50mm 1.8

I was wondering if anybody uses 50mm 1.8 lens underwater?

It's not listed on Ike's port list and I don't recall reading about people using it. Why not?

It's cheap, small, sharp and fast. Could I fit it behind ike's fish eye dome (with a diopter)?

I don't use a 50mm lens because:

>I don't own one

and

>I have a pre-existing bias (from film days) against the useless 50mm length

More to your point:

>This perspective is (usually) used for a very close or macro shot

>The 60mm has macro optics and the 50mm does not

>The 60mm is a stop slower, but that doesn't matter, because

>I'm usually at f22+ with strobes

All the best, James

yep, the macro capabilities are what sets the 60mm apart on Nikon lenses.

That said... Sigma makes a 50mm for Canon (and maybe Nikon?) that does macro and i know of a few users of that lens....

yep, the macro capabilities are what sets the 60mm apart on Nikon lenses.

 

That said... Sigma makes a 50mm for Canon (and maybe Nikon?)  that does macro and i know of a few users of that lens....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yep, IMO you don't want a mid-range lens like 50mm or 60mm unless it has macro capabilities. The Sigma 50mm lens (50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro) is a great little lens, and it IS available for Nikon. It is one of the cheapest lenses I own ($269 at B&H), but I use it a LOT. It's a great fish lens, yet gives you the ability to shoot 1:1 macro when you see something small. I use it on dives where we might see good big OR small stuff, and I also use it a lot on night dives because it focuses well in less-than-optimal light situations. I assume the Nikon 60mm would have all the same advantages.

Here are some lo-res versions of shots taken with the Sigma 50mm -- from fairly wide angle to quite small/close-up -- to give you an idea of its flexibility (note: these were taken with a full-frame camera, so your cropped sensor camera would actually allow you to take the same photos from farther away):

Why not ! IT a pefect portrait lense in a studio environment - perhaps it's about time that a few people used lenses for there original intentioin,/

50. 1.8 is sharp as a nut and could be well suited to imagemakers in the portrait vein.

Thast said is well suited to static still lifes around the vessells and should not be shortsold as an architectuaral lemse.

Why not ! IT a pefect portrait lense in a studio environment - perhaps it's about time that a few people used lenses for there original intentioin,/

 

50.  1.8  is sharp as a nut and could be well suited to imagemakers in the portrait vein.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That may be true, and I'm sure it's a great lens, but (assuming I'm looking at the right lens) the 50mm 1.8 has a magnification of 1:6.6, which means if you take it down on a dive, you won't be able to shoot anything smaller than a breadbox from very close, and will have way more water between you and your subject than necessary. Sigma's 50mm f/2.8 or the Nikon 60mm lens are still extremely fast, but are capable of 1:1 macro, so you open up a whole additional range of potential subjects on every dive. To me, each dive is precious, and I see no reason to give up the possibility of even shooting half the subjects I might encounter on a dive...

Don't ever let anyone tell you something "can't" be done. Try it, experiment have fun. I'm sure there are some applications that you can dream up for this lens--like shallow DOF portraits with filters.

That said, for most applications I'd rather have a 60mm macro because I usually try to get as close as possible and the macro gives me the same perspective with the added ability to get close. Both the 50mm and the 60mm are very sharp lenses. I'm usually trying to minimize the water between me and the subject so if I'm going to shoot something that fills the frame at 50mm at 3' or more away then I'd want a wide angle to get closer. I wouldn't want to go through the trouble of housing a lens that would only be good at a very specific use. I already use the 60mm as my most used lens.

If all you have is a 50mm then you could add a diopter and get macro shots too, but the 60mm is better optically than the 50mm + diopter.

Thanks for your input. I thought about getting this lens for portraits, but then I started wondering if it would be useful underwater too.

I guess I'll try if I get it.

Andrzej,

I used my brother's Canon 50mm F1.4 lens in Australia on a full frame Canon 5D last January. Bruce's input is correct in that you can't do "true macro" down oto 1:1 with most "standard" 50mm lenses. But it certainly focused faster than any macro lens and was a nice fast fish lens and some other subjects. Mcuh brighter viewfinder due to the large aperture, too. I mainly shot at distances of 1.5' - 3' from my subjects.

On your Nikon D70 the 50mm will act like a 75mm lens so you will have to find things a bit smaller and frame tighter without getting too far away for your strobes to be effective.

One last thing, I used it behind a flat port as this lens didn't focus to 1' or less enabling it to "see" the apparent image a dome port creates underwater. The flat port made the lens's "view" a bit narrower, too.

Not my first choice, but I wasn't shooting that much teeny tiny macro anyway....

dhaas