Switching to Nikon - Advise needed on lenses / ports

Good evening,

After having several issues with my S&S housing for the Canon 350D, I agreed with my LDS that I would get a whole new rig. I decided to switch to the Nikon D300. So now is shopping time once more.

After reading many posts over here, I am considering getting the following lenses:

1. Nikon AF 60 /f2.8 D

2. Tokina AT-X 10-17/3.5-4.5 Fisheye

3. 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX VR II (for topside)

Later on I want to buy the Nikon AF-S VR 105mm/f2.8 IF-ED G for the real small stuff.

In terms of ports, I will be keeping the S&S glass optical dome port.

Additionally, I also have at the moment more ports which I can choose to give back:

-S&S SX Extension Ring

-S&S Macro Port NX Base

-S&S Compact Macro Port S

-S&S Extension Ring 40

My main questions are the following:

A. Are these lenses the best to get at the moment or are there other lenses that I am missing here?

B. Which ports and extensions will I need for the configurations above mentioned? Also in terms of the VR 105, is there a way to combine ports that I could use together with the port for the 60mm in order to reduce the amount of gear to take while traveling?

Thanks for your help !!!

Cheers,

Nuno

A. Those are the lenses in my bag (except I still shoot the old 105).

B. I believe that the diameter of the 105 VR is too big to use the same port. You can use the 60mm port w/ an extension with the older 105's.

Dave

Sounds a good selection to me. As you rightly say, the Nikkor 18-200 VR is only for topside but I reckon it is excellent. I've just got the Tokina 10-17mm which sounds excellent too - but have not had it in the water yet. I suspect it may replace the 12-24 and 10.5 that I have used so far.

I use the Subal port for the Nikkor 60mm macro - and the same port with an extension ring to house the old Nikkor 105mm. No problems at all.

I agree. Those are good lenses for starters.

Alex

Thank you for your feedback guys.

I still have to decide which ports and extensions should I keep and which ones should I give back. Can anyone with a S&S housing tell me which extensions and ports are used with the lenses I mentioned before? For the 60mm and and the 105, do you use the same as suggested in the S&S port chart?

And for the Tokina, do you use any extension?

Alex, you mentioned that this are good lenses for starters? can you please elaborate on this? do you mean the 17-55? In terms of wide-lenses, from what I have been reading I got the impression that the Tokina as been beating all other lenses, including the 10.5.

Cheers

Nuno

I would definatly keep both the extention rings, they are very handy for any new lens that Sea and Sea may not support, and you may buy in the future. Check out the new design of DX macro ports that Sea and Sea are selling here:

http://www.seaandsea.jp/products/accessory/acce/port.html

they are, DX macro base part No 30105,

and DX macro port 50 (30106)

you will have to buy both parts to attach to your housing.

They seem to have been specifically designed to accomodate the new VR 105 "PHAT BOY" lens, and although I haven't had my hands on one yet,I think it will accomodate your 60mm as well (but you should check that out to be on the safe side).

From your post, I read the line,"getting a 105mm for the really small stuff." I just wanted to point out that the 60mm and 105mm are both 1:1 lenses and you will get virtually the same image whichever lens you use, the difference is the distance between your camera and the subject. In underwater use the 60mm is ideal in murky temperate waters, getting close means less water between you and the subject, and less chance that backscatter will ruin your shot.

The 105 is excellent in clear water, being further away from a very small creature means less chance of "spooking" it into swimming off, then you have to find it again and reframe the shot. I'm sure you know all this allready but I just wanted to point it out.

Hi Stefin

Thanks for your answer. I will check whether I can use that same port for both the 105 and the 60.

In terms of the "really small stuff" you are definetly right. I did not express myself properly. This is to shoot those small blennies and gobies that do not want to stay around when you get too near them (garden eels as well )

Cheers

Nuno

I've just looked at the list of equipment at the bottem of your post, and when you say you have a "compact flat port" do you mean the Sea and Sea "Custom" or "Standard" flat port? If so,look at this post.

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=19001

You may already have all the ports you need (Some whittling could be involved)

Also, for future reference, here's a link to the Sea and Sea 2008 brochure with port charts

http://www.seaandsea.com/PDF_manuals/2008_...SEA_Catalog.pdf

P.S. (Look out for a PM in your messages)

After you are all settled in, my only addition for a little more reach underwater (not macro) would be the Nikon 17-55 or equivalent.

I've just looked at the list of equipment at the bottem of your post, and when you say you have a "compact flat port" do you mean the Sea and Sea "Custom" or "Standard" flat port? If so,look at this post.

 

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=19001

 

You may already have all the ports you need (Some whittling could be involved)

 

Also, for future reference, here's a link to the Sea and Sea 2008 brochure with port charts

 

http://www.seaandsea.com/PDF_manuals/2008_...SEA_Catalog.pdf

 

P.S. (Look out for a PM in your messages)

Hi Stefin,

The compact port I have is the compact macro port S (not the custom). In the terms of the brochure, I tried to follow your link but it did not work. It would be very helpful for me to check the 2008 port chart.

Thanks!

Nuno

After you are all settled in, my only addition for a little more reach underwater (not macro) would be the Nikon 17-55 or equivalent.

Hi Loftus,

I am considering that one at some stage indeed. From what I have been reading, this is a very good lens for mid-size fish, right? I am shark fan myself so this is would be something I would consider next time I dive with bullsharks for example.

For now, it is too much money at once so this one will have to wait. And also, is it likely that Nikon would put in the market another similar lens but with VR?

Cheers

Nuno

Sorry about the bad Sea and Sea link, not sure what happened there! Go to this Wetpixel thread:

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=21888&hl=

Post No 14 has the link I used.

I am considering that one at some stage indeed. From what I have been reading, this is a very good lens for mid-size fish, right? I am shark fan myself so this is would be something I would consider next time I dive with bullsharks for example.

 

For now, it is too much money at once so this one will have to wait. And also, is it likely that Nikon would put in the market another similar lens but with VR?

 

Cheers

 

Nuno

It is my main shark lens, yes. VR may be helpful topside, not sure of any value underwater. Who knows, if Nikon do bring out a VR version you may be able to pick up the present 17-55 at a good price. The older 17-35 which I have as well is also a very sharp lens.

Sorry about the bad Sea and Sea link, not sure what happened there! Go to this Wetpixel thread:

 

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=21888&hl=

 

Post No 14 has the link I used.

Thanks Stefin,

This is very helpful for me.

Cheers

Nuno