SLR lenses help plz!!
- Thread starter aboalreem
- 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
Not having used the 10.5 I cannot say how it compares to the 12-24 underwater, but I am in the process of acquiring one. But with my new D200 Aquatica housing on the way, finding some spare cash for this will be a stretch...
pterantula
Contributor
I was told by several UW fotograffers & shops that I should start with the 12-24, I think especially since: 1) I do mostly land shots, and 2) the rental house through which I was getting my housing, etc. only had the gearing for the 12-24 (though it may have worked on my 70-300, I never tried....?).
My tastes say the fisheye is cool for effect, but can be too extreme for a whole catalogue of shots; that's just me, and that may change. So far the 12-24 has proven to be a great investment all around, though I still have quite a ways to go underwater....
I'm still uncertain where to go with UW macro: 55, 60 or 105? How do the applications differ? Is the 105 more difficult to use?.....
t
My tastes say the fisheye is cool for effect, but can be too extreme for a whole catalogue of shots; that's just me, and that may change. So far the 12-24 has proven to be a great investment all around, though I still have quite a ways to go underwater....
Warren_L:
I'm still uncertain where to go with UW macro: 55, 60 or 105? How do the applications differ? Is the 105 more difficult to use?.....
t
You said you wanted a topside lens. They don't make ports for the 18-200mm lens.aboalreem:
If you're looking at getting the ikelite housing. Here's their list of ports and the lenses they fit http://www.ikelite.com/web_pages/2port_nikon.html
parabolic
Contributor
pterantula
I don't think the 105mm is more difficult to use than the 55/60mm. At minimum focus it might be a little harder to find the subject in the viewfinder with the 105mm (because it is farther away). OTOH since the subject is farther away it is not as spooky, which makes the 105mm EASIER to use
I don't think the 105mm is more difficult to use than the 55/60mm. At minimum focus it might be a little harder to find the subject in the viewfinder with the 105mm (because it is farther away). OTOH since the subject is farther away it is not as spooky, which makes the 105mm EASIER to use
Again parabolic, we have similar views... separated at birth?
Go simple, go best, do not medle with the rest.
If you want also a topside lens:
105mm
10.5mm
12-24mm (cheap option: 18-55mm, 18-70mm, 18-200mm whatever you choose)
But for UW training topside, mount your camera and lens (105 or 10.5) - better if inside the housing - and start shooting indors at night... get under the central table and do a close-up wide angle of a table prop vs a ceiling fan on the background... go for the garden and do macro of crawling bugs... CUWA of a flower with a tree on the background... create!
Go simple, go best, do not medle with the rest.
If you want also a topside lens:
105mm
10.5mm
12-24mm (cheap option: 18-55mm, 18-70mm, 18-200mm whatever you choose)
But for UW training topside, mount your camera and lens (105 or 10.5) - better if inside the housing - and start shooting indors at night... get under the central table and do a close-up wide angle of a table prop vs a ceiling fan on the background... go for the garden and do macro of crawling bugs... CUWA of a flower with a tree on the background... create!
parabolic
Contributor
Mariozi:
My long-lost Brazilian brother!! At last I've found you
! Obrigado,
++Ken++
ChrisA
Contributor
aboalreem:
The 10.5 is a fisheye lens. It grossly distorts the scene but sometimes the effoect is nice and if there are not stright lines in the scene people may not even notice. Also the image and be "rectified" using software if you don't want the disortion. I think the 10.5 is a "specialty lens" not something to use all the time.
The 12-24 on the other hand is a general purpuse lens that goes from very wide to wide.
A lot depends on where you live. If the water is clear you can use a wide angle but if the viz is poorer macro is the way to go and you might want a macro lens
Aboalreem - what kind of pictures do you want to take?
I would think that a purely macro lens or a purely WA-fisheye lens would be quite limiting for topside, unless you're doing something specific.
If you're going to be taking a variety of photos, and using the D200 as an "everyday" camera, then I would consider a zoom lens.
If you want to ONLY shoot macro, then by all means check out the 105mm - or if you ONLY want to shoot Wide Angle, then get a 10.5mm
I would think that a purely macro lens or a purely WA-fisheye lens would be quite limiting for topside, unless you're doing something specific.
If you're going to be taking a variety of photos, and using the D200 as an "everyday" camera, then I would consider a zoom lens.
If you want to ONLY shoot macro, then by all means check out the 105mm - or if you ONLY want to shoot Wide Angle, then get a 10.5mm
Similar threads
