Jump to content
Rocha

Nikon 18-35 f/3.5-4.5G AFS ED G

Recommended Posts

Has anybody tried this lens underwater? I was set on getting the 16-35 f4, but the reviews that this lens is receiving are amazing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is my primary wide angle lens. I really like it with my Aquatica housing, 8 inch dome and my D90. I think it does well at close focus/wide angle.

Red+Frogfish+2012.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What zoom gear and extension ring do you use? I tried to get them from Aquatica but the lens is not in their lineup...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

Is there anyone here on wetpixel who has some experience with the new AF-S NIKKOR 18–35mm f/3.5–4.5G ED?
Might this be a good replacement for the 16-35 f4?
Going trough the specs I see the f4 has 7 degrees FOV more on the wide side (107 vs 100 and 63 to 63), focus distance is the same at 0.28m.
Any thoughts on this new lens being a good underwater lens for (semi) wide angle?
looking forward to some opinions.

Cheers,

Max Daniël.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought one and will be trying it with my D800 and aquatica housing next month. Will report back when I do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought one and will be trying it with my D800 and aquatica housing next month. Will report back when I do...

That would be great, I am going to get it for my D800 too.(if it is any good).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great, I am going to get it for my D800 too.(if it is any good).

The reviews on it for topside are looking great, so I hope it performs well underwater too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see any reason why it should be much better than the 16-35mm. Compatibility with dome ports is always a problem with mid-range zooms, particularly with FX sensors: an underwater comparison is needed, and soon!

 

I certainly can't see it being so much better than the (more expensive) 16-35mm that it justifies replacing that lens...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see any reason why it should be much better than the 16-35mm. Compatibility with dome ports is always a problem with mid-range zooms, particularly with FX sensors: an underwater comparison is needed, and soon!

 

I certainly can't see it being so much better than the (more expensive) 16-35mm that it justifies replacing that lens...

 

I don't want to replace the 16-35mm (which I don't have), I just want a cheaper ang lighter alternative, and this lens is half the price and half the weight. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't want to replace the 16-35mm (which I don't have), I just want a cheaper ang lighter alternative, and this lens is half the price and half the weight. :)

Same thing for me, if the quality is the same I will go for this lens instead of the 16-35 f4. Saves me money to spend on other stuff. That being said, if the f4 is still beter I will go for it in a blink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't want to replace the 16-35mm (which I don't have), I just want a cheaper ang lighter alternative, and this lens is half the price and half the weight. :)

 

maxman2402 mentioned the new lens as a replacement...

 

... hence my comment. I'm always wary of cheaper lenses in an optically challenging environment (underwater): field-testing is really important (it was surprising that the 16-35mm performs better than more expensive mid-range wide-angle Nikon lenses). The extra 2mm isn't insignificant underwater, either, because of the likely additional field of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought one and will be trying it with my D800 and aquatica housing next month. Will report back when I do...

could you test the lens and how are the results?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...