Tokina 10-17mm in Aquatica 6-inch dome

Sorry to add to the swelling ranks of Tok questions but....

I've found I can fully use my 10-17mm under an Aquatica 8-inch dome with no need for extension rings or the like. However, I just got my mitts on a 6-inch dome (I like the convenience of the more compact dome) and I wonder if someone can tell me how this will affect my use of the lens before I have to find out the hard way.

Any advice from Aquatica experts would be much appreciated.

SimonR

ooooooo. i want to know that too.. for the 10.5. will be better for lighting cfwa for sure...

Simon/Mike, It works fine with the 6 inch dome, used this combo on quite a few dives without an extension and got some good shots out of it.

Thanks Gary - that's really useful to know. I may try shooting with both to see if there is any difference, and will report back.

SimonR

Instead of starting a new thread I found this old one while searching on Google for any reviews or information on the Aquatica 6" dome used with the Tokina 10-17.

I know Gary says it works fine, but can anyone please provide more details? I would prefer the compact 6" and the reduced cost is a bonus, but I would like to know the exact tradeoff if anyone can help

I have searched but cannot find any images specifically with the 6" dome.

Thanks

This is my favourite combo for this lens in CFWA.

The only time you might want a bigger port is if you doing under overs ( ala Lemon Snaps ).

This is my favourite combo for this lens in CFWA.

The only time you might want a bigger port is if you doing under overs ( ala Lemon Snaps ).

Thanks for the quick reply.

Between your comment and Gary's that seals it for me.

Cheers

6" dome works great - I use it with Tokina 10-17 and Sigma 17-70.

The attached photo was taken with the 10-17 and the 6" dome.

Very nice, thanks for the example.

Have I read this correct in that people are saying the tok 10-17mm works well behind a 8" aquatica dome without an extension?

I am sure you do not need an extension for the 8", and from Gary's comment above, it looks like you do not need an extension for the 6" dome as well.

I use a short extension - I believe it is the same one that Aquatica recommends for the 10-22.

I use the extension with the 8" as listed on the Aquatica guide. This works fine, but if I can get away with no extension all the better.

No extension would be appealing for some surf photography as it'll lock the dome in with the port lock, rather than just the extension. May be handy on deep dives too, less points of failure and the dome locked would be piece of mind.

The extension will improve corners when shooting wide aperture and is more significant on the 6" dome than on the wider radius 8" or 9.25", the trade of is the frontal footprint in the last two, here are a few shots. this one at 1/250 @ f/16

one of fellow pixel member Felix Rodriguez in La Guaira, I was tempted to photoshop him out it was shot at 1/15 @ f/16

and a split shot with the 6" that demonstrate that it is not the ideal combo for split shots, mind you with a more recent cameras I could have hiked the ISO to muster the proper DOF.

thanks all.

and a split shot with the 6" that demonstrate that it is not the ideal combo for split shots, mind you with a more recent cameras I could have hiked the ISO to muster the proper DOF.

Thanks for posting the pics.

Is that split shot in your "Coral Life" gallery without the diver and the reddish rocks on the bank in the background with a 6" or 8" dome?

It is file coral_life-21.jpg

Thats a 8'' dome, it was taken before we reintroduced the 6'' dome, its in Mochima, Venezuela

Have never used an extension ring with my 10 -17mm and pic come out ok. All the u/w wide angle shots on my web site www.garlin-photography.com are done with one

Regards

Gary