Jump to content
Timmoranuk

Glass for the 7D?

Recommended Posts

Thanks Aussie!

 

At the moment it's in a modified Aquatica 5d housing. Just waiting for the Aquatica 7D housing to get here.

 

Stu, Ive got my Sigma bhind an 8" dome and it works fine without a dioptre. Some of

my other lenses I do need one, but not this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gudge

 

Are you using the Sigma behind a dome or flat port? I'd be tempted to try the 17-70 behind a dome as it likely won't need a diopter since min. focus is only 8"

I use it behind an 8" dome and no dioptre.

 

The 4" dome is an interesting point. This might be housing dependent as upon a quick look I couldn't find a Zen 4" port for Aquatica. They may exist, and I'd be greatful if someone can point one out. I'm interesting in small dome for tec dives as it's more manageable. The Aquatica 6" doesn't seem small enough to justify buying it when I have an 8"
I just ordered mine from Reef Photo. According to their web site they are available for Subal, Nauticam and Sea & Sea with versions for other housings under development. I'd check with them to see how the Aquatica version is going. Edited by Gudge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the moment it's in a modified Aquatica 5d housing. Just waiting for the Aquatica 7D housing to get here.

 

Stu, Ive got my Sigma bhind an 8" dome and it works fine without a dioptre. Some of

my other lenses I do need one, but not this.

 

Sigma just updated their 17-70 with Optical Stabilization, but the OS takes away some of it's macro capability (new minimum focus is 22cm and 1:2.7 macro).

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0912/09120402...OSHSM.asp#specs

 

Good compromise for our use underwater behind a dome?

 

Bo

Edited by fotoscubo714

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just ordered mine from Reef Photo.

 

Hey Gudge

What did you order? Is it the little dome for your 10-17mm? You going to put your new 7D in a Subal?

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What did you order? Is it the little dome for your 10-17mm?
The Zen Underwater DP-100 100mm Fisheye Dome Port for Subal from Reef Photo:

 

dp.100.jpg

 

You going to put your new 7D in a Subal?
Although its going to be a tough habit to break (last five cameras were all in Subal housings) I'll be going with something different this time. After reading various reports on the new Nauticam housings and talking to a couple of people who were at DEMA (and got to play with the D90 version) they sound like a great unit and significantly cheaper than what the Subal is expected to cost. Nauticam have an adapter for Subal ports so I can use all my existing ports with the new housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats partner! :wacko:

Can't wait to see what you can do with it.

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opportunity to shoot w/a macro with 10-17 and 4" Zen would immediately add another dimension to my photography and, I guess, will have a relevance in my lower viz home waters.

 

May I ask what differences I would see between the 8" and 4" ports when used with the 10-17 and / or 17 - 40?

 

Thanks guys. Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first dome was a 6" and I sold that an upgraded to an 8" dome. With rectilinear lenses such as my 17-70 and 12-24 corner sharpness was much better with the 8" dome. With the 10-17 fisheye I couldn't see any difference in the results. From my results and what I've read there will be no problems with using the 10-17 behind a 4" dome (unless you want to shoot over/under shots). However, I think you will have a few problems using the 17-40 behind a 4" dome as it's the bigger dome size the better with rectilinear lenses.

Edited by Gudge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small domes are not always better. They have advantages, but they have disadvantages too, even with fisheyes.

 

I might try and borrow of the Zen Domes in the next couple of months for a review.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice collection Alex! I'm not a Nikon user, so a lot of them are unfamiliar, care to name them all?

What's the blue tape on the longer lens for as well?

 

The image shows (back left to front right) Sigma 28-70mm, Nikon 105mm VR, Sigma 150mm, Nikon 17-35mm, Nikon 60mm AF-S, Sigma 15mm FE, Nikon 16mm FE, Nikon 5T, Nikon 1.7x TC AF-S, Kenko 1.5x TC, Canon 500D. These are what I generally use on FX. I also have a 20mm Nikon, but I only dived it once last year.

 

This was taken with the 20mm:

Cay09_am11.jpg

 

The blue tape is to stop a switch moving. The lens used to have black tape on it, but this came off at some point and this blue tape was the only one available on the liveaboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Small domes are not always better. They have advantages, but they have disadvantages too, even with fisheyes.

 

I might try and borrow of the Zen Domes in the next couple of months for a review.

 

Alex

 

In specific reference to the Tok 10-17, what are the disadvantages? I'm asking out of ignorance to knowledge of dome optical physics.

 

Simplistically, I always thought that if the curvature of the dome was positioned parallel to the same curvature of the lens

 

[port~ (( ~lens]

 

you'd have minimal distortion, no matter what the size of the dome (of course the lens needs to be able to close-focus on the virtual image created by the dome). Is my simplistic thinking totally wrong?

