Nikon 17-35 f2.8 or Nikon 10-24 f3.5-4.5 or Nikon 12-24 f4

I use the zoom feature of my lenses routinely.

Unlike topside, it's a whole lot more difficult to move backwards or forwards to frame and compose underwater, particularly with moving subjects.

Moving backwards I can understand, but moving forwards?

Moving backwards I can understand, but moving forwards?

Either way; particularly if one is vertical in the water with large animals, horizontal movement is not very efficient, at least for me. Neither chasing after large animals or backpeddling work well for me.

A couple of examples where having a variable focus length lens on a dive and being able to zoom was helpful.

First a 10-17 example

17mm

10mm

Then a 17-35 example

35mm

17mm

Either way; particularly if one is vertical in the water with large animals, horizontal movement is not very efficient, at least for me. Neither chasing after large animals or backpeddling work well for me.

A couple of examples where having a variable focus length lens on a dive and being able to zoom was helpful.

Oké you made your point, with faster moving subjects like Sharks a zoomlens can be handy.

In the murky waters were I have to take my pictures, the subject are much more close by and don’t move that fast. A fast lens in the way of catching light is much more important.

I also own the 14-24 from Nikon, but beside the problems of a good matching dome the lens is heavy, and very expensive. With the 20mm I am very satisfied and I was just wondering why nobody finds a fixed wide angle lens a good alternative?

Oké you made your point, with faster moving subjects like Sharks a zoomlens can be handy.

In the murky waters were I have to take my pictures, the subject are much more close by and don’t move that fast. A fast lens in the way of catching light is much more important.

 

I also own the 14-24 from Nikon, but beside the problems of a good matching dome the lens is heavy, and very expensive. With the 20mm I am very satisfied and I was just wondering why nobody finds a fixed wide angle lens a good alternative?

I think if there were one perfect lens for all of us and all situations, we would not be having these discussions. I would agree, in the conditions you describe a zoom would have far less value.

I'm planning to buy the 17-35 by Tamron (it's not Tokina), but exactly because it *IS* a different range from the 10-17 and 11-16 I own. At the small end (35mm) it should work pretty well for fish faces with crop sensor, and at the wide end still be useful for a school o' fish. It doesn't move much in/out in zooming, which I take to be A Good Thing when used with a dome.

What's its closest focussing distance? It may need a diopter, and even then not focus close enough for the fishes' faces. I'm pretty sure that's why these lenses don't feature very often: I would guess that the number of good images from my Nikon 17-55mm is about half of the number from any of my other lenses. I would say that 17mm is still a bit tight for schooling fish if you want real sharpness or are using strobes.

I use the 17-55mm, in part, because it's fairly fast (how fast is the Tamron lens?) and doubles up as a great surface lens (and it feels as if it's built to mil. spec.!). It is a DX lens, though...

Tim

What's its closest focusing distance? It may need a diopter, and even then not focus close enough for the fishes' faces.

According to the Tamron site specs, it focuses to 11.8" / 0.3m over the whole zoom range. That seems comparable to other lenses I see used successfully, and I have a +2 diopter anyway...

But right now I don't know how well it will work. I'll be back in ~10 days with some dives on it, comparing to the other WA lenses I have, so... I hope to add empirical knowledge!

If you're still following this thread, I've got a question that's only slightly off-topic. Based on your recommendation I tried using the Tokina 10-17mm lens with a 1.4X teleconverter with my full-frame DSLRs.

What is the effective advantage of using the tele converter? And, did you have to use a different dome?

I'm very new at this.

Thanks

Bob

What is the effective advantage of using the tele converter? And, did you have to use a different dome?

 

I'm very new at this.

 

Thanks

Bob

Since the 10-17 is a DX lens (for use with cropped chip cameras) you need to add the teleconverter in order to be able to use it with FX cameras (full-frame chip). With either type of camera you are able to focus closer with the teleconverter on. You can use the same dome, but you need to add an extension tube behind it equivalent to the length of the teleconverter.