Canon DSLR Lens Choice

[Gus_Smedstad 0]

I've got about 70 dives in my log, and I'm a long time photographer. I have a Canon 350D (aka "Digital Rebel XT"), and I've been thinking about making the shift to underwater.

 

I have a EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. I've been thinking about adding a EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, which from what I've read is probably a better focal length for UW photos than the 17-85mm.

 

The other major area is macro. My question is, which would serve me better? The EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro? or the EF 100mm f/2.8 macro?

 

As I see it, the argument in favor of the 60mm is that it might be more useful for more than just macro work. It's not like you can change lenses underwater if an opportunity comes up. 60mm with a 1.6 crop sensor is still a somewhat narrow field of view, but wider than the 100mm lens.

 

Is 60mm a usable focal length in practice for larger subjects?

 

On the other hand, the 100mm lens gives you a bit more working room for macro subjects. Ikelite also makes a port that's specifically for this lens, and allows manual focus. How important is this? I gather it's very useful for night diving, where you may not have enough light for AF to work correctly, even with a f/2.8 lens.

 

Also, is there any point in buying a port for the 17-85mm lens (28-136 in 35mm terms)? Or will almost all shots be either macro or in the 10-22 (16-35 in 35mm terms) range?

 

- Gus

[james 0]

I think the 60mm Canon or 50mm Sigma is your best choice for your first macro lens. You will get great results and a lens at the 50-60mm focal length will be OOOODDLES easier for you to use. (that's a technical term).

 

Cheers

James

[dmoss 0]

Welcome Gus...

 

I will second James' recommendation on the 60mm. When I had a 20D the 60 was my most used lens. I hate that it's not directly compatible with the 5D. It works very well for night dives. It can double as a macro as well as for medium sized critters.

I use the 100mm now with the Ike manual focus port. I find it difficult to manually adjust for accurate focus while looking thru the viewfinder and seldom use the knob. Maybe that's just me though with my aging eyes.

I also had the 17-85 lens. I used it for a couple of dives but found the 10-22 to be much more useful. I shot GOBBBBS of wide angle stuff with that. (Also a technical term).

Edited October 10, 2007 by dmoss

[bmyates 3]

I totally concur with James and David. Get the 60mm and a port for the 10-22. If you're doing a macro and/or "a fish here and there" dive in clear water, use the 60. If you're going for wide angle, use the 10-22.

 

One of the hardest things for me to get over when I started shooting uw (and it took me several YEARS to get over it!) was my fear that I might not have the right lens for something I'd see...so I tried to use a lens that would "do it all" - even though it wasn't really able to do a GREAT job at either extreme (macro or WA). If you try to use the 17-85 as a "jack of all trades" lens, you might get a few more shots, but they won't be nearly as good as if you used one of the more "dedicated" lenses like the 60mm or 10-22mm.

[Gus_Smedstad 0]

Thanks, that's exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for. I.e. that the manual focus on the 100mm isn't as helpful as you might think, and that the 60mm is genuinely useful for non-macro work in a pinch.

 

It's funny, looking back at my question, the "is 60mm a useful focal length" would be a complete novice photographer question if I were talking about above-water photos. But I'm aware that the distances are much shorter than what I'm used to, and that there are refraction effects with a flat port which alter my expectations of field of view. Not to mention that scuba subjects aren't really anything like what I normally shoot.

 

- Gus

[james 0]

Manual focus works quite well w/ the 100mm actually - but how well you can use it depends on your port/focus knob system and a LOT on the housing's viewfinder. If you can't see well through the viewfinder then you can manual focus - obviously.

 

I actually use a 150mm macro lens and have no trouble manually focusing it.

 

Cheers

James

[Gus_Smedstad 0]

Manual focus works quite well w/ the 100mm actually - but how well you can use it depends on your port/focus knob system and a LOT on the housing's viewfinder. If you can't see well through the viewfinder then you can manual focus - obviously.

 

I actually use a 150mm macro lens and have no trouble manually focusing it.

 

Cheers

James

Oh, good, confuse me. My research so far had pointed to the Ikelite housing, though I haven't purchased anything as yet. I have no idea how easy it is to see through the viewfinder with that housing, or if there is a housing with superior viewfinder visibility for the 350D. I did get the impression that it's difficult to see through the viewfinder of any SLR housing.

 

- Gus

[james 0]

The viewfinder on the 350D is one of the smallest of any DSLR. Some DSLR's have pretty big viewfinders - but not yours I'm afraid (I know because I have a 350D also). So having a good viewfinder on the housing that magnifies the view might be a good thing. I think you can get one of the magnifying viewfinders put onto the Ikelite housing.