 

Please make me understand the factors involved, since I'm in process to house my 7D with a Tok10-17 (and perhaps a future Sigma 17-70) behind small 6" Ikelite dome and a 8" Oceanic dome.

 

Thank you for any insight on this.

 

Bo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have both these lenses. The results I've achieved backup the reviews I've read, the 17-70 is a much better lens. As for reliability, my 17-70 has had way more use than the 17-85 and has never missed a beat. The 17-85 on the other hand is having issues with autofocus and needs to go back to Canon for repair.

 

Question for you Gudge,

 

How is the Sigma 17-70 holding up with the 7D?

 

Reason I'm asking is that some claim that the 7D with it's 18Mp sensor requires high performance lenses (see this 7D review http://blog.gsmarena.com/canon-eos-7d-revi...ridging-a-gap/)

 

Can you perhaps post comparison picture taken on your 7D with the Sigma versus the Canon lenses?

 

I's be very much interested in your input, since I'm looking for a midrange zoom for underwater use, and the Sigma is almost half of the Canon in cost. I have had positive experience with Sigma many years ago and have several Sigma lenses, although I need to send my 28-300 in for repair.

 

Thank you for any input to the Sigma 17-70 on the 7D.

 

Bo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How is the Sigma 17-70 holding up with the 7D?

 

Reason I'm asking is that some claim that the 7D with it's 18Mp sensor requires high performance lenses (see this 7D review http://blog.gsmarena.com/canon-eos-7d-revi...ridging-a-gap/)

The same point was raised about the 50D when it came out and I've been more than happy with the results I've got with the 17-70 (and 10-17, 35, 60, 100) and the 50D over the last year or so. From the few shots I've taken with the 17-70 on the 7D I'm happy with the results there too.

 

With regards to the review you've posted in the link, this is probably the paragraph you are worried about:

 

When it comes to dynamics and resolved detail, the EOS 7D is quite demanding on the choice of lenses. Actually, anything below the best in class will limit its output resolution. With lower quality lenses, you may not be able to notice the advantage of the higher megapixel count. But don’t get us wrong – you would get pretty decent results from cheaper lenses as well.

I think the important thing to take in from this is that using a lower quality lens with the 7D is not going to give you bad results, there's just a possibility that the lens may not realise the full potential of what the camera is capable of resolution wise.

 

Can you perhaps post comparison picture taken on your 7D with the Sigma versus the Canon lenses?
No, 17-85 is broken and I'm going diving. :wacko: Here's a couple of reviews for you to read:

 

Sigma 17-70

Canon 17-85

Edited by Gudge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do we know about this Zen company? I love the idea of the smaller dome with the 10-17 if it works. Their website is just barely marginal (maybe it's under construction) and the only seller listed there is Ryan.

Has anyone seen actual images taken with their equipment? I'm guessing the new small dome is glass but Ryan's website doesn't say unless I missed it.

 

Love the idea,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, 17-85 is broken and I'm going diving. :wacko: Here's a couple of reviews for you to read:

 

Sigma 17-70

Canon 17-85

 

Thank you for the input and have a great time diving, I wished I lived in the southern hemisphere this time of year (my local diving about to get messed up with a rare winter storm moving in this weekend).

 

Bo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've finally gotten around to looking at some of my images from shooting with my 7D in the water over the last few weeks. Below is the first I've had a look at, shot using a Sigma 17-70mm behind a 8" dome. No editing done, just a straight jpg conversion using ACR. To me it does look like the image hosted on flickr is a bit more desaturated than the file I uploaded from my computer. Has anyone else found this?

 

I've done about 10-15 dives with the sigma, and 2 dives with my 60mm on the 7D now, and both seem to be working well. Unfortunately most of the time I was working and unable to give the camera a good run, but I was able to sneak in the occasional shot or two (or twice even an entire dive), to see what it could do (Peter, if you're reading this, I mean of course I was working 100% of the time!).

 

4161877046_0fe168fa93_b.jpg

 

Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70mm @17mm, modified Aquatica 5Dmkii housing, 2x Inon Z240's. ISO 125, f10, 1/125.

 

Norman Reef, GBR, Australia

 

More to come!

 

Ryan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70mm @17mm, modified Aquatica 5Dmkii housing, 2x Inon Z240's. ISO 125, f10, 1/125.

 

Norman Reef, GBR, Australia

 

More to come!

 

Ryan.

 

Nice! Congratulations on being the first to get an underwater photo with a 7D here (and anywhere else, I think).

 

Love to see more.

 

Which controls are workable with the 7D on your 5DMarkII housing, and which modifications were necessary? Obviously you have the shutter...LOL.

