17-35 (2.8) or 16mm Fisheye

[cavemanxxx]

I have been looking at these 2 lenses, mainly for underwater photography. Any views on which one would be preferable ( other than from a cost perspective)

 

[cavemanxxx]

Strange.... how come this does not show up in the "new posts" list

 

[Scubatooth]

which brand is it for ? canon or nikon ?

let me know

 

[cavemanxxx]

Nikon

 

[Rooster]

Digital slr or flim?

 

[Scubatooth]

rooster

thanks for adding that, because film or digital does make a difference because there is a crop factor in digitals (except for the full frame dslrs from kodak and canon)


as for the lense zooms arent used very much and primes or fish eyes are because of the complexity of the zoom functionality in a dome or port (i believe the editor of sport diver said he uses a fish eye on a regualr basis)

but for me it would be 50/50 if i choose a fisheye or prime it would come down to money since alot of primes and fisheyes of that size are a 1.5 grand most of the time

 

[cavemanxxx]

Shooting film. I like the wide angle of the fish eye, but there is alot of distortion of straight lines at the edges. the 17-35 however had very little distortion of stright lines, but had lesser of an angle ( and double the price).

I probably would not use the zooom capability anyway, just fix it at 17 mm and go under

 

[NCwreckdiver]

I have a 16mm and 20 mm for my nikon. I find that the 16mm is very unforgiving in that you really have to watch what is in the edges of the frame..including your flashes. You have to get extremely close to your subject in order for the photo to look good. Also, some dive sites just aren't good for a fisheye. There needs to be a great reefscape for a background or a wreck. I find that I use my 20mm more often.

 

[cavemanxxx]

Thanks a million for your views. I tried the 16mm, and agreed, on the edges there were alot (repeat alot ) of heavily curved lines. The 17-35 was virtually straight at the edges, and the distortion was less in that respect.

Ona general note, I have noticed that there is little interest in lenses, and people on most forums prefer to talk about pixels / bytes etc. I think lens selection and quality is equally an important part of making a good picture !.

Would hope to see more write ups about lenses