which lens should I

Hi all

I have just come into some unexpected $$$$ - I have a D50 in Ikelite housing running a 60mm with 2 DS51 strobes - my diving is mainly shore based around temperate jetty/piers etc with a trip to Bali or exmouth once or twice a year -

I have read heaps of reviews on the above lens - any wanted to see which way others would spend this money - should I go for a lens and dome ? if so which one ? or should I spend the approx $2K (Aussie) on new strobes (DS160s or DS125) - I like the idea of the 17-70 for my type of diving - as it will cover most if not all of the critters I am likely to encounter here in Perth/Exmouth BUT will the DS51s light that lens enough ?

Help please

Hmmm, I like the 17-70 a lot, it's a great all-round lens above and below water. You'll need a dome for it, but as you said, you can get sort of macro to sort of wide angle. A great "hunting" lens if you're not sure what is on the dive. Your strobes are fine.

The 10-17 is a much better w/a lens, but of limited above water value. You're DS-51s will be a little pressed for it at wider angles.

The 105 is the other way, a more limited macro, but very sharp, fast and great bokeh. It can be a struggle to use in lower viz or currents, definitely a learning curve. Your strobes are fine with it.

More powerful strobes are always nice!

Cheers, have fun.

Jack

Hi Jack thanks for that -some one else said the 17-35mm I can get away with a 6in dome port -how about this lens with my strobes ??

Send it to me, I'll spend it for you and save you the headache, mate

Can't help on the strobes (I use Inons), but....

10-17 Tokina is excellent. I love it for close-up/wides on the reef (good for Ningaloo); and very good for those whale sharks. Its not much use I find above-water - and I find weird exposures with it too on my D300 topside. But underwater it is excellent.

I use the 105mm for the especially shy critters where trying to get close with a 60mm is not going to work - such as the pygmy seahorses around here. But generally a 60mm works for an awful lot of macro stuff. Why not think about a wet lens for your macro port which will give you greater magnification?

17-70 can't help I'm afraid. But all those mid-wide-teles seem a bit of a compromise. I reckon its better to decide to go with a wide-angle or macro and concentrate on that for the dive. Otherwise you end up picking away all over the place - and nothing works very well.

They are very different lenses.

The 10-17 is an excellent lens. But is good for very wide angle. If you get right on top of your subject you can shoot a subject down to the size of a volleyball.

The other lens is for medium size shots, especially in good visibility conditions.

Meaning you have to decided what type of image you are trying to shoot.

Hi Jack thanks for that -some one else said the 17-35mm I can get away with a 6in dome port -how about this lens with my strobes ??

Haven't shot it, but it's not all that wide so I should think it'd work. At 17mm I think you may find them a bit narrow, but then just shot close focus wide angle, which in many ways is more dramatic anyway.

I guess my approach would be to buy something that fills your camera bag with options and not get too specialized yet, if all you have is the 60mm. One option with that lens if you want more power is to buy a woody's or other diopter, it's a great combo. as long as you shoot mid apertures like f/14-16.

Jack

Hi all

I have just come into some unexpected $$$$ - I have a D50 in Ikelite housing running a 60mm with 2 DS51 strobes - my diving is mainly shore based around temperate jetty/piers etc with a trip to Bali or exmouth once or twice a year -

 

I have read heaps of reviews on the above lens - any wanted to see which way others would spend this money - should I go for a lens and dome ? if so which one ? or should I spend the approx $2K (Aussie) on new strobes (DS160s or DS125) - I like the idea of the 17-70 for my type of diving - as it will cover most if not all of the critters I am likely to encounter here in Perth/Exmouth BUT will the DS51s light that lens enough ?

 

Help please

You have come to the right place for help in spending your money The DS51 with diffuser covers 80 deg. I have not tested the coverage fall off for this strobe, but two of them should cover the Sigma 17-70 which is 80 deg. FoV at 17 mm. Not so for the Tok 10-17 which is a fish eye lens with 180 to 100 FoV. The DS125 is out of production. The DS160 has 100 deg. coverage with the diffuser and could work. The color temp. of the DS 51 and the DS160 are different. Keep your DS51s for macro. The Inons are about the same color temp. as your DS51s and use "AA" batteries. The DS51 and the DS160 use the same strobe cords, but the DS160 has a special battery and charger and is much larger than either the DS51 or the Inon.

I like the Sig. 17-70 (170 mm dome with 2 Inons) a lot. However it is not the end-all be-all lens. For real macro I use the 105 mostly and sometimes the 60. For w/a I use the Nikkor 12-14 and will have the Tok 10-17 for next season. Be sure the HSM 17-70 (zoom ring diam. of 79 mm) will fit in your rig.

I like Tim's suggestion, just send me the money and I will save you the grief.

Bob