 

That 17-70 seems to do the job behind the 8" dome.

 

Again, thanks

 

Bo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've finally gotten around to looking at some of my images from shooting with my 7D in the water over the last few weeks. Below is the first I've had a look at, shot using a Sigma 17-70mm behind a 8" dome. No editing done, just a straight jpg conversion using ACR. To me it does look like the image hosted on flickr is a bit more desaturated than the file I uploaded from my computer. Has anyone else found this?

 

I've done about 10-15 dives with the sigma, and 2 dives with my 60mm on the 7D now, and both seem to be working well. Unfortunately most of the time I was working and unable to give the camera a good run, but I was able to sneak in the occasional shot or two (or twice even an entire dive), to see what it could do (Peter, if you're reading this, I mean of course I was working 100% of the time!).

 

4161877046_0fe168fa93_b.jpg

 

Canon 7D, Sigma 17-70mm @17mm, modified Aquatica 5Dmkii housing, 2x Inon Z240's. ISO 125, f10, 1/125.

 

Norman Reef, GBR, Australia

 

More to come!

 

Ryan.

Great stuff Ryan!

Just for the record I tried a 7D in my Subal 5D2 housing but it doesnt fit (an no modification is possible either) :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great stuff Ryan!

Just for the record I tried a 7D in my Subal 5D2 housing but it doesnt fit (an no modification is possible either) :)

:wacko:

Somewhat off topic, but interesting to many here.

 

 

As reported by various members here at Wetpixel who tried the 7D inside a 5Dm2 housing, the following shows:

 

Sea&Sea - no (modification not possible due to housing too low to accommodate the (closed) flash)

Aquatica - yes (with modifications)

Subal - no

Ikelite - ??? (Hope to have an answer soon).

 

Anybody else tried a 7D inside a housing not designed for this camera?

 

Bo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nice! Congratulations on being the first to get an underwater photo with a 7D here (and anywhere else, I think).

 

Love to see more.

 

Which controls are workable with the 7D on your 5DMarkII housing, and which modifications were necessary? Obviously you have the shutter...LOL.

 

That 17-70 seems to do the job behind the 8" dome.

 

Again, thanks

 

Bo

 

Thanks guys! Still a few more photos to go thru. Maybe tomorrow.

 

Have access to shutter, rear wheel (aperture) and review button. No shutter speed, etc. It's enough to get basic photos. Although the cameras got a few marks on it from where the housings pushing against it.

 

Ryan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although the cameras got a few marks on it from where the housings pushing against it.
And the problem is? You can't see the marks when it's inside the housing. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to come to a important decision (within the next two weeks) on which 17-40/70 zoom lens to choose.

 

I have it narrowed down to 2 lenses, The Canon 17-40L around $700 (with rebate this month) and Sigma 17-70 around $370.

 

My budget is around $800. I do nature, weddings, product and portrait photography. I would like to upgrade to the FF 5Dm2 sometime in the future, but probably not soon.

 

I like the weather-sealing on the canon L glass, but question the cost for such and the trade off in low light lens speed. Also no macro. But, FF sensor ready, quality built and Canon reliability.

 

With the Sigma I have macro, increased range, f2.8 on 17, and money left for another lens.

(With the newly announced Sigma 17-70 OS, I would also get increased hand-hold stops for an additional $80 above the old non optical stabilized 17-70).

 

From those here that have experience with these above mentioned lenses, which one would you go with and why? Thanks for any help and input on factors for me to consider.

 

Bo

Edited by fotoscubo714

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 17-40 is really an excellent lens in build quality and optically throughout the zoom range

 

the problem on crop frame is that it's not quite long enough or wide enough. underwater it's really a medium zoom for those times when you need a medium zoom which may or may not be very often - it's not wide and it's not macro although it focuses decently close. on land it's pretty much the same - would be just fine for group wedding photos, but not long enough or fast enough to be used without something longer and faster as a companion lens

 

i'm no fan of Sigma quality and reliability and service but don't have experience with the 17-70. the Canon 17-55 is excellent optically although more expensive than the 17-40 and not as robust (the lensrentals.com reliability dat make very interesting reading).

 

the 7D really does need good glass to reach it's potential

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input chaps. Its been very much apprciated.

 

So, I gues the shopping list is going to look like this:

 

2 x Nauticam housings

2 x 7D bodies

2 x 8" Zen domes

1 x 4" Zen dome

2 x Tokina 10-17

2 x Canon 17-40

2 x Canon 60 and ports

 

I'll come back to the Canon 100 and ports later.

 

I'd best ask my card issuer for a raised limit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just got myself a 7D, has anyone used the Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 lens rather than the 10-17mm 3.5?

Edited by Spacker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...