So I sprung for a forum members Canon 30D ikelite setup. I have a 5DII with a whole lot of lenses but all EF for land use. I was planning on using my 17-40L with the crop body underwater. Fortunately the dome for the 17-40 also works with the Tokina 12-24 lens I am always hearing about around here.
Is the 17-40 going to be too wide underwater? It close focuses well enough to not warrant a diopter.
Should I get a 12-24. I could also go for a 10-22 EF-S but from my minimal research it seems it would use a different port, no?
Thanks
Hi Jay,
I'm not much help with the 12-24, I've never used it, but there is an older thread where we did some tesing on the 17-40 you may find useful. At least on my copy there is a very definite sweet spot at f/11.
I'm not much help with the 12-24, I've never used it, but there is an older thread where we did some tesing on the 17-40 you may find useful. At least on my copy there is a very definite sweet spot at f/11.
Thanks. I'm very familiar with the 17-40 on land on my 5DII. Definitely need to stop down. CA can be bad at the edges, but not as bad as the 24-105 at 24.
I was thinking more of focal length. I've never used it on a crop camera and never used it underwater. Were people satisfied shooting only as wide as 17mm?
Were people satisfied shooting only as wide as 17mm?
Sorry partner, I'm not clear on what you mean. In general, the folks around here are never satisfied. A bunch of people do like the Tokina 10-17 Fisheye lens for WA work. The 17-40 on a cropped camera can be a little too narrow as you suggest.
HTH,
Steve
i'm still shooting a 20D and take along the 17-40 as a backup but have never yet had to use it - it's not wide enough or not long enough. i use a Tokina 11-16 for wide and a 100M for macro. of course this depends on what you're shooting
I don't have a 17-40, but I do use my Tamron 17-50 quite often as well as the Tokina 12-24. The former is my catch-all lens if I don't know what to expect from a dive. It's just ok as a WA or macro uw behind a 6" dome. Better on the 50mm end as corners get really bad on the 17mm end, but when in doubt better soft corners than no picture at all. The 12-24 on the other hand is a very good lens, but the zoom is limited, so you whant to have some good viz. I usually take it on wreck-dives as it gives me straight lines and yet is wide enough to capture a good portion of the wreck. I love my 10-17, but given that it is a fish-eye, I find it of only little use on wrecks and no use in limited visibility (less than 50ft) what we usually have here in SoCal.
Just traded my wife's 16 mm fish eye for our second Tokina 10 - 17.
So it seems people really go wide underwater.
If I get another lens I'd probably go for the Tokina 12-24 because it uses the same 5503.51 port.
Will probably dive with the 17-40 and see what I think.
I used the Tokina 12-24DX - it is wide, reasonably good, and cheap. The 17-40 is a great lens stopped down to F8 or F11 but it is not wide enough for underwater wideangle on a cropped sensor camera.
A bunch of people do like the Tokina 10-17 Fisheye lens for WA work. The 17-40 on a cropped camera can be a little too narrow as you suggest.
