Best wide angle lens choice for Canon 10d and Ike housing

Ha most people look forward to the end of the surface interval .... anyways back to the lense business. I was speaking to my housing dealer today about lens and port choice.

Current lense : 28 - 70mm Canon EF USM ... really good inbetween lense. I believe will fit in the Compact (6") Sea and Sea dome port or the Flat port with and extnsion on the dome. Now I will need an extension for the flat port anways when i get a nice lense in there for macro.

Originally I was planning on getting the dome port with ext for the 28 - 70mm .. but I want to get a wa in there as well, I would rather get going in wide angle before macro.

So two lenses one port is possible i believe. But as I have decided wa .. i just wanted to know how wide will I want. Alex you know I like to get as wide as possible and then worry about getting close to the subject. So here's my question ..

I wanted the sigma 12 - 24 .. but I think i will stick with canon glass now.

So what would be better 15mm Fisheye .. or Super Wide 14mm and why ?

with the fisheye lense do i need a fisheye dome ?

Just asking to get as much input as possible.

Canon 14mm is an unpopular lens above water as it's considered overpriced and a poor optical performer. 15mm fisheye makes a lot more sense underwater unless you absolutely have to have a rectilinear lens. I'd but a wide angle (12-24) zoom at half the price before I'd buy the 14mm prime.

There's no Canon prime lens between the 14mm and the 20mm, and 20mm is a little too long on your d60.

Sigma 12-24 is not an option on Ikelite housings (as per the original question), Canon 12-24 is no good on 10D or D60, but I did find a listing for the Tokina superwide 12-25 on B&H yesterday - so this may be a really interesting prospect for underwater Canon shooters.

Fisheyes - Sigma is cheaper than canon, but not a lot cheaper (I think the nikon 15mm fisheye is a lot more expensive?). Still deciding this one myself.

I have seen a bunch of lisitngs on ebay for the 15mm FE lens for around $350 brand new. It's hard to beat that price point. It's unfortunate that Canon left some 10d users in the lurch without providing some quality superwides. If I was a canon user I don't think I could take a hacksaw to a lens, sorry. I almost went with the sigma 15FE for my d70 but the 12-24 nikkor came so highly recommended I find that I use it all the time on the surface. But it is 2 1/2 times more money than the FE. As far as the canon I really don't see much of any other choices.

Herb about the signature line, unfortunately most of my life is a surface interval. And yes I look forward to bottom time all the time. Thanks for noticing...

Tony

Ok here's what I know

Sigma 12-24mm = 122 deg = good for underwater and land

Canon SWA 14mm = 112 deg = good for underwater and land

Canon 15mm Fisheye = 180 deg = great for underwater

I don't think there is much of a choice in it for Underwater ... it has to be the 15mm FE lense, which means I am now buying lenses specifically for underwater, which I guess I was going to do with the 100mm or 135mm anyway. I wouldn't buy those lenses for land ever it would always be a 70-200mm zoom.

God i need to start earning some money now.

Yeah but you have to remember that your D60 is a 1.5x cropped sensor - so these angles of coverage are all reduced. The 15mm Fisheye ends up at about 110 degrees.

I would suggest getting a domeport for the 15mm on a cropped sensor camera - doesn't need to be the full S&S dome port. Which will save you money. You will only need this if Canon (or Sigma) bring out a full frame fisheye that works on the D60 and gives 180 degree coverage (like Nikon's 10.5mm, which I used to take all those pictures of you with the silversides).

Then using the 28-70mm and the 100mm macrro behind the same flat port. Buy a flat port that fits the shorter lens and then get an extension ring to extend it for the longer lens. if required.

Alex

If all that isn't clear - ring me up!

it all makes sense ... doesn't make it any easier spending the money though !

the flat port is easy .. thats a given i would do that, but I was pretty sure that I could use the 28-70mm in the dome port to start off with until I need to get a flat port. I would already have the ext ring for the 28-70 in the compact dome port. That way I can use the equipment without having spent loads straight away. The 15mm Fisheye is def going to be my choice as when i do upgrade to full frame it will work beuatifully in that and I will also be able to have that 10mm zoom SWA

I think my lens collection when i am finished will be something like this

10-22mm Super Wide Zoom EFS

15mm Fisheye EF AutoFocus

28-70mm Zoom EF

One of These for Macro most likely 100mm EF

and then either a

70mm-200mm EF or 100mm-400mm EF for land use

Giles,

I'm in th same boat with you! I use a 10d and sea and sea housing, so when you come up with a wide angle choice-let me know!

Sugar

for underwater it is going to be the 15mm fisheye

i will need to get a non fisheye for land as well ... but maybe not before i upgrade the body

The Tokina 12-24 lens is almost as big around as the Sigma (87 mm vs 84 mm) but maybe that will be enough to use it in most ports, maybe not. Also, B&H at least shows no known ship date for the lens but is getting tempting. I would like to see the calculations on the modification of the Canon 10-22 since that would be my first choice, or perhaps you can stuff a 20D in the Subal 10D housing.