 

Cheers

James

[BoatMoney 0]

Thanks, that's exactly the kind of feedback I was looking for. I.e. that the manual focus on the 100mm isn't as helpful as you might think,

In certain circumstances AF will hunt a lot underwater, so manual focus can be a tremendous advantage. But while using a focus ring to achieve focus topside is easy, using the same technique underwater can be a pain. Many underwater shooters set focus distance (to a close approximation of what we need or desire) and then move the camera in or out until focus pops. You can set distance with a manual focus knob or you can do it in AF and then switch to MF to hold the setting. But in either case, when considering your housing setup, be careful not to discount that *at times* using AF underwater can be infuriating and largely unsuccesful. And as a result significantly less desirable than MF.

[markdhanlon 0]

I have the 60mm on the 350D in an Ike housing. When I first started using this lens, I set the lens to AF and used the zoom gear as a focus gear, since the 60mm has full time manual focus. However, I found that the AF was so good on this lens, that I stopped installing the focus gear. I find that it's a great lens and can even get some shots of larger critters.

[Gus_Smedstad 0]

OK, there's another piece of information that I was lacking. That the Ikelite flat port - you are using a flat port, right? - has a control that will move the focus ring on a prime macro like the EF-S 60mm.

 

- Gus

[dmoss 0]

You would want to use an Ikelite flat port for either the 60 or 100 macro lens. Ikelite makes a special port for the 100 that has a manual focus knob on the port. The flat port for the 60 doesn't have the knob. To manually focus the 60, use a zoom clamp and put it around the focus ring on the lens. Align that with a zoom sleeve that meshes with the zoom/focus knob on the housing. Like Mark, I found that manually focusing the 60 wasn't necessary.

[mjpsfla 0]

Gus,

 

I have a Canon 400D with the 60mm macro and the 10-22mm wa lenses. I also use an Ikelite housing and I must say that I am very happy with the results. The 10-22mm gives outstanding wide angle shots while still being good for general fish pics that happen to swim by. I love the 60mm lens as well. I think it is a great first macro lens and does allow for some other types of pics as well. Here is a link to the galery I have posted here with the setup.

 

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?autom...m&album=259

 

For better or worse, all pics were taken with one of those two lenses (and all using the Ikelite DS-50 strobe...before I upgraded to the DS-125)

 

I do sometimes wish I had the 100mm macro for some even better close-ups, however that would be somewhat more limiting as to the types of photos I could shoot. Just a thought.

 

Best wishes

 

Michael

[stever 0]

i've got a 20D in Aquatica housing and have been primarily using the 17-85 with a dome port and found it to be a pretty satisfactory all-round combination - although i recently tried it with the macro port which seems to work to about 20mm before cutting off the corners and lets me get a bit closer to smaller fish.

 

i think the frustration of autofocus with the 100 macro is mostly a problem resulting from the exposure factor when you try to get in close -- however the modeling light on my Inon strobe provides enough light to autofocust the 17-85, but not the 100M -- manual focusing the 100M with the small viewfinder of the Canon crop-frame cameras is very difficult, not to mention the problem of needing a third hand

 

if the 60M autofocuses better than the 100 i'll get one

 

since the 10-22 is internally zoom and focus, it seems to work with my Macro port (small air gap with the Aquatica port) -- any reason why this shouldn't work?

[markdhanlon 0]

I realize that this is slightly hijacking the thread, but to answer stever's question about using a 10-22 behind a flat port, I can see two possible problems with this:

1) Using a flat port increases the effective focal length whereas using a dome retains the above water focal length so that your wide angle lens stays wide angle.

2) CA. I'm surprised that you don't have significant CA using such a wide lens with a flat port.

[stever 0]

took a good look at my test shots and the flat port doesn't work - at 10mm blurry line about 10% from L and R with severe CA beyond - top and bottom look okay

 

guess i need to get a +2 for the 10-22 with 8" Aquatica dome - tried to understand "Dome Theory" and searched posts, but didn't find a definitive answer -- seems like the housing manufacturers could be more helpful

[Gus_Smedstad 0]

Why do you think you need a +2 for the 8" port? My understanding is that the effective focusing distance behind a 8" port is 16". Which is well within the capabilities of the 10-22. Actually, it's kind of difficult to get the 10-22 out of focus, from my personal experience.

