Best lens for sharks and mantas

Im using the 10,5 mm and tokina 10-17 for my wide angel photo so far.

Im looking into buying a more medium format for my D200 for shooting mantas and sharks this winter.

What are you guys using and what do you consider the ultimate shark & manta lens for Nikon?

Lasse

I vote the 17-55 or 17-35, both are very sharp.

Im using the 10,5 mm and tokina 10-17 for my wide angel photo so far.

 

Im looking into buying a more medium format for my D200 for shooting mantas and sharks this winter.

 

What are you guys using and what do you consider the ultimate shark & manta lens for Nikon?

 

Lasse

What about the 12-24? 17mm will not be wide enough for a manta ray sitting directly above you.

It also depends what kind of shark action you will be shooting. If the sharks are hitting your dome, you're probably better off with the wide lenses you already own, plus a 12-24 for a non-fisheye view of the world.

Well, I have the Tamron 17-50 for shark and manta shots (at least those that are not within spitting distance). The 10.5mm would be great for those big critters that like to nuzzle. I used 15mm in Palau and was disappointed cos the sharks never got close enough to fill the frame.

I have struggled to get the 12-24 to be as sharp as I like, at least with the Subal dome; I'm hoping the new Subal 10" dome will be helpful - hope I can get one before Socorro. I would go with a 16mm Nikon before the 12-24, at least with my present dome.

What about the 12-24? 17mm will not be wide enough for a manta ray sitting directly above you.

 

It also depends what kind of shark action you will be shooting. If the sharks are hitting your dome, you're probably better off with the wide lenses you already own, plus a 12-24 for a non-fisheye view of the world.

The 10.5 is great for mantas.

If you think the 10-17 is too wide for sharks, perhaps you'd want a rectilinear lens - a wide prime like a 14 mm Nikkor or Sigma, or a wide rectilinear zoom, like a Nikon or Sigma 12-24, a Sigma 10-20 or similar is good.

Sigma 10-20 at wide end.

Good luck

Christian

Now that we know you're talking about a Socorro trip, I'd say the wider the better. You may think a mid-range lens will enable you to get more shots, and you may indeed get MORE because you can shoot from farther away, but you give up two things (that are FAR more important IMHO):

1. Being able to fit an entire Manta (or two) in the frame when they're right on top of you.

2. On a Socorro trip, being able to fill the frame with mantas or sharks from farther away will NOT (in general) result in photos as good as if you fill the frame with them at half that distance. The reason is that the water is not crystal clear. This is definitely a case where CLOSER IS BETTER, and in that context, WIDER is better...

IOW, I'd stick with the 10.5 or 10-17 for Socorro.

I am heading to Galapagos on the Deep Blue this weekend and am bringing both a Tokina 10-17 and a Nikon 12-24. Problem with this setup up is that is 2 different domes on my D200 with a the Light and Motion housing. Not sure when I will use what lens...will start with the 10-17 and see how the results are from there. Crossing my fingers for the whale sharks...

Mantas in Socorro. If a normal year the 10-17 FE. If abnormal like my trip last year then the 12-24.

For Sharks the 12-24. You almost never get FE close to them. I was on a cage diving trip to Australia with a professor of UW photography. Shooting 35 mm film he felt the best lens to get full frame shark action was a 28 mm lens. We had GREAT shark action on that trip.

The 17-55 is good but I have been caught a bit too long a few times with it. On the DX formate something like the new 14-24 would be perfect.

For Galapagos, you're going to want to use the 12-24, with the occasional 10-17 or 10.5 when you want super-close shots of whale sharks. But aside from whale sharks, you're probably not going to get close enough to anything large to fill a fisheye (except for... schools of jacks, perhaps -- but they are hard to light if you have a 10.5 on).

Socorro? Shoot WIDE, especially for the mantas...

... schools of jacks, perhaps -- but they are hard to light if you have a 10.5 on.

Dual wide-angle strobes, 2-3 stops below full power, a couple of inches behind the dome on 10-12" arms and angled at about 20-30 degrees away from the dome axis. and lots of ambient light!

Tim

B)

Thank you all

A lot of good advice here.

what about the new Nikon 14-24 mm F2.8 G ED AF-S?

Anyone with any UW experiece with this? And what do yo other guys think of it?

Lasse

The 14-24 hasn't been released yet. For a DX camera I'm not sure what its draw would be over other options. It's large, thick, heavy, and expensive and it doesn't take front filters. Looks good for full frame though. The 24mm end is very short should you want some reach.

I like the 17-55 for sharks and big fish in general, but I've never tried shooting mantas with it...

17-55mm with a good dioptre for sharks - very sharp - one of your FEs for mantas.