Is adding 12-24 a good idea?

[Fota]

Hi,

So far I've only used the Nikkor 60mm uw but I would like to take some wide angle shots as well. Maybe some wreck shots now and then, but mainly CFWA/CUWA shots (as I seldom dive on wrecks), you know with some small anemone in the front and a diver far away in the back or something. Macro will still be the main thing though as I mostly dive in green relatively dark water with lots of particles. I also would like to use the lens top side.

Is the 12-24 (most probably I'll go for the Nikkor) a good choice?


Thanks,
Fota

 

[Warren_L]

I think the 12-24mm would be a good choice if you're looking to use it both for WA underwater and topside. I have both the 10.5mm prime and 12-24mm zoom, but I do prefer the 10.5mm for shooting wrecks. However, the 12-24mm I do find more versatile especially when you're shooting WA and potentially larger marine animals like sharks and rays as this will give you a bit of room to move in. Sometimes I do find it difficult to fill the frame at the wide end at 12mm, so having that flexibility when needed is nice. You do sacrifice a stop, but it's not bad, and it's an easier lens to use topside as well.

 

[tx51210]

Is adding a lens ever a bad idea? (Just, don't ask my wife that question!)

You will really enjoy the 12-24. It is a great travel lens for topside and I use it a lot for architectural photography. I am battling over the decision on which port to buy between as I own both the 10.5 and 12-24. A lot of folks seem to prefer the 10.5 for underwater but the 12-24 seems to be a good second choice. I like the 10.5 but it is harder use topside and the benifits of traveling with less makes it tempting for me to get the port for the 12-24 as this lens will travel with me even if I decide to dive the 10.5.

Go for it, you only go around once. But then, creditors can come around more often if you don't pay your bills.

 

[Warren_L]

Is adding a lens ever a bad idea? (Just, don't ask my wife that question!)

You will really enjoy the 12-24. It is a great travel lens for topside and I use it a lot for architectural photography. I am battling over the decision on which port to buy between as I own both the 10.5 and 12-24. A lot of folks seem to prefer the 10.5 for underwater but the 12-24 seems to be a good second choice. I like the 10.5 but it is harder use topside and the benifits of traveling with less makes it tempting for me to get the port for the 12-24 as this lens will travel with me even if I decide to dive the 10.5.

Go for it, you only go around once. But then, creditors can come around more often if you don't pay your bills.

Depending on the port system you are using, it may be possible to get an 8" dome to work with the 10.5mm and add the proper port extension to accomodate ther 12-24mm. I use the Aquatica ports and that's how I do it.

 

[mjh]

Well there is a new lens on the market that is getting great reviews, the Tokina 10-17mm http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/10-17mm.htm. In fact I just sold my 12-24mm on ebay. Right now my line-up is Nikon 10.5mm (I will hold on to this) Tokina 10-17 (waiting delivery), Nikon 17-55, Nikon 60, Nikon 105mm.

 

[tx51210]

You are correct, the port is the same, but every $150 bucks for another ring is another $150 I have to come up with. I am sure I will eventually get both, but the current total price tells me I need to find some more stuff to sell off to fund the current list.

 

[tx51210]

Well there is a new lens on the market that is getting great reviews, the Tokina 10-17mm http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/10-17mm.htm. In fact I just sold my 12-24mm on ebay. Right now my line-up is Nikon 10.5mm (I will hold on to this) Tokina 10-17 (waiting delivery), Nikon 17-55, Nikon 60, Nikon 105mm.

I usually don't put much faith in Ken Rockwell but he is correct in his statements about this lens. It is not a replacement for the 12-24 as the 10-17 is a fisheye and likely to be good under water. I do not see it as funcitonal topside due to the fisheye nature of the lens (again, mostly because I architecural photography). For me I enjoy the lack of distortion of the 12-24 and the 10-17 looks like a fun lens for a different kind of photography and potientially good for diving.

 

[RonFrank]

I find the 12-24 lens needs great vis, and reasonable lighting at least on the 12mm end. On the 24mm end it's lovely, but if I'm zooming to 24mm I often wish I could go even closer UW.

The 12~24mm is a great lens for UW AND topside, but I'm suggesting is that a zoom in the 17~70 range maybe more useful for overall conditions vs. the 12~24mm. This is the pitfall of DSLR, one must choose their weapon before getting in the water.

I use the 12~24mm, the 18~35mm, and the 60mm macro UW.

The new Tokina lens looks interesting, but it's a fisheye vs. a rectilinear lens. Not very useful topside.

Look HERE to see some topside results and specs. Fisheye lenses are generally clownish for most situations topside, and the curved lines and distortion quickly grow old.

The Nikon 10.5 fisheye lens has software to convert the fisheye view to a standard rectilinear lens view (with some crop). I don't see that option for the Tokina lens but maybe something can do it.

IMO the 12~24mm is already somewhat of a specialty lens offering a VERY nice 18mm (35mm EQ) range. Fisheye is cooler UW, and I may get the Tokina lens instead of the Nikon 10.5mm just to have some zoom capability, however a fisheye lens does NOT replace a rectilinear lens.

Purchase a good kit of lenses before going into something like a fisheye that is very limited especially topside. You will have to decide what your next lens should be, but I'd look at either the 12~24mm, or the Sigma 17-70mm which is one of the few lenses that allows reasonable macro in a do it all general purpose lens.

Howarde uses the 17~70mmm Sigma, and I'm always impressed when on a given dive he comes up with some nice overall reef shots, along with spider crab, or other macro like shots as well.

 

[RonFrank]

Depending on the port system you are using, it may be possible to get an 8" dome to work with the 10.5mm and add the proper port extension to accomodate ther 12-24mm. I use the Aquatica ports and that's how I do it.

Ikelite 8" dome port systems support multiple lenses by swapping extensions as well. I know it works for the 10.5mm through lenses like the 17~55mm. Not sure how easy it is to change the extensions as the one I have works for my Tokina 12~24mm and my 18~35mm also.

 

[Fota]

Thanks for all the great replies!

The 60mm works good for me to take macro schrimps --> mid size fish shots and diver portraits. So, what I need is something to take wide angle shots, wreck parts on occation, a complete diver both close up and in the distance on a CFWA shot. A a lens that also works top side (I mainly use my nikkor 18-200 topside). I am more convinced than ever that the 12-24 is the one for me. If wide angle suddenly turns out to be the main thing for me I'll look into fish eye lenses such as the 10.5 nikkor or the tokina 10-17. If I only had one lens then the sigma 17-70 sounded like a very good option.

BTW, anyone has any pictures to show taken with the nikkor 12-24?


/Fota