A versatile lens

When you go shooting do you go with one thing in mind, like shooting very small macro items may be even stacking macros, or when shooting wide do you only go for really wide items and nothing else will do. What do you think of picking a lens that will allow you to do both, or close to both, example photos here:

Taken with the Canon 17-85MM set to 17mm

Taken on the same anemone in the photo above set to 85mm

I don't want comments on the photos they are just an example as they have been reduced in quality for the forum, but someone diving with me today posed the question.

A single focal length prime, with a particular "mode" of shooting as a mindset.

If I hop in with two cameras, they are both set up for the same "mode" (i.e. both macro, or, both WA).

All the best, James

It is always good to have versatility during the same dive, however, remember that this lens (and most other zooms) will not approach the sharpness of real macro (like the Canon 100mm USM) or prime wide angle lenses.

So, to answer your question, and because of the reasons outlined above, I always go with one thing in mind, and the lenses I use more often underwater are the 16mm fisheye (for wide angles), 60 (mostly for fish portraits but also macro) and 105 (mostly for macro but also fish).

But it all comes down to what you like. I like super sharp images, if you are satisfied with images from your 17-85 you're set!

That water colour is really nice. Boy, I miss Cayman. Alex

I tend to find that depending on what lens I have fitted, I either operate in 'macro subject search', or 'overview' (wide-angle) mode. The dives feel very different because my concentration is either for a specific size range of subjects or simply one where I ignore small things and look for larger compositions. I've tried a Nikon 28~35 (on 35mm) but found that whilst useful enough, it left me in a quandry as to what it was I was looking for and aiming to achieve photographically.

I actually like the discipline of having a specific set-up, and I sometimes extend this to my own personal topsides photography by just taking a single fixed focal length lens out for a day.

Quality issues aside (and there are various optical issues), my preference is for either/or, but each to his own and it would be interesting to hear of other people's experiences. I do intend to house my 24~70 Canon lens at some point though, as a trial if nothing else.

Well i am sort of split on this issue.

When it comes to macro i like a really tight lens and i am going to shoot the 105mm 9 times out of 10. If the object i am shooting is too big then i go for designs or something. Macro, definitely fixed length.

WA on the other hand...i do like a versatile zoom lens. 17-35 or 12-24. What i thought was a fantastic lens on a film camera was the 24-50mm, what a fantastic lens for sharks as well as sooo many other things.

I shot the 15mm on a Nikonos almost exclusively for about 2000 dives, then i finally housed my N90 and had the 18-35. i had often wished for a zoom to get such things as people shots, sea fan shots, and shark shots at Blue Corner, Palau as i went there 3 or 4 times a week. However, i usually chose the 15mm (this was before the housed camera) because i had to get a slide show of guests together. Therefore my shark shots looked like minnows instead of sharks. At the end of the week when the slideshow was done i would go for the 28mm and get a few shark shots.

At the moment i shoot with the 12-24 and i like it a lot. Most of the time i shoot at 12mm but having that option to zoom is a definite plus for me. (but then again sometimes the blur on the edges at 12mm when close up ruins a shot completely...) Which of course leads me to want the 10.5mm

Grrrrr.... so many lenses, so little money...

If anyone wants to start a "purchase the 10.5mm lens for Mike" fund please let me know

M

I like to set myself up mentally to the type of images i'm aiming for and usually end up with either a 60mm or 105mm for macro and 10.5mm or 14mm for wide angle, if unaware of the bottom's content I try to stay with the moderate side of these, either the 60 or 14mm and keep the more radical lens for when I'm more aware of what to expect. admittingly I have being screwing up good oportunity because of my unflexible prime lens approach and I am now pretty tormented by the attraction of the zoom side. anybody has an opinion on the 17-55mm Nikkor...

So, Murphy's law comes to play a lot in our decision pretty often, I guess it make the charm of u/w photography in a way

Cheers

The lens that Patrick was using comes out to an equivalent focal length of 28-135. From what I gather talking to underwater film photographers, expecially fish photographers, the 28-85 mm range is quite popular. Another point to keep in mind is that this zoom range is the same as what most compact digital cameras are equipped. The compact shooters seem to like it!

I think the photos in this thread are a good example, thanks for posting! If you wouldn't mind making some 100% crops of the shrimp and posting here it would be very helpful.

Cheers

James

I personally shoot the EF28-105 f3.5-4.5 with my 10D. It's great for larger nudi's to frogfish. I have a shot of a giant commerson's froggie with a sunburst behind it done with the lens at 28mm.

I have 2 20x30 images hanging in my house, 1 of a Lionfish and another of a flamboyant cuttlefish, both at ISO 200, f8 and 1/125th. The Lionfish was at 28mm and the cuttle at 105mm. Both are stunningly sharp.

I've sold 24x36 prints of some shots I did of Vancouver for quite a bit of money and they were also shot with the 28-105.

It's a great zoom range for sites where the variety of life is just too diverse to limit oneself to a single focal length. I have one site in particular where I get both juvenile and mature emperor angelfish. The juvi is only about 3" long and the mature is about 14 inches long. No way can a single focal get both properly.

My 2 cents.

Stu

p.s. another great advantage of the lens is that it is a VERY fast focussing lens with the ring USM motor

Stu,

Do you shoot it behind a flat port?

Cheers

James

Hi James,

Yes, and forgot to mention, I periodically use Woody's push on diopter too.

Stu

p.s. about 70% of the images show on my Philippine slide show were shot with the 28-105.

www.final-frame.com/scan/ss/phil.html

This is a 100% crop of the shrimp James, my thinking is that if you are looking for a particular subject then use the right lens, but there are times when you have the wrong lens on and that subject happens to be there, do you take a photo or not bother? I'd take the photo. I have a few lenses and try to put on what I think I want to look for that day, on thing I will say about the 17-85mm, it's a sharp lens and is fantastic in low light, so good that at the end of a dusk dive when it was almost pitch black I was still shooting! and no focus light needed.