 

I'm asking at least in part because I have that lens and that port, and I haven't picked up any +diopter filters for the 10-22.

 

- Gus

[stever 0]

that's the kind of practical answer i was looking for

 

the reason for expecting a diopter is that everyone says they are needed to compensate for the dome, but none of the port manufacturers or dealers have a concrete recommendation as to which diopter

 

however, since the 10-22 focuses to 10 inches on land, and if, as you say it focuses to 18 inches UW, then a diopter can be added and it will focus closer and still focus to infinity

 

there probably aren't many fish that will let me get closer than 18 inches, but i'd still like to have the maximum focusing range that the lens is capable of

[stewsmith 14]

i also have the 350D but I opted for the sea and sea housing. I have the 10-22 which iI used behind the sea and sea 8" dome and I have the 60mm macro. Which I also use a woodys dioptre with.

This is my first camera so I am not too technical with the ins and outs of photography.

what I do know is the 60mm works very well. I am very pleased with the images it produces. both for cose up macro work and for a wider shot.

I am pleased with the 10-22 also but am struggling with the blues, I have done mainly drift diving with it so havent had time to practice as much as I would have liked.

 

here are 3 shots with the 2 lenses in question.

 

the first and second were taken with the 60mm, giving some indication of how wide it will go.

 

The last was with the 10-22

[stewsmith 14]

on my last trip to egypt i decided to try out the 18-55 lens which everybody has slagged off into the ground.

 

ok it is a very cheap lens and thats why it comes with most deals on the 350D.

 

here are a few images taken with it. see for yourself what it is capable of.

[Gus_Smedstad 0]

Those are some great images. I've gotten close to a sea turtle once, but have only seen rays off in the distance, and haven't seen dolphins at all.

 

That said, a 600 x 400 image isn't going to show any limitations of a lens except for distortion, which you can fix in photoshop. Blur and chromatic abberation tend to be in the 2-3 pixel range at worst in a 3456 x 2304 image, and will completely vanish when each pixel in a 600 x 400 image represents 5x5 pixels in the original.

 

You tend to see the difference when viewing larger versions. Large prints, or viewing the image full-screen on a good sized monitor. Prints will tend to be more demanding even at the same view size.

 

Of course, I don't know what your exposure conditions were - the EF-S 18-55 won't be that bad if it's stopped down to f/8.

 

- Gus

[allen 4]

In regards to the small view finder: with the SeaTool and Ses & Sea housings and several others the Inon 45 degree view finder can be put on it. This helps greatly with getting more out of the view finder.

[muro_ami 0]

In certain circumstances AF will hunt a lot underwater, so manual focus can be a tremendous advantage. ..

 

Hi. I am new to taking pics underwater. I opted to go for a 50mm 1.4 (for canon 350d, 6" dome port) because I thought having a fast lens would benefit in low light conditions. Though I've experienced that it does not hunt underwater, rather it does not (auto) focus at all. No matter how close or far my subject is, the shutter wouldn't release because it couldn't focus (at one shot mode). Hence I went back to my trusty kit lens.

 

 

Is there a way to find out which lenses have similar problems, so i know which ones to stay away from? Or would the 50mm still be usable?

[Cerianthus 55]

the trouble you had was that the lens couldnt focus close enough on the virtual image of the dome. (distance at more or less twice the diameter of the dome). You can do a search for dome port theory, or virtual image to find out more about this.

 

For the 50-100mm range, a dome port is not that usefull, as you will losse magnification.

[MikeO 5]

Hi. I am new to taking pics underwater. I opted to go for a 50mm 1.4 (for canon 350d, 6" dome port) because I thought having a fast lens would benefit in low light conditions. Though I've experienced that it does not hunt underwater, rather it does not (auto) focus at all. No matter how close or far my subject is, the shutter wouldn't release because it couldn't focus (at one shot mode). Hence I went back to my trusty kit lens.

Is there a way to find out which lenses have similar problems, so i know which ones to stay away from? Or would the 50mm still be usable?

 

Yes, that is to be expected. If you look at the specs for that lens, you'll see that it is not designed for close focusing. Minimum focus distance is 1.5 feet. The dome creates a virtual image that the lens must focus on, and normally, the apparent distance to that image is on the order of several inches. Your lens would work fine behind a flat port. Either that, or you need to put a diopter on it. I'm not sure how useful that lens is anyway when paired with the dome port unless you really need to do low light photography. If you're looking to do macro work, I'd suggest buying a proper macro lens and putting it behind a flat port.

 

Mike