Wide angle D70s

HI guys,

I was considering of getting myself a wide angle lense, but i'm a bit lost. Was tinking of the 10.5mm or shd i go for the 12-24mm or maybe 10-20mm? Confused and Lost

Please state the differents and if u have sample pics would be great. i'm currently using a sea&sea housing. Pls help

The 10.5mm is a fantastic lens if you're experienced in shooting ultra-wide (weitwinkel) lenses, and have the strobes to light such wide lenses. The down side is it is not very flexible: you need large subjects and be able to get close.

The 12-24mm or 10-20mm are more versatile lenses, and are more suitable if you are less experienced or need a lens that works in a wider variety of situations.

See sample pictures here for what you can do with 10.5, 15, and 12-24 lenses on a D70.

http://www.splashdowndivers.com/photo_gall...ple_gallery.htm

Peters Gallery is very helpful. In regards to his gallery and what you are looking for my take is this:

18-70mm pictures do not have quite as crisp, clean and and as professional look to them as the 12-24mm pics do. Most pros would call it the bouquet I think. The edge to edge clarity and smoothness. I like the 12-24mm better.

The 10.5 is very different but I think is a slight step up in overall quality on the 12-24. Owining one and only shooting about 70 pics U.W so far I can attest it is great in low light situations giving good depth if field even at 2.8. It also focuses at inches from my dome. You really have to get close with this lens but it is really nice and a performs great at over and under shots.

U seem to have a lot of gear and I assume experience, maybe sell off some older stuff and get both the 12-24 and 10.5 but I would lean toward the 10.5 if I were you. I will also point out the 17-55dx, as another choice, the finest zoom lens I have used on land. Will be testing it U.W. soon.

I am a hack photog but I have both the 12-24mm and the 10.5mm on a d70. My experience has lead me to the conclusion that we need to be able to change lenses under water...

I shoot big animals mostly and have found that the 10.5 is a far superior lens to 12-24. I think what is important is that you really have to have the correct lens for the task at hand...there is no phenominal lens that does it all...I thought there was and that is why I bought the 12-24...However once I tried the 10.5 I never put the 12-24 back on the camera. The 10.5 forces you to get closer which gets less water between you and your subject and that will always result in a better picture....I rented a 14mm lens once and tried it in the bahamas this summer....all I can say is wow!!!!...anyone want to buy a low milage 12-24mm?...I gotta have that 14mm...

If I had to do it over again I would save my pennies and buy the 14mm first and then the 10.5.....the quality of the images from the 12-24 just isn't there for me...

And I love the Nik 16FE f2.8 ... good when you can't get quite so close, for ambient light, or if the animals aren't so big. Aside from the obvious difference in field, the feel and quality of the 10.5 and 16 (even their size) are virtually identical -- both fit behind the Ike compact port and look good to the edges.

I'm saving for a 14mm (tres cher!), and praying for a 9.5mm f2.8 DX rectilinear. Shucks, I'll take f4 if I have to.

I was in the same dilemma for long time also.

At the end I decided to go with the 10.5 DX, much less flexible but it's can create more interesting images.

A big help to that decision is that a good friend of me who also use Ikelite systems, bough the Sigma 10-20 in the same time so we can switch and use both lens.