Jump to content
alcina

Wide angle lens

Recommended Posts

I will be using a Canon 20D in a subal housing soon and am building my collection of lenses from scratch. I am truly stressed about the 10-22 and need some feedback, ideas and examples.

 

I am a macro girl. Love that tiny stuff, love to get close. Lately I have been making myself put on the WAL for my Oly 5050. I am liking the results & seeing some potential and learning a tremendous amount, however, wide angle is still not my favourite.

 

I do not dive wrecks as there are none here. I do dive reef scenes but usually focus on the creatures more than on the "scenes" themselves. Though I am practicing! While we do have some nice walls, they aren't sites I dive very often. Almost all of my diving is local (Ningaloo Reef). The whale sharks don't show up until next April...and I'm embarrassed to admit, I didn't even go out with them once this season :)

 

I have budgeted for the lens and port so cash is not an issue.

 

I do not want to end up with a lens/port that I don't use. Perhaps my Oly or Fuji 810 and Inon WAL are adequate at least for now? Or will I really be short-changing my growth as an underwater photographer by sticking with them instead of taking the leap? Will the quality be so much better? Should I just stop stressing and thinking about it?

 

Also, I am not sure I see a lot of uses for this lens above water - so would really appreciate examples and situations where it would be beneficial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just like you (love macro, not so into WA) untill I got a super WA lens. Now my 15mm FE lives on my camera. I use it for everything. That lens probably has accounted for 90% of the pictures I have taken in the last 4 months.

 

A picture from last week with it.

 

Boat.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I second that - my wide angle zoom is my most used topsides lens. I think you should go for it, or try the Tokina 12-24.

 

Sincerely,

James Wiseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that I enjoy both wide and macro. I reserve macro for night dives as shooting a fisheye lens in the dark is pointless. I have managed some great close ups of so many cool things. Dual Seahorses, blennies, choralimorphs....but during the day, a super wide shot of the reef, divers, boat on surface, turtle, your own fins, etc. cant be beat....I find I like both equally enjoyable, depends on what I'm after which lens combo I head out with....As a matter of fact, I have been undecided on a lens for an upcoming trip next month. I have a super wide angle, 10.5 fisheye, and 2 macro lenses....Happy to say that I picked up my 17-35 f2.8 tonight and can't wait to get in the water with it....Right now, the line up will be, My 10.5 with Alex's Magic Filter....17-35 for the dolphins/sharks/rays....and the 105 for schooling/mating seahorses! :);)

 

If it is in the budget...cover the bases! Wide, medium, close up

 

This probably didn't help....Go on...just spend the money!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your first images...perhaps most especially the topside ones...will convince you.

 

The 14mm f 2.8 is my most-used UW lens.

 

All the best, James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate the input so far - keep it coming.

 

I dunno about being convinced...I haven't been convinced by shooting the WA system I have now. What will be different do you think?

 

I like shooting WA underwater, ok now...but...

 

...or maybe we are talking mainly topside. I guess I could consider the lens first and adding the port later if I feel I am missing out underwater with my current set up. Am I going to see such different results or feel so much differently?

 

Never having used a wide angle topside perhaps this will solidify things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the guys: I too started off heavily into macro underwater. But the more I use a WA underwater, the more I get WOW photos. I started with the Nikkor 12-24 but have just added the amazing Nikkor 10.5.

 

I also do a lot of topside photography and for that the Nikkor 12-24 is perhaps my most used lens. Seems to me you just can't go wrong with a good WA zoom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in almost the same position now, I have to decide about my first (and only for the close time) WA lens.

For topside the Nikon or Tokina 12-24 zoom lens looks almost perfect but to the u/w its a problem with thus lens with my Ike's housing since its require the 8'' dome port so its arrived to more then 1000$ in case of the Tokina and 400$ more in case of the Nikon.

The other option is the Nikon 10.5 DX, looks great for u/w but not very appropriate for topside use (for most of the time)

So my conclusion is: to buy them both :) too sad that the one that in charge of the money (my beloved buddy & wife) didn't arrived to the same conclusion ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this question in another thread but it's probably better suited here. What are the differences between the 15mm FE and the 10 -22mm WA zoom above and below water? Will the 15mm FE show lense flare on a Canon 20d since it's not an EF-s lense. Which is the one to buy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I posted this question in another thread but it's probably better suited here. What are the differences between the 15mm FE and the 10 -22mm WA zoom above and below water? Will the 15mm FE show lense flare on a Canon 20d since it's not an EF-s lense. Which is the one to buy?

Coverage comparison for the two lenses:

 

http://img193.exs.cx/img193/8272/w050124fovcomparison2wv.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK...wide angle choices:

 

Sigma 10-20

Canon 10-22

 

I am guessing that I won't miss the extra on the long end. The Sigma is $250 cheaper and everything I can find says it is a great lens and compares as an equal, or pretty dang close, to the Canon.

 

What, in your opinions, are the real advantages of spending the extra cash on the Sigma? Or is the Sigma simply a newcomer and its underwater results (and land) not as well known?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've owned lenses by Nikon, Canon, Sigma, and Tokina.

 

If I had to choose between the Sigma 10-20 and a Tokina 12-24 (which you don't have listed) I'd choose the Tokina.

 

I think their lens bodies are better built and I tend to think that Sigma coatings create a bit of a yellow color bias. My gut feeling - at least from my experience w/ my Tokina lens is that they are VERY sharp too.

 

So you might want to add the Tokina 12-24 to your list.

 

Cheers

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, James! I hadn't heard about the yellow color bias, so that's good info to check out before I jump in. I've got a couple of Sigma lenses from long ago film days (can you say mid 90s??) and they are in excellent shape, so the build quality isn't worrying for me.

 

 

I am not adding any more lenses to this quest as it's all proving to be a bit time consuming and less fun than it should be. My feeling is that I probably won't HATE anything I choose, but I still would like to make the best possible choices for me. I can always add and/or sell a lens at a later date after I get started and get a feel for the body, lens and capabilities.

 

So the only options for me at this time are

Sigma 10-20

Canon 10-22

 

YMMV ;)

 

Appreciate the feedback, Everyone...keep it coming!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...