justin-branam 0 Posted January 22, 2009 So ive been doing some thinking about how to fit the 16-35mm into an ike port after seeing a few people disappointed about not being able to use the lens. I think it can be done using the 8" dome port. I wanted to see how many would be interested in buying a kit which would allow you to use your Canon 16-35mm lens on your ike housing with the 8" dome? Just as a ballpark figure I think it could be done for under $200. So would you be interested? If i get enough people, i may make a run to the machine shop and see about a production item available for purchase. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
photovan 0 Posted January 22, 2009 So ive been doing some thinking about how to fit the 16-35mm into an ike port after seeing a few people disappointed about not being able to use the lens. I think it can be done using the 8" dome port. I wanted to see how many would be interested in buying a kit which would allow you to use your Canon 16-35mm lens on your ike housing with the 8" dome? Just as a ballpark figure I think it could be done for under $200. So would you be interested? If i get enough people, i may make a run to the machine shop and see about a production item available for purchase. Interesting thought... With that in mind can any of you Ikelite / Canon FF users comment on the optical quality of the other Canon wide zooms behind an ikelite 8" port? thanks Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
segal3 0 Posted January 22, 2009 Before we lead anyone off-track, Justin is referring to the Canon 16-35 MkII - the original version of the lens is compatible with standard Ikelite ports. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dhaas 27 Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) See Brian Cripe's comments in one of the other threads (I think on the Canon 5D MK II.) Brian has lots of experience shooting full frame Canon and I agree with his assessment. I'd use teh much more reasonable (and good enough performing) Canon 17-40L on FX. Then again I don't believe 99% of rectilinear lenses deliver as well as a Fisheye underwater of FX or DX YMMV dhaas Found it, here's Brian's comments: In my experience with a 5D, the 16-35mkII isn't overly practical underwater. The biggest issue is the problem of diopters - you'll have a hard time finding a diopter that fits the 82mm thread 16-35II, not to mention the issues with fitting into some port systems. The 17-40 offers the potential for adding diopters (yes, it's a stop slower and slightly less wide, but it's got good corner to corner sharpness and performs well for a wide-angle rectilinear lens. YMMV. Brian Edited January 22, 2009 by dhaas Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
james 0 Posted January 22, 2009 Also, I think that most people who choose the 16-35II over the 17-40L also choose a different brand of housing. Just a thought, James Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justin-branam 0 Posted January 23, 2009 Also, I think that most people who choose the 16-35II over the 17-40L also choose a different brand of housing. Just a thought, James Thats what i was kind of thinking but if there was interest it would be a fun project for me. i personally like the 17-40 better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bertschb 0 Posted January 25, 2009 Justin What exactly are you thinking of doing? I might be interested but I would need to know how reliable your "invention" is. Failure of a "modified" Ike part is not an option... -Brian Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scubapat 0 Posted February 23, 2009 Justin, I'd love to buy your part for $200 or $300 if it works well. I have an ikelite housing, 8" dome, ports, etc for my 400D and now just bought a 5d Mark II. I bought the 16 35 II to use with my Mark II in order to replace/upgrade from the 10 22 that I had for the 400D. I can either buy Aquatica or another more expensive housing maker and all the ports and domes over again, or hope that you make your part and then I can use my current dome, extensions etc and just need to buy the (already available) Ikelite housing for the 5d Mark II. The 16 35 II comes soooo close to fitting in the port system, as I'm sure you can see, it is just that little flare at the end that doesn't fit (and it almost does). I agree, it seems like this would be a relatively easy fix. I spoke with Ikelite and I'm suprised they haven't done it yet given how many of us would stick with Ikelite if they did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justin-branam 0 Posted February 27, 2009 Justin What exactly are you thinking of doing? I might be interested but I would need to know how reliable your "invention" is. Failure of a "modified" Ike part is not an option... -Brian i can try to explain it. there would be a short (1-2") port-like piece that would go on the housing. the end of the piece would be opened and would flare out to at least the width of the end of the 16-35. this piece would also have 2-3 more ikelite port clips on it (to replicate the front of a housing). then another piece would be machined to thread onto the dome port (replacing the stock piece that is threaded on there) and attach to the previously mentioned open ended port. so, you would put on the 1st port piece, then attach the lens to the camera, and then snap the dome port on with the larger opening already threaded onto it. only problem is, since you will thread the wider opening onto the dome port, it would only be able to be used for the 16-35 unless you want to keep threading on and off the standard piece back on and off as needed, or made another stepdown ring (then this would have effects on the distance the dome is away from other lenses though. so does that make any sense at all? im going to bed now. maybe ill draw up a sketch of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
