. But in case I can not get close enough to the school, the school is not big enough, or meet a shark, the 10.5mm does not give me the right angle.

The 10-20 is not that wide, but would be good choice for wrecks and can deal with wide angle scenery too. Wide enough for surface. No question about this.

Finally, do I need the 15mm FE? Would you, experienced WA shooters buy a 15mm when you already have 12-24 /10-20/ and a 10.5mm? Is the advantage of sharp corners more important than the versatility of a 12-24 zoom?

 

Shortly, which is a must?

 

thank you

[Peter Schulz 1]

I have both the 10.5 and the 15mm. I go back and forth between which is my favorite, shooting one for months at a time the switching to the other for a few months. Thus my take, they are both great lenses and they are different.

 

Sample pics.

 

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_l/index.html

 

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_q/index.html

 

I also had the 12-24 but no longer. It didn't use it much because it was harder to focus than the 10.5 or the 15mm and while I got some better compositions with zooming, I lost shots while zooming instead of shooting.

 

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_j/index.html

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_k/index.html

[DuikKees 1]

I have both the 10.5 and the 15mm. I go back and forth between which is my favorite, shooting one for months at a time the switching to the other for a few months. Thus my take, they are both great lenses and they are different.

 

Sample pics.

 

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_l/index.html

 

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_q/index.html

 

I also had the 12-24 but no longer. It didn't use it much because it was harder to focus than the 10.5 or the 15mm and while I got some better compositions with zooming, I lost shots while zooming instead of shooting.

 

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_j/index.html

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ry_k/index.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thanks Peter,

I already looked at your site for the fantastic samples. Your comment put me over the edge.. the Sigma 15mm FE it will be.

[Lionfish43 0]

Same as Peter, I own both and use both. I prefer the 10.5 for clear water CFWA and use the 15 primarily when conditions are less ideal. Here are a couple of DMWWA shots taken with the 15 - about 10 ft vis off Deer Island, Canada

 

[Strmko 0]

I am not sure about the purchase again.

Let me ask a few more questions: Do you use a 10.5 or 15mm for wrecks? Do you use the 10.5 and the 15mm above the water? Finally, what lens do you use for sharks?

 

I thought I made the decesion...

[Peter Schulz 1]

Re "Do you use a 10.5 or 15mm for wrecks? Do you use the 10.5 and the 15mm above the water? Finally, what lens do you use for sharks?"

 

10.5 for wrecks because of the big picture opportunities and because I can shoot it in fixed focus mode which works great in engine rooms and other dark, hard to focus locations.

 

I occasionally use the 10.5 lens above water as a fun lens i.e. I like the distortions. But mostly I shoot long lenses e.g. 70-200mm and 300mm.

 

I use both for sharks and I get real close. But I only ever see nurse sharks which hardly count as far as danger is concerned. For real sharks I think I would use my 15mm to get back a little and still fill the frame.

[Rocha 0]

For wrecks the 10.5. For sharks the 15mm (or 16 in my case, since I don't have the Sigma) unless it is a shark feeding place where you can get real close and take great shots with the 10.5. For above water the 15 will have a lot less distortion as Peter said. I think both lenses have a place in your bag, the real question is, which one to get first?

[Rocha 0]

Basicly I have the same question... using nikon D70 in ikelite too and did not want to start a new topic.

I am buying 10-20mm sigma and one of the FE primes/15mm or 10.5/. I would like to use the sigma for landscapes too, so it is a priority at this time. I have never had something as wide as 10.5 even on 1.6 crop... Although, I like 10.5 WA shots a lot, I fell in love with some of Alex's WA photos, I have to ask if it is a right choice for me. I mostly dive in the red sea, where I always count on some schools and wall shots. This is where 10.5 shines. But in case I can not get close enough to the school, the school is not big enough, or meet a shark, the 10.5mm does not give me the right angle.

The 10-20 is not that wide, but would be good choice for wrecks and can deal with wide angle scenery too. Wide enough for surface. No question about this.

Finally, do I need the 15mm FE? Would you, experienced WA shooters buy a 15mm when you already have 12-24 /10-20/ and a 10.5mm? Is the advantage of sharp corners more important than the versatility of a 12-24 zoom?

 

Shortly, which is a must?

 

thank you

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry, just saw your original post now. Since you are already buying the 10-20, I would buy the 10.5. The simple reason is that the range of the 15 is covered by the 10-20. The 10.5 is a completely different lens.

[Strmko 0]

Thank you guys for sharing your experience. It is a lot easier to decide if samle situations with apropriate lens are described...

[DuikKees 1]

Thanks to all,

 

As we speak, the Sigma 15 FE is in the pocket. What a great lens that is.

 

Toedeloe (Dutch for seeya)

[gianster 0]

Sorry for hijacking this thread. But since we are talking wide angle here. Any thoughts on Sigma 15 vs. Nikon 16? Is one better than the other as far as sharpness or easy focus?

[kdietz 0]

Sigma 15 will focus closer ....very sharp

[Rocha 0]

I think you will do well with either lens. I haven't heard complaints about neither one, and that's always a good sign. I have the Nikon 16, it focuses very fast and is very sharp.

 

Luiz

[ChrisJ 0]

aw man,

 

i ordered the tokina 12-24mm for my tahiti trip, now reconsidering...

 

this is my first trip with my d70 to a place i probably would never be back again...so i want to be "armed" with the best lens. from eric's gallery, it seems i need to purchase the 10.5, and Peter mentioned the 12-24 focus is slower than the 15mm.

 

really which one should i get? my budget is only for one lens right now.

[Rocha 0]

Hi Chris,

 

Since you already have the 12-24, I recommend you get the 10.5. You don't usually need fast AF for wide angle, and even the slower lenses are pretty fast (because they are small, not a lot of glass to move). Also, the 12-24 at about 13mm will give results very similar to the Sigma 15mm fisheye. The 10.5 on the other hand is a very different (and complimentary) lens.

 

Luiz

[frogfish 5]

If anyone doubts the ability of the 10.5 to focus right on the actual dome itself, this is a record of an accidental collision with a manta. The manta is actually on the dome in the darkened portion in the right center of the frame.

 

We'd been swimming parallel for a couple of minutes and I was sure that the manta realized where I was when it suddenly turned towards me. I was looking through the viewfinder while swimming, and the last thing I saw was ... this.

 

The collision shook me up a bit, and I was worried that the animal might have been injured or frightened, but it seemed that no harm was done. The shooting session with this very friendly animal continued for another ten minutes or so, but I can hardly claim this incident as a testimonial for low-impact diving.

 

One interesting thing to come out of taking this otherwise useless image was learning that the skin of a manta is sort of like a golf ball, presumably for the same reasons. The tiny bumps, like the dimples on a golf ball, probably induce vortex shedding and thus reduce drag. Another was realizing that some subjects that can be too big - or too close - even for the 10.5!

 

Frogfish

 

Date/Location: March 2005, Komodo National Park. Fuji S2Pro w/ 10.5 mm, 1/125 @ f/8.

[famorim 0]

The 15mm should give sharp corners - a good choice I'd say.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I like Sigma 15mm FE, it focus close and is very sharp with 8" dome port.

 

 

It will give you a little bit more FOV with nikon 1.5x sensor.

 

Regards. Fabio