gary-ramey
Contributor
I may have to settle for a slightly less crisp WA lens if I have any hope of getting one. The 9-18mm seems a worthy candidate but I've still not seen any photos from this lens.
11-22mm lens vs 9-18mm lens
- Thread starter dkayuk
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
gary-ramey
Contributor
9-18mm Review
Interesting comparison here. I've also read links on here about the outstanding sharpness of the 11-22 lens. I just don't know if 22mm, true WA, is going to leave me wanting more coverage or not. I'm not real thrilled about the corner sharpness with the 9-18mm in the link and was wondering if a dome port would make it worse.
Interesting comparison here. I've also read links on here about the outstanding sharpness of the 11-22 lens. I just don't know if 22mm, true WA, is going to leave me wanting more coverage or not. I'm not real thrilled about the corner sharpness with the 9-18mm in the link and was wondering if a dome port would make it worse.
PHIL RUDIN
Contributor
Gary,
You may want to read this more detailed review of the 9 to 18 mm zoom. It appears to be a quite good lens for the price.
biofos.com; Zuiko Digital 9-18mm x f=4.0~5.6 Ultra wide angle lens review
Phil Rudin
You may want to read this more detailed review of the 9 to 18 mm zoom. It appears to be a quite good lens for the price.
biofos.com; Zuiko Digital 9-18mm x f=4.0~5.6 Ultra wide angle lens review
Phil Rudin
gary-ramey
Contributor
Thanks Phil....Yes..very informative. Has anyone posted any underwater results yet? I'm really thinking this is the lens but will wait until January before pulling the trigger on any deal. There are also some very good deals out there on 7-14's right now. Just don't know if I can afford even the best of deals on that lens and still hope to buy a port.
evil_xander
Contributor
Have you considered the 8mm FE? You can use it to some extent minimising the FE effect on land, depending on the scene. Not sure how it works UW though, not diving with my SLR yet.
Currently, for land photography I use E510, ZD 12-60mm, ZD50mm, ZD8mm, ZD40-150mm...
Currently, for land photography I use E510, ZD 12-60mm, ZD50mm, ZD8mm, ZD40-150mm...
PHIL RUDIN
Contributor
I like the Olympus 9 - 18 mm zoom range better than the 8 mm fisheye, but I still like to using the fisheye lens. The big problem with all fisheye lenses is that you need to get very close to fill the frame and it can be hard to compose in the smaller view-finders.
I like to use the 8 mm fisheye with the X-1.4 tele-converter and extension ring. This makes the lens an 11 mm fisheye and allows a little more distance between the dome port and the subject, as with this image shot at ISO 100, F/5.6 & 1/90th sec. from about two inches to the subject. Without the tele-converter the dome would have been in the eels mouth. The 8 fisheye has three dome choices with the Inon dome being the least expensive, however this dome only allows use of the fisheye lens (other zooms will not do well with this dome). The Olympus/Athena/SeaTool 170 mm and Athena 220 mm domes also work very well with this lens as well as the 7 to 14, 9 to 18, 11 to 22 and 12 to 60 zooms.
If you make the Olympus 8 mm fisheye your only W/A lens combined with the Inon fisheye dome the total cost will be about equal to or a little less than the cost of the 9 to 18 mm lens, 170 mm dome and zoom gear.
Phil Rudin
I like to use the 8 mm fisheye with the X-1.4 tele-converter and extension ring. This makes the lens an 11 mm fisheye and allows a little more distance between the dome port and the subject, as with this image shot at ISO 100, F/5.6 & 1/90th sec. from about two inches to the subject. Without the tele-converter the dome would have been in the eels mouth. The 8 fisheye has three dome choices with the Inon dome being the least expensive, however this dome only allows use of the fisheye lens (other zooms will not do well with this dome). The Olympus/Athena/SeaTool 170 mm and Athena 220 mm domes also work very well with this lens as well as the 7 to 14, 9 to 18, 11 to 22 and 12 to 60 zooms.
If you make the Olympus 8 mm fisheye your only W/A lens combined with the Inon fisheye dome the total cost will be about equal to or a little less than the cost of the 9 to 18 mm lens, 170 mm dome and zoom gear.
Phil Rudin
Attachments
AndyT
Contributor
Never thought of combining the FE with the 1.4 TC . Looks like a very workable option. Now all I need to do is buy the TC !!!!
PHIL RUDIN
Contributor
Hi Andy,
You will love the T.C. with your 50 macro as well, it is the combination I use most for my macro work.
Phil
You will love the T.C. with your 50 macro as well, it is the combination I use most for my macro work.
Phil
AbyssalPlains
Contributor
I tried to visualize what you are saying but I don't get it. Underwater, there is no pop-up flash, so I take it the flair is only for land use, correct?
AbyssalPlains
Contributor
I have the 50mm macro and a Sigma 105mm Macro. Am I correct assuming that adding th 1.4 TC to my 50mm macro lens wouldn't do me much good as I already have the 105mm Sigma lens? Or am i missing something?
Similar threads
