SLR Lenses - The Basics

[TimIngmire]

This thread is for users to post useful info for new photographers or those looking into this area for the first time. Feel free to add any relevant information, tips, links that you feel would of help.

Tim

[TimIngmire]

I'll start then with a selection of what I think are essential lenses for a Nikon Set-up.

To Start:

Macro: Nikon 60mm
Wide Angle: 12-24 Nikon and I believe the Tamron performs well.

And then:

Macro: 105mm
Wide Angle: 10.5mm

Any thoughts on lenses for the Canon?

[KenByrne]

My advice shop around and look at all the lens options. For example I use a Sigma 50mm macro lens rather than the Nikkor 60mm lens. The quality is about the same and the cost was half. Now I'm on digital the slightly wider angle of view is an advantage.

The other thing to consider before splashing out on a top price lens is that you are going to house it behind a port and take photographs through a water column full of floating detritus. Any marginal advantage of the lens optics will be nullified by the environment in which we use it. That at least is my view.

[Mattdiver]

One of the key things when selecting lenses for SLR cameras in less than ideal conditions (read poor viz, lots of particles) is the ability to focus close.

This cuts down on the amount of c#@& between the lens and subect (i.e. less risk of backscatter), and also allows the use of less strobe power (again, reduced potential for backscatter).

In that respect, lenses like the Nikkor 10.5mm or Sigma 15mm are great for WA shots, while the Nikkor 60mm or Sigma 50mm work great for macro.

[jarhed]

For W/A, I'm looking very hard at trading in my Nikon 16mm FE for the Tokina 10-17mm. At first glance, it appears to offer the benifits of both the 10.5 and the 16mm with coverage from around 180 deg to about 99 deg.

I think the 12-24 picks up the coverage at around 100 deg at the wide end.

With the Tokina 10-17mm FE (~$550) and the Tokina 12-24mm (~$480) you can get a complete, quality wide angle lens suite for about $1000.

Both lens have great reviews.

For Macro, the 60mm and the 105VR are my favorites.

For mid range fish shots, I use the 18-70mm kit lens, but may consider the 17-55mm someday, bit it is quite pricy the 17-35mm I understand is plenty sharp too, but almost as pricy.

Just my .02psi as I look for an excuse to add a post.

John

[desert diver]

I am getting the d80 and was looking at the 28-80mm and the 70-300mm lens.Just moving up to slr from point and shoot and the lens choice is confusing me.Any thoughts on those two lens(good or bad).It will be a while till I can house this, so I need some glass for up top.Also looking at the sigma 17-70mm.
thanks jon

[Cussy]

Originally Posted by desert diver

I am getting the d80 and was looking at the 28-80mm and the 70-300mm lens.Just moving up to slr from point and shoot and the lens choice is confusing me.Any thoughts on those two lens(good or bad).It will be a while till I can house this, so I need some glass for up top.Also looking at the sigma 17-70mm.
thanks jon

Jon,
I would suggest you really need to consider which housing you will get long term. If, like me, you go for Ikelite you will find that not all lenses are compatible (I nearly bought the Sigma 10-20 only to realise I would never be able to zoom underwater). What I did was spend my money on 2 quality lenses for underwater (Tokina 10-17 and Sigma 50mm macro) and bought 2 lenses second hand for topside (Nikon 18-70 and Nikon 70-300). The 70-300G feels like a very cheap lens and I find it is pretty useless without a tripod at the 300mm end (unless you're in perfect sunlight). I can't think it would be any use underwater. As it is so cheap I find the optic accecptable, but not pin sharp. I find that the Nikon kit lens doesn't have close enough macro focusing and so I don't intend housing it; it's probably the same in the states, but these are really easy to pick up second-hand very cheaply and they are good lenses. The downside of my setup is that once the lens is on it dictates the dive, but at the same time that focuses the mind. So the downside of going dSLR is the loss of flexibility on the dive; but the very clear upside is the fantastic optics that mean you can do things you can't with a compact.
HTH
Rob

[desert diver]

Well,
Didn't get the d80(not enough funds-married-long story)but got a d40 6.1mp.It came with 18-55mm kit and still have the 28-55mm and 70-300mm lens.Probably get the fantasea housing.I know about the lens motor in the lens on d40 limiting the choice of glass that can be used,but any suggestions would be appreciated.The fantasea housing comes with a flat port for the 18-55mm kit lens.Is this lens even semi decent for uw?
thanks jon

[KenByrne]

First thing is that on the D40 I doubt you'll get autofocus on the 28-55 or the 70-300 lenses. Mind with an 18-55 the 28-55 is surplus to requirements.

I'm not sure how close the 18-55 focuses. I used a 28-80 underwater with a film SLR and got some reasonable shots in the Red Sea. However it was useless in the UK as it didn't focus close enough for the typical UK vis. That was behind a dome port which needed a +4 dipoter to focus. It's a bit of a problem with a zoom of this focal length because 18mm is a moderate wide angle and would be better behind a dome port, at 55mm it's a short telephoto and better behind a flat port. As you'd be using it behind a flat port I'd consider using it at the 55mm end of the zoom and if it'll fit attaching a diopter to enable you to focus closer.