100 L IS M in Aquatica

just put my new 100 L IS in my Aquatica 20D housing - fits with the macro port, same extender and focus gear as the 100M.

don't expect to notice any IQ difference with the 20D from the 100M, but a quick test indicates that the autofocus is better -- will have to wait until January to find out how much better UW

on the 5D2, it's a good 15% sharper than the 100M at f8 - this advantage goes away with diffraction as you stop down

i agree with others that as a pure macro lens it's hard to justify the upgrade, but for my use for topside in conjunction with dive i think it will be worth it

now the question is whether to house the 5D2 or get a 7D and house it. for practical purposes i wouldn't expect to see much practical difference in macro shots between the 5D2 and 7D (assuming i won't be able to get close enough with the full frame in many cases and have to crop), but i'd expect about a 50% advantage in wide angle resolution for full frame assuming good lenses, eg a 17-40 compared to my Tokina 11-16 -- if the limiting factor isn't the water column.

just put my new 100 L IS in my Aquatica 20D housing - fits with the macro port, same extender and focus gear as the 100M.

 

don't expect to notice any IQ difference with the 20D from the 100M, but a quick test indicates that the autofocus is better -- will have to wait until January to find out how much better UW

 

on the 5D2, it's a good 15% sharper than the 100M at f8 - this advantage goes away with diffraction as you stop down

 

i agree with others that as a pure macro lens it's hard to justify the upgrade, but for my use for topside in conjunction with dive i think it will be worth it

 

now the question is whether to house the 5D2 or get a 7D and house it. for practical purposes i wouldn't expect to see much practical difference in macro shots between the 5D2 and 7D (assuming i won't be able to get close enough with the full frame in many cases and have to crop), but i'd expect about a 50% advantage in wide angle resolution for full frame assuming good lenses, eg a 17-40 compared to my Tokina 11-16 -- if the limiting factor isn't the water column.

i believe the choice is clear 5D Mark II in an Aquatica Housing that's what I have, as well as a T1i in an sea and sea RDX housing to use the Tokina 10-17 Happy Shooting Dee Dee

i'd prefer full frame, but i think it's going to be the 7D so i can have fiber optic TTL and not be forever dependent on the Heinrichs & Weikamp

i believe the choice is clear 5D Mark II in an Aquatica Housing that's what I have, as well as a T1i in an sea and sea RDX housing to use the Tokina 10-17 Happy Shooting Dee Dee

That's pretty good Dee Dee. So the choice is clear.. get both?

Sorry I'm missing something,

Steve

i'd prefer full frame, but i think it's going to be the 7D so i can have fiber optic TTL and not be forever dependent on the Heinrichs & Weikamp

7D is a great camera, if I was a Canon user I would go for it..

I tested the 100L from a student, on his 5D2 and lens wise I am very happy with it.

Seems to be flawless, right on par with 105VR.

Good Luck