Jump to content
robbwitt

Canon 40D Lenses?

Recommended Posts

All -

 

am considering the Canon 40D as a replacement/upgrade for my now-flooded Oly 5060. Since most of the housing manufaturers won't have an offering for a little bit... I realize I'm taking a bit of a risk... but I am hoping that Aquatica will step up pretty quickly.. In any case, I'm thinking about buying the camera now, as I have a dry-land misson that needs doing. I'm requesting some advice about lenses. My needs are typically: a general purpose wide-angle for sharks and other larger critters, a macro for the nudi's, and perhaps a general purpose for non-specific shooting above and below the surface. I guess I'd want to buy the general purpose lens now... and leave the others till housing and port availability clarified. Low light and autofocus always a consideration.

 

Suggestions very gratefully requested.

 

cheers,

 

robb witt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 30D and use primarily the Canon 10-22mm for wide angle work and the Canon 105mm f2.8 macro for very close macro work. I also have a Canon EF-S 60mm macro for fish portraits and some macro.

For my walk-around topside lens, I've become partial to the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS zoom lens. It's not the fastest or the sharpest lens in the bag, but the image stabilization -- and ability to bump up ISO on the fly -- have made it very versatile for me. And it is adequately sharp, IMHO, reasonably priced and of modest size and weight for everyday use ... much better than the 18-55 Canon kit lens.

 

I have pushed the 30D to ISO 800 and higher in low light situations and never had any major complaints about noise. I've often used ISO 400 underwater for wide-angle scenics. The 40D should be even better noise-wise.

 

The 30D is housed in a Subal case with the appropriate Subal port; Inon Z220 strobes.

 

Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One possible option is to get the camera as a kit with the 17-85 lens with IS. Its a versatile lens, the IS (image stabilization) is very handy, though the lens is a bit "slow" and I don't know which companies offer ports for it. Something else you may consider is looking for a Canon 30D with this lens as a combo for a bargain, my local shop has one for I believe ~$1250 for body and lens.

 

Selecting the body is the easy part, the lenses get complicated with many options and with every lens you give up something. For surface, depending on budget...I'd really look at the Canon 17-55 f2.8 and 70-200 F4 IS, I'd also add a ultra-wide (weitwinkel) such as the 10-22mm and maybe the Canon 60mm macro. The macro and ultrawide (weitwinkel) should work well with the bubbles.

 

I have the Canon 20D, my primary surface lens is the Canon 24-105L F4 which is known to be one of Canon's best zoom lenses. If I was to do it again I would look at the Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 lens, it wasn't out when I purchased mine...and sadly, it may also not fit into ports. The Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 may also be an option. If you don't mind the distortion in "super" zooms, then you can look at the Tamron 18-250 or the new Sigma 18-200 f3.5-6.3 OS.

 

One possibility you may need to face is that your primary surface lens won't see any bottom time, as it will likely not have port support.

 

On the wide angle, I use the Canon EF-S 10-22mm and there is 3rd party equivalents from Tamron, Tokina and Sigma. The 10-22 has port support, as do the macros...such as the Canon EF-S 60mm f2.8 macro.

 

Photozone . de is always a good place to look at reviews and comparisons of lenses.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html#canon

 

Good luck! Hopefully others will chime in, since I haven't submerged mine yet...just waiting on getting final pieces and parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently using a 400D u/w. Bought a 40D for topside use until the housings start appearing early next year (well at least S&S has announce they will come out with a 40D housing).

 

10-22 EFS is a great lens topside but have seen mixed results with it u/w (maybe better success with a large dome or diopters). For WA u/w, my Tokina 10-17 is now my go to lens. I also use a Sigma 18-50mm f.28 lens for a mid range lense for shy pelagics. For macro, 100mm macro USM and the 60mm EFS macro are great lenses.

 

Topside, I'll second the Canon 24-105L f4 and also recommend a nice low light/ portrait lens like a 50mm f1.4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've had a Aquatica 20D housing for 2+ years - bought it with the dome port for use with 17-85 and used it that way for 3 or 4 dive trips (i only do one or 2 major trips a year)

 

before going to Sipidan (from which i just returned) i decided to get a macro port to use my 100M

 

using the 17-85 and dome port, i noticed that at least some of the fish did not let me get as close as i thought i should be able to - so i tried the macro port - which seems to work fine until it cuts off the corners at about 20mm -- perhaps i'm getting nasty distortions at wider angles, but in a rough edit they look okay -- and yes, i believe i got closer to some of the fish and little critters

 

my results with the 100M were a bit frustrating -- in good light i got some good images, in poor light, when trying to get close the lower effective f-number made the autofucus unreliable (as it does on land - should have known better) - i don't think i'll be able to grow a 3rd hand to stablize while manual focusing and triggering the shutter with this lens (the macro opportunities around Mabul and Kapalai were fantastic)

 

has anyone had experience with the 60s macro compared to the 100, particularly autofocusing?

 

i also brought the 10-22. i'm not much of a macro shooter, but i'm planning for some whale sharks next spring and thought i should practice. with the above lens fiddling it appeared that the 10-22 fit the macro port (less extension) perfectly - since this lens has internal zoom and focus, the distance between the front element and port glass is about like adding a filter -- it seems to work, is there any reason why it shouldn't?

 

if i didn't have an investment in the 20D housing and backup body, i'd buy a 40D (which i will for land anyhow). i still think the 17-85 is the first lens choice - decently sharp, reasonable distortion, pretty close focusing with useful autofocus, and IS - results in a higher percentage of keepers

 

i'd really like to hear some feedback on my port comments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...