NIKON LENS DECISIONS

I think it would be AMAZINGLY HELPFUL if people would start threads for the range of photos one gets with any particular lens.

David,

Your comments prompted me to write up some of my experiences with the lenses I use. It is nowhere near exhaustive (only includes three lenses), but thought it might be useful for newbies.

It is not quite finished, and I'm open to suggestions for other comparable lenses to the three that I currently use.

Underwater Lens Use

I hope people find it of value.

That was an awesome review, ATJ. Very helpful indeed!

Hey Chuck

 

I've got both the Nikkor 10.5mm and Tokina 10-17mm. The Nikkor is an excellent underwater lens in terms of quality. But the versatility of the Tokina is, for me, a hands down winner. I've owned it for about 6 months and have just been shooting whale sharks on Ningaloo Reef: it was terrific. In fact I like it so much that I'll be advertising the 10.5mm for sale on the Classifieds before too long. Interested?

 

And, yep, I'm using the Tokina behind the (Subal) 8" dome. Works a treat with a 20mm extension.

Tim, care to share some of your shots with the Tokina 10-17? I am having a feeling I bought the wrong lens and that I should have stuck with the 12-24 because I am much less interested in walls/reefscapes, and more interested in getting decent photos of barracuda, grouper, and sharks. But if I see great shots of fish with the fisheye, I'll be more at ease with my purchase (otherwise I have to wait until July to try it out!)

The Tokina 10-17 is fine for sharks, barracuda, grouper etc, but you have to get close. Yes it forces you to get close, which is good. Remember as well, the 17mm end is in the middle of the 12-24 range. When you start to get toward the 24mm end of the 12-24, your subject will frequently be too far for great image quality. The 10-17 also focuses as close as you can get, literally on the dome. The 10-17 is harder initially to use than the 12-24, but the discipline it enforces with getting close and good lighting arrangement can result in some killer images.

I would add that the 10-17 does not suffer from edge sharpness issues behind a dome that I have found with the 12-24.

My overall experience with this lens is the same as Tim's and I have sold my 10.5. The only difference is I changed the 20mm extension for the 15mm with the Subal dome and that eliminated the little bit of vignetting I was getting with the 20mm extension with the lens at it's widest.

Excellent news. Since I wan to to be up close and personal with the fish, I don't mind being forced to do it in order to get a great picture. Barracuda and Grouper let you get right up to them usually so that's not a problem. For the sharks, I may have to use my knife to cut my buddy, but she says she'll make the sacrifice because she loves sharks! Have to love her.

I have also heard that the 10-17 does nice without an extension with an 8" dome

Cheers,

Chuck

I have also heard that the 10-17 does nice without an extension with an 8" dome

Cheers,

Chuck

I'm sure it does fine and I have not tried it without an extension. The Subal 8" dome is designed initially to work with the 16mm. If one uses the Tokina without an extension it projects a little further into the dome than the 16mm, which probably makes little difference.

So it would seem that the Nikon 60mm or 105mm, Tokina 10-17mm and the Sigma 17-70mm would be a great setup to get started with.

Just a few questions on the Sigma 17-70mm

Is it considered better than the Nikon 18-70mm? And how about the Nikon 16-85mm, i know this would proberably a very theoretical answer as i don't think many people has used it underwater yet.

Also how does the Sigma compare to these two Nikon lenses above water?

To add to the confusion: If you're looking for a mid range zoom, the 'new' Sigma 18-50/2.8 is a very nice lens. Very sharp throughout the zoom range, even wide open, 20 cm CFD which make it suitable to use behind a dome port, cheap compared to Nikon glass (17-55DX and 17-35)...

good luck

So it would seem that the Nikon 60mm or 105mm, Tokina 10-17mm and the Sigma 17-70mm would be a great setup to get started with.

 

Just a few questions on the Sigma 17-70mm

Is it considered better than the Nikon 18-70mm? And how about the Nikon 16-85mm, i know this would proberably a very theoretical answer as i don't think many people has used it underwater yet.

I my opinion, a good start up set would be a Sigma 17-70 and a Nikkor 60 lens on a DX format. The wider lens (10.5, 10-17) are great but difficult for a new photographer to master as discussed in this thread. I have tried the Nikkor 18-70 and you are limited since it only focuses to 16â€, while the 17-70 focuses to less than 9â€. In other words, with the Sigma 17-70 you can take reef scenes and sea horses with one lens.

I mostly agree with Elmer et al. I have both the Sigma 17 - 70 HSM and the Nikon 18 - 70 kit lens. The Nikon is "OK" and a fair scouting lens but when you see the flamingo tongue or sea horse you aren't going to get it with the Nikon unless you get into the closest focal distance and then crop away a lot on the computer and hope you have enough resolution to make something out of. The closer focus of the Sigma gives you some basic macro capability but between the dome port and the sharpness doesn't even come close to the Nikon 60. The 60 is a lot easier to use than the 105. The other reason I like the 60 over the 105 is that you pretty much have to decide pre-dive that all you can possibly shoot is going to be pretty small in area. IF you see a great white with the 105 you can get a heck of an eyeball shot. I really like my Tokina 10 - 17 fisheye - I think it is pretty easy to use if you get close to your subject. It's perfect for wrecks and big pelagics and wall shots with divers (among other things). I have the Nikon 10.5 - which is a pretty nice lense but the tokina is so much more versatile for about the same price. If you have this trio of lenses without one of the new really expensive Nikon zooms you have spent about $1500 for three lenses that cover about 95+% of the situations you will ever encounter. Good luck. Andy