200mm f/4D ED-IF AF Micro-Nikkor

[onokai 18]

Anyone out there using this lens. 1 to 1 and 19 inches minimum focus distance. This looks like a sweet macro lens. Mark

[Kasey 0]

This is definitely Nikon's flagship macro lens. I just can't persuade myself to hack off the tripod collar knowing that I may not like its handling underwater. If the length doesn't bother you, and perhaps with a diopter, this lens might be really fun uw. I'm just not sure that it is any better than a 60mm + 2X teleconverter for underwater purposes, and I don't need to hack anything apart to house that.

[james 0]

Craig has used this lens extensively - but he's not around at the moment. Perhaps when he returns we'll hear about it and see some samples.

 

Cheers

James

[Kasey 0]

I love this lens, but I haven't purchased my own yet because I expect that there is a AFS VR version in the pipeline. Hopefully it will come with a removable tripod collar!

[onokai 18]

I spoke to Nikon Tecnical today and the collar does not come off. These was bad news.Mark

[scorpio_fish 5]

I have the lens and have used it underwater. It was not necessary to cut the tripod collar off in order to use it with an Aquatica housing. It is dependent on the size of the port opening.

 

It is difficult to use this puppy. The lens is obviously long. When you shove the strobes down to the end of the port it gets awfully difficult to balance. Not so bad with DS125s, but I've used it with SS200's.

 

It takes lots of patience to use AF. You can add a diopter to go beyond 1:1 film at shorter than 19", but the whole point of the lens is to get macro at an even greater working distance.

 

It's been a while since I used the lens, here's one from the Bahama's Wetpixel trip a year ago.

 

[onokai 18]

Thanks for that rply>I wonder if it will fit my subal housing ports?? Mark

[millionfish 0]

- there's no need to cut the collar off this lens!! Nikon UK gladly removed the collar and charged me only £35/$65 - I would guess Nikon service centres worldwide will do the same. Underneath the collar there is just smooth black metal. And they'll refit it for the same price if I ever want to sell the lens - far cheaper than the depreciation the lens will suffer if you cut the collar off.

 

As for useage, this lens is a good, but takes getting used to. Biggest problem I found is that with the luxury of increased working distance it's too easy to be in the position of not being able to get enough light on the subjects to operate at small apertures (and the DOF is very narrow at wider apertures, so you need to keep the lens closed).

 

Cheers

[onokai 18]

I did follow up with Nikon and they can remove collar for a fee. Mark

[ulcs 0]

Underwater photo tech will remove the tripod collar for you for a fee, no need to cut it off. I had to do that to use in my Subal. Havn't used it much as it gets front heavy and my wrists get tired. Also you have that 19 inches of water between the camera and subject and lighting to avoid backscatter can be tricky

Terry

[UWPhotoTech 0]

As Terry mentioned we can remove the tripod collar for you. Cost would most likely be around $100. I have been factory trained by Nikon USA.

[Kelpfish 15]

Sounds like a great way to make your photography more difficult.

 

Joe

[bacripe 0]

I don't know how it is for other housings, but for Sea & Sea housings they make a piece to move the handles forward for better balance when shooting with a large macro lens - definitely worth looking into if you shoot a lot of macro with a long lens.

[millionfish 0]

This lens is well balanced in the Seacam housing - it's pretty much neutral, as there is enough displacement provided by the length of the flatport. It's not an every day lens, but I've got shots of species with it that I would otherwise not have been able to get close to. Of course, I'd choose a 60 and a 105 in my lens portfolio before this one, but I enjoy using it when opportunities arise B)

[onokai 18]

One of these 200mm micro's on E-bay with collar removed now. up to $1080 with 1 day left. Mark

[Kelpfish 15]

I am going to take the "old timer" position on this. There are limited uses for something like the 200 underwater. There have been other similar lenses in the past trying to make "getting the shot" in UW photography more flexible. The fact is that the farther away you get the worse. There can be good pics shot with the 200, but it simply is harder, and less productive that using your noggin to get a good shot. One will never convince me that using a lens of this type is better than the 105 or 60. I will go as far as saying it's not even more flexible than the basic arsenol of lenses. Skill is what it takes to get a good pic with the 105 not a longer lens that puts more water betwen you and the lens. The message is that techies on this site think they have a fix for something new, but they don't with the 200. Over the past 20 years long lenses have been tried and most photographers end up reverting back to old faithful. Most of you are new photographers. I am not, so I thought I'd post this and let you know about the history of what this thread is revisiting. EVERY photographer I know has always dumped the idea after figuring out that longer lenses underwater was a waste of productivity. My personal opinion is that you are wasting your time, but that is only my opinion. I am not in any way trying to bash the use of new techniques, just trying to present an old farts opinion and experience.

 

**not to say that you cannot get good pics with a 200.**

 

Just my 2 cents, for whatever that's worth.

 

Joe

[Kasey 0]

1) The 200mm is nikon's flagship micro lens. With a diopter attached, it should facilitate quite exceptional magnification, no?

 

2) The critters I'd shoot with this in the caribbean are tiny critters that I want to shoot 1:1 and beyond. 20" working distance in clear caribbean water isn't "too much" for many applications.

 

3) Can anyone explain to me a situation that the 200 works well but the 105 + 2X TC falls short. I realize you loose a stop and some sharpness with the TC, but you gain magnification and flexibility that you wouldn't get with the 200 + diopter.

 

KC

[shchae 3]

Hi,

 

Now, I can see this lens has been used with Seacam,Sea&Sea & Aquatica. Anybody tested with Ikelite Housing ? If did, which port ??

 

shchae

[cor 0]

The 200mm lens is a very specialised lens. If you merely want working distance, and not necessarily very high magnification (beyond 2:1), then a 105 with a TC should do fine. Both my wife and I use it all the time, without any problem. It gives you more options than a 200mm. Getting enough light on the subject hasnt been a problem for us.

 

If on the other hand you want high magnification (beyond 2:1, maybe towards 5:1) and you dont like TCs for whatever reason, then a 200mm + diopter is probably a better choice than a 105 + diopter, as the working distance for a 105+diopter is imho a bit too small for a lot of critters. Getting that close makes the subject usually stop showing its natural behavior.

 

I do use the 105 + 2xTC + diopter once in a while, simply because I dont want to buy another lens. Im trying to get rid of crap to take, not add to it

 

Cor

[james 0]

A lens as long as the 200mm needs support in the middle or at the end - as well as at the camera end. The Ikelite manual focus port may work as it "grabs" the lens at the front but I wouldn't recommend a normal Ikelite macro port.

 

Cheers

James

[shchae 3]

All,

I did not started this question but, thanks to all participant & it was good discussion & I learned a lot. I have a diving body using Canon EOS-Kiss (film) on Inon X1 Housing with 180mm L Micro lens + special manual focusing gear with magnets and his pictures comes out very well focused on fish/shrimp eye and very soft on everythingelse & his picture was on display at Antebe. I just do not want to buy new housing but, try best I can do with what I have. I will post pic when I am ready. Thanks again.