RGist
Contributor
I am looking into my first wide angle lens for a D200. What would be the best choice the 10.5, 16 or 12-24?
First W/A Lens 10.5, 16 or 12-24?
- Thread starter RGist
- 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
What kind of shots are you going for? I use both the 10.5mm and 12-24mm zoom, but for different purposes.
OP
RGist
Contributor
Warren_L:
Thanks for your quick response!
I really do not know... I was just thinking of wide angle shots. Can you explain why you use one over the other?
The 10.5mm I use when I am shooting subjects that are not particularly difficult to frame and get close to. These would be primarily shots of seascapes, wrecks, and other divers. I love the 10.5mm for this as I can get nice and close, and I can get my lighting they way I want.
The 12-24mm will do a good job as well with these sorts of subjects, but I can't get quite as close, but results have been decent nonetheless. However the 12-24mm gives you a bit of room to zoom in, which I find particularly useful when shooting large-ish marine life. It still can be difficult to get close enough to fill the frame with this lens on animals that are too small, as that may involve getting closer that you often might be able to. YMMV.
The 12-24mm will do a good job as well with these sorts of subjects, but I can't get quite as close, but results have been decent nonetheless. However the 12-24mm gives you a bit of room to zoom in, which I find particularly useful when shooting large-ish marine life. It still can be difficult to get close enough to fill the frame with this lens on animals that are too small, as that may involve getting closer that you often might be able to. YMMV.
I'd have to say head for the 12-24 (or 10-22, 10-20, 10-17 etc) first. You will likely find you have more success with it and will find it more versatile.
The 10.5 is an awesome lens, but it's by far trickier to master and to light.
The 10.5 is an awesome lens, but it's by far trickier to master and to light.
half a year ago, i asked myself the same question.
At the end i bought a Sigma 10-20.
Why? i wanted a versatile lens, which i could use also on my land tours.
It is a little bit wider than the 12-24 and a lot cheaper...
My next buy would be the Fisheye 10.5.
At the end i bought a Sigma 10-20.
Why? i wanted a versatile lens, which i could use also on my land tours.
It is a little bit wider than the 12-24 and a lot cheaper...
My next buy would be the Fisheye 10.5.
I highly recommend the Sigma 15mm FE. About $350 US and sharp! As Kristin said, the 10.5 is VERY wide....
I am one of only a few people that I know that doesn't like the 12-24mm. I sold mine after 2 dive trips and bought the 17-35mm which is a better quality lens and its f2.8...but not as wide.
If you look in my Grand Cayman gallery, all of the WA shots were taken with the 15mm Sig
Dave.
I am one of only a few people that I know that doesn't like the 12-24mm. I sold mine after 2 dive trips and bought the 17-35mm which is a better quality lens and its f2.8...but not as wide.
If you look in my Grand Cayman gallery, all of the WA shots were taken with the 15mm Sig
Dave.
OP
RGist
Contributor
Thanks for all the feedback. I really appreciate it.
Similar threads
