Macro, wide, fisheye

[kreuzerkrieg]

swankenstein: splendid photos! are u professioanal?

alcina: Ok, I think I got the point, my conclusions as following:
a) Define what you gonna do this dive and select appropriate lens
a1. Take macro lens (60mm f2.8 is fine) for shooting creatures
a2. Take wide angle for scenic, wreck etc (which would be the best choice for DSRL with crop 1.6?)
b) Min. aperture does not matter (forget the f1.0/1.2/1.4)
c) Bring more light and set aperture to maximum to obtain desirable DOF
Have I missed something?

 

[alcina]

LOL yeah, that works too

If I'm not sure I put on the 17-70.

Even if I am sure, on some sites the 17-70 is my lens of choice, too.

It's all about knowing what your gear does and how to get the effect you are looking for. If you get to dive a lot, it's great because you can experiment more and if something doesn't work, doesn't matter - go back next time. Much more difficult if your diving time is restricted for whatever reason!

 

[kreuzerkrieg]

That’s it, I make approximately 50 dives per year and I got too much stuff to learn about photography in general and in UW photo especially. So I'm trying to avoid the try and error method.
So, is the 17-70mm a wonder solution? In which case it will not fit? What are the drawbacks of using that lens?

 

[alcina]

a1. Take macro lens (60mm f2.8 is fine) for shooting creatures

Little creature to mid sized fish and diver head shots.

a2. Take wide angle for scenic, wreck etc (which would be the best choice for DSRL with crop 1.6?)

Have a look at the Sticky (follow the pink link) as there are lenses listed and some links to various discussions on them.

My personal choices are Canon 10-22 or Sigma 10-20 if you want really wide; Tokina 10-17 if you want really with some fisheye. There are also some 12-24 that people like.

b) Min. aperture does not matter (forget the f1.0/1.2/1.4)

These are maximum apertures, not minimum. Maximum refers to how wide open the lens is - how big the hole is that lets in light. The bigger the hole, the smaller that number...1.8 is a bigger hole than 5.6... It can be confusing.

c) Bring more light and set aperture to maximum to obtain desirable DOF

The smaller your aperture, the larger your DOF - so f22 will have a wider DOF than f5.6. The smaller the aperture, generally the more light you will need - it is not uncommon to crank the strobes to near maximum output when shooting

So, is the 17-70mm a wonder solution? In which case it will not fit? What are the drawbacks of using that lens?

I think this is the most versatile lens available right now. I am perfectly happy heading out and shooting nudibranchs with it right along with shooting whale sharks and manta rays. It's relatively fast to focus and doesn't hunt much (I never use my focus light with it coz I always forget to bring it!), it's sharp and it's a great price.

The drawback is that it doesn't do 1:1 so if you are trying to shoot that, stick with your 60mm macro. If you are trying to shoot extremely wide scenes, go for something wider.

You'll have to have a dome port for this lens.

 

[kreuzerkrieg]

>>It can be confusing
Yeah, actually it is 1 divided by the f number, AFAIR
And I always confused with it
>>You'll have to have a dome port for this lens.
Well, I guess it is little spending compared to lenses prices.

I will spend the rest of this week reading UM photo literature, I guess I will back with more questions and clarifications.

Once again, great post!

 

[MarkH]

swankenstein: splendid photos! are u professioanal?

Thanks, but no I'm not proffessional. Although I have sold photos to local magazines and the government, it's not my job. I think having to do it to live would somehow take some of the fun out of it. For what it's worth, I'm now using that Canon 50mm (1.8) with the close-up diopters for close-up photos. The settings I use are ISO 100, f11 and a shutter speed of around 200 with a small surface flash in an Ikelite housing. For wide angle, I use a Zenitar (Russian) 16mm fisheye (about 90 degrees angle of view with my 1.6 crop sensor) with an aperature of f5.6, ISO 400 and a shutter speed of anywhere from tripod-slow to 300 or so. This is all up here in relatively dark water. In the tropics, I can use less sensitive settings. If I wasn't cheap, I think my ideal lenses would be a 60mm for macro and one of the 10-20mm zooms for wide angle.

 

[kreuzerkrieg]

"Zenitar"? Do you mean "Zenit"? after 1956 they ran out of german captured glass and started to produce lenses from Russian glass, which as I understoon was no match for German quality.
As i understand the setup should be from two to three lenses: macro, wide and wonderlens ~17-70mm (if you got money for two primes and zoom, or macro and 17-70 otherwise).

 

[MarkH]

"Zenitar"? Do you mean "Zenit"? after 1956 they ran out of german captured glass and started to produce lenses from Russian glass, which as I understoon was no match for German quality.
As i understand the setup should be from two to three lenses: macro, wide and wonderlens ~17-70mm (if you got money for two primes and zoom, or macro and 17-70 otherwise).

It may be the same company. On my lens is written "MC Zenitar", which sounds like a pretty cool name for a rapper. They still make them new. They cost around $120 on E bay.