Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
-scott-

Canon 10D Underwater Lense Choices

Recommended Posts

I have recently made the switch from film to digital. Given the 1.6X effect, can anyone shed some light on their experience with various Canon lenses with this body for both wide angle and macro and levels of quality achieved?

 

Thanks,

 

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would you like to know? Best WA lens would be the EF15mm FE, intermediate would be the EF16-35L, Fish portraits to semi-macro would be the EF28-105 with a "Woody's Diopter", macro needs were served with the EF50 F2.5 Macro or the Tamron SP90mm Macro, my dive buddy has the same housing (Subal C10) and he used the EF100 Macro.

 

As for quality, I've blown up both .CRW and Large Fine JPGs to 24x36 with stunning results.

 

Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own the 17-35 2.8. Is it worth trading for the 16-35 for slightly better WA? I I am contemplating the Canon 14mm, but not sure it is worth the price difference over the 15mmFE. Can anyone provide comparison? A little concerned about the stability of using the 100mm macro versus a smaller focal length.

 

All comments are greatly appreciated.

 

Thank you, Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17-35L is not quite as good optically as the 16-35L but I don't think you'd notice much difference underwater. I bought the 17-40L which is a great lens (f/4 is fine for underwater IMHO)

 

Macro: I've only used the Tamron 90mm macro. The 100mm EF is optically similar with better autofocus. That's what I'd buy.

 

15mm Fish seems to be a good choice (Sigma if you're feeling cheap) for wide angle. I've seen nice pictures from it, but haven't shot with it myself yet. I don't think the 14mm is worth the price, personally.

 

28-105 - I actually do own this lens, never really liked it, haven't been tempted to take it underwater. I still carry it around in my bag, but it never gets used. More recent versions (Mark 3, I think) are cheap and nasty. Its OK I guess if you feel the need for a midrange zoom.

 

I have considered the Tokina 17mm, but there doesn't seem to be much point as optically I don't think it's better than the 17-40L. There's no other tempting wide angle prime choices that spring to mind. I'm sticking to the zoom.

 

24mm f/2.8 - I used to like this lens, but there's no real advantage over the 17-40L so I haven't bothered submerging it yet. Maybe on a 1Ds. Not really wide enough for the 10D.

 

1200mm - When Ikelite make a port, I'll buy one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got the Canon 17-40L, which I chose over the 16-35L. 1/2 the cost, slightly sharper corner to corner if you believe the reviews, and I didn't feel a need for f/2.8. I love this lens...

 

The 100mm macro is not unstable UW, it's just that you face the same issue that you have out of water, which is that you need to keep your shutter speed up. I find the 1/125 is fine for shooting macro, especially since virtually all of your light is based on your strobes.

 

If I had to choose between the Canon 14mm (or Sigma 14mm) and the Canon or Sigma 15mm FE, I'd go with the fisheye. I had the Sigma 14mm for one trip and was lens than enthusiastic about it. For the money, the 15mm FE gets you wider at 1/2 - 1/3 the cost and the FE effect is minimal on a 1.6x FOV chip like the 10D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just got custom made zoom gear for Sigma 12-24mm lens and sea&sea housing. I find it most flexible wideangle lens for my D60.

btw. the gear is not made by sea&sea. I asked a friend of mine (blacksmith) to do one for me and it works perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your comment about the 15mmFE autofocus is interesting. Do you shoot it at all in manual focus to avoid this issue in low light? I have had this issue with my 17-35 in low light as well, and it is frustrating if you are set up for autofocus and conditions are too dark.

 

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always used AF underwater

i have enough things to do when shoting underwater to add the hassle of manual focus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Herb, how was the sigma 15mm fish? You're obviously a sigma fan - you should try a canon lens sometime, they're quite good :D

 

I'd be interested in peoples thoughts about canon vs sigma 15mm fisheyes.

 

I've always used AF with my 17-40L underwater, and almost always used manual focus with the Tamron macro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb, how was the sigma 15mm fish?  You're obviously a sigma fan - you should try a canon lens sometime, they're quite good :D

 

I'd be interested in peoples thoughts about canon vs sigma 15mm fisheyes.  

 

I've always used AF with my 17-40L underwater, and almost always used manual focus with the Tamron macro.

 

Here's a start: http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_84586...rx.aspx#reviews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb, how was the sigma 15mm fish?  You're obviously a sigma fan - you should try a canon lens sometime, they're quite good :D

 

I'd be interested in peoples thoughts about canon vs sigma 15mm fisheyes.  

 

I've always used AF with my 17-40L underwater, and almost always used manual focus with the Tamron macro.

 

Here's a few reviews on the Sigma Fisheye, http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_84586...rx.aspx#reviews

and http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showpro...ort=7&thecat=13 and some food for thought, http://www.dragtimes.com/sigma12vs15.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, read all of the above. There's a few negative comments about the AF, and given the above comments about the Canon (which presumably has superior AF) I wonder if this would be an issue underwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Herb, how was the sigma 15mm fish?  You're obviously a sigma fan - you should try a canon lens sometime, they're quite good :D

 

I'd be interested in peoples thoughts about canon vs sigma 15mm fisheyes.  

 

I've always used AF with my 17-40L underwater, and almost always used manual focus with the Tamron macro.

 

The autofocus on the Sigma 15mm FE works very well. I can't think of a single example where that's an issue. The 50mm works OK, moving subjects were out of focus on a small number of shots. I bought that one instead of the Canon because it will focus to 1:1.

I only used the 105mm on a couple of dives using autofocus both times. Small moving fish were definitely a challenge. I don't know what the Canon 100mm can do. I'll try manual focus with this lens next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sigma 14mm that I use underwater has Sigma's HSM, their answer to Canon's USM. I have absolutely no complaints about the autofocus with this lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've just got custom made zoom gear for Sigma 12-24mm lens and sea&sea housing. I find it most flexible wideangle lens for my D60.  

btw. the gear is not made by sea&sea. I asked a friend of mine (blacksmith) to do one for me and it works perfect.

 

Can you post a picture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, please post a picture or two. How about one of the setup, and one taken underwater? That would be very helpful.

 

Cheers

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...