DSLR Housing Advice? polycarbonate vs. alum?

[RonFrank]

Dave, I agree with the 18-200VR being a great walk around lens and it pretty much stayed on my D2X most of the time now and I have not touched my 18-70mm since I got the 18-200VR.

I'm also considering this lens, which is surprising in that I never thought I would consider such a slow lens. One concern I have is how does it do for isolating subjects at the longer end of the zoom range. My 80-200mm f2.8 is one of my favorite lenses, and largely because I can use it wide open and throw the background into very soft focus against a sharp foreground like so:

http://www.pbase.com/rfrank999/image/21158933

I do this a lot with portraits as well. Any thoughts?

 

[fdog]

Ron, we had one here. After passing it around the verdict was "not for us". I believe one comment was "just like those old Vivitar zooms"...

>Generally miserable at long lens lengths (soft, dark corners, flarefest)
>Easy to break the lens when left racked out to 200mm
>Lots of distortion at the wide end, way more than the 12-24
>Hacked up focusing furballs on 2 of our D2H's
>Way, way slow (f5.6!!! What crippling nonsense is this?)

On the plus side, it does have a dizzying range. I'll stick with the 70-200 though.

All the best, James

 

[ssra30]

The 18-200VR is definitely not a one lens fixed all for everybody. considering the size and price, it is not surprising. It definitely won't replace the F2.8 80-200 or the 70-200VR F2.8 for many use but like I said, my next big project is trekking near Tibet and I will definitely be using the 18-200VR instead of carrying a 70-200VR and 17-55DX or 17-35mm. I am even contemplating getting a D200 for the trip rather than carrying the D2X. The biggest and fastest glass is not always the right solution for everything unless somebody else is doing all the carrying!

 

[Diver Dennis]

I'm new to U/W photography but have done about 100 dives with my Ike and Rebel XT set up since December, twice to over 200' with no problems. I just got back from the Philippines a couple days ago and ordered the 8" port because the 6" port gets quite soft around the edges using the Canon 10-22mm. I expect it to be even more front end floaty than the 6".

 

[RonFrank]

The 18-200VR is definitely not a one lens fixed all for everybody. considering the size and price, it is not surprising. It definitely won't replace the F2.8 80-200 or the 70-200VR F2.8 for many use but like I said, my next big project is trekking near Tibet and I will definitely be using the 18-200VR instead of carrying a 70-200VR and 17-55DX or 17-35mm. I am even contemplating getting a D200 for the trip rather than carrying the D2X. The biggest and fastest glass is not always the right solution for everything unless somebody else is doing all the carrying!

Thanks for the response.... still up in the air on the 18-200mm :11doh:

However here are some thoughts on your TREK! Get a 50mm f1.4. In fact if you have disposable income, get some fast glass in the much wider range.

I'd actually skip the 18-35/55, and just do the 70-200mmf2.8 and the 12-24mm. I'd have the 65mm macro and the 50mm to cover the gap.

After a lot of topside experience I find wide or tele are my bread and butter.

A 70-200mm f2.8 plus a 1.4 coverter is a powerful combination.

The 18-200mm certainly sounds like a great everything lens, and maybe you should carry that also. I agree, get the smaller d200 body, and trade it for the weight in glass!

I have a feeling if you shoot the 70-200f2.8 it might be a revelation for you topside. Like I said, it's in my top 2 lenses, and likely my top one of all time. I shoot it a lot wide open. Surprise, I use it a LOT shooting landscapes.....

Just some thoughts.

 

[dbh]

If you are a serious topside shooter or shoot for a living (James) than the 18-200 is not for you (IMHO). If you want to take decent topside pics and only carry ONE (the key here) lens, it does the job. My only goal is to take decent topside pics to complete a trip report or pics of my kids for my wife.

Ron: when I get back from Indonesia (April 30), I would be more than happy to send you my 18-200 to play with for a week. Heck, it will take me a month to get through all of pics .

Let me know,
Dave

 

[ssra30]

However here are some thoughts on your TREK! Get a 50mm f1.4. In fact if you have disposable income, get some fast glass in the much wider range.

I'd actually skip the 18-35/55, and just do the 70-200mmf2.8 and the 12-24mm. I'd have the 65mm macro and the 50mm to cover the gap.

After a lot of topside experience I find wide or tele are my bread and butter.

A 70-200mm f2.8 plus a 1.4 coverter is a powerful combination.

I have a feeling if you shoot the 70-200f2.8 it might be a revelation for you topside. Like I said, it's in my top 2 lenses, and likely my top one of all time. I shoot it a lot wide open. Surprise, I use it a LOT shooting landscapes.....

Just some thoughts.

Ron, thanks for the tip. Hmm... I suppose a 12-24mm and 70-200VR would be possible. I may be able to carry a 60mm macro but a 50mm 1.4 might be better and it should not be too heavy. I have not had a chance to play with a 50mm f1.4 yet.
I was thinking that 10.5mm might be fun for some panoramic shots but that would mean packing lots of lens. May be I could get a spare mule for the trip
I have not done much topside photography since all vacations I took in the last 3 years was always for scuba diving trip but now I plan to do more land based trip so may be an investment in 70-200mm VR would not be such a bad thing.

So if you are going on a 5-8hours trek, (let say with a D2X for now), 12-24mm, 70-200VR are the two main lenses (with 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter). Would you take a 60mm macro/50mm 1.4 or 10.5mm as a third smallish/light weight lens?

A friend that I will be going with will be writing an article about the trip for a local travel magazine and asked me to provide photos for his article!

I apologize for getting off track on the original topic

 

[RonFrank]

So if you are going on a 5-8hours trek, (let say with a D2X for now), 12-24mm, 70-200VR are the two main lenses (with 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter). Would you take a 60mm macro/50mm 1.4 or 10.5mm as a third smallish/light weight lens?

I guess this really depends on what type of photo ops you wil encounter. I suggested the fast 50mm f1.4 thinking of the availalbe light images I've seen done in Napal in the temples where the lighting conditions are low.

If you think there will be a lot of macro possibilities, well one can add on a close up filter (they do work) but nothing performs as well as the macro lenses.

So I guess my answer it that if you think low light shots are going to be possible, then the 50mm is your choice. If macro is going to be a big part of things, then the 65mm. If you think both are going to be happening, well, can you slip the 65mm lens into your buddies backpack when he's not looking?

 

[ssra30]

Ron, thanks for the input. I think 50mm f1.4 will be very useful when I am in Lijang for the town and temple part of the trip. The trekking part will be mostly outdoor with lots of autume folliage.