Has anyone tried a 20D in a 10D housing?

That's the only way you're going to get a 10-22 EF-S in a 10D housing. I joke about hacksawing it, but I would never consider doing it in reality to an expensive lens like this (18-55 EF-S is a completely different matter). If your rich enough to write off a 10-22 EF-S trying to modify it, you can afford to upgrade to a 20D!

The tokina:

Note: Use of this lens is NOT recommended with 35mm or APS SLR cameras.

Note: Equivalent focal length in 35mm terms when used on a digital camera is 18-36mm.

That makes no sense, but I think what they're saying is it's designed for crop sensor DSLRs

Ikelite ports:

Maximum lens diameter is limited to 8.4cm (3.3"). The diameter for attachment of zoom or focus clamps is limited to 7.1cm (2.8").

So the 84mm Tokina will fit, but according to this you won't be zooming.

Having said that, I'm happily zooming with my 17-40L in an Ikelite port, and it's got a maximum diameter of 83.5mm.

I do understand the Tokina 12-24 is max. 84mm. That would be at the lens top. The zoom ring seems to be somewhat smaller.

The Sigma has 87mm diameter but the zoom ring is "just" 84mm (83.8 exactly). So Zoom gear was possible (Sealux).

So there might be a chance the Tokina's 84mm refer to the lens top and the zoom ring is small enough for an Ikelite gear.

If there is some time left I would wait to see how the Tamron 11-18mm does: 11mm wide end (it's no huge step but noticeable in that range), better close focus, max. diameter 82.2mm, but a bit slower.

Julian

Rob: I'm not so sure about the "no zooming" comment. Perhaps only the front of the lens is 84mm and the area where the zoom gear attaches is much less than 71mm. That's how the lens looks and that's how the Nikon 12024 lens acts, and it works in the Ike housing.

Cheers

James

James, I agree. What I should have said is that the lens will fit, just, according to maximal diameter. Whether you can zoom depends on whether the zoom ring is less than 71mm. My 83.5mm maximal diameter 17-40L zooms fine, with a zoom ring diameter of 65mm. If the tokina is a similar shape there's a strong chance it would work too.

The annoying thing is that I'd like a superwide zoom that would work on a full frame camera, but the only one that does, the Sigma, won't fit in the Ikelite housing (allegedly - has anyone actually tried this, by the way?).

Rob,

Sigma 12-24mm is funny on full frame. But full frame 12mm with 122° is an optical compromise in the corners. I would prefer the 17-40 for full frame as it would be wide enough for me and it's superb on FF.

so how is this:

you buy a slim APS-C wideangle like the Tamron or Tokina and it stays on your 10D with zoom gear (if possible) for underwater or as a topside backup. The 17-40 goes onto your 1Ds

Julian

Rob,

 

I would prefer the 17-40 for full frame as it would be wide enough for me and it's superb on FF.  

Hey, I'm a fan of the 17-40L, but calling it superb on full frame is probably an overstatement. I'm expecting it to be adequate on full frame, but that's all. Zeiss 21mm is superb on full frame. Canon 35/1.4 is superb on full frame. But most 1Ds Mk2 lens testers don't even bother testing the 17-40L as it's performance generally isn't up to the job (or at least so goes the conventional wisdom).

I'm hoping mine is a good copy, and will perform well on the 1Ds. From memory, on the small number of frames I shot on film there was some vignetting. I'll let you know how it goes when I get a chance to test it later this week.

OK, I seem to have chosen a to superlative word for the 17-40 (still struggling with english words) ?

What I wanted to say is that the 17-40mm gives you better full frame corners than the Sigma 12-24mm if 17mm is wide enough for you on FF. If you are concerned with the 17-40 image qulity on FF and think about "superb" primes, the 12-24 really is no FF choice I guess :-)

Julian

OK, I seem to have chosen a to superlative word for the 17-40 (still struggling with english words) ?

Das Canon 17-40L f/4 ist nicht sehr gut, aber es ist gut. Das Canon 10-22 EF-S ist nicht so gut. Ja?

Whitey: Getting a 20D is not the issue, that is relatively cheap. Getting another Subal housing for a20D is the problem since a, it doesn't exist yet and b, it will be another $4k.

Das Canon 17-40L f/4 ist nicht sehr gut, aber es ist gut.  Das Canon 10-22 EF-S ist nicht so gut.  Ja?

Ja genau, richtig, sehr gut!

You can not deny your Ewa-Marine career

Julian

1Ds arrived so I did some lens testing this afternoon.

Hey, the 17-40L is much better than I'd been led to believe full frame!

Significant vignetting at f4 but usable it appears, no real vignetting at f8 or f11. Barrel distortion certainly present at 17mm. But the sharpness stopped down a bit (f8,f11) is really pleasing - some very slight loss of sharpness right in the corners but otherwise very good. Here's one of the lens test shots, f11, 24mm focal length: