Sigma 17-70 f2.8 review??

[kenns]

I have a D7100 and dive mostly in the Pacific Northwest. My primary lens choice will be a 105mm macro since visibility is traditionally pretty low here, but for the occasion when I want to take pics of larger fish or pilings and such, I was thinking that the "Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 MACRO OS" might be a good lens behind a dome port. Anyone have experience with this lens? How is it functioning in cold water? I bought a Sigma 50m lens for my NEX and found it got sluggish when it got cold. Also, are you happy with the sharpness of the images? Or would it be better to go with a Nikon 10-24mm?

Advice welcome...nothing has been purchased. Still in research mode but I have decided to get a Sea & Sea Housing.
Thanks
Kerry

 

[Interceptor121]

I have this lens for the D7100 though am not planning to house it

I read this The Sigma 17-70mm ? A lens for the indecisive? | UnderWaterVisions's News

As it stands you need a pretty large dome however the portrait shots looks interesting

 

[DelrayDM]

It is a fairly popular choice for midrange zoom. (click for sample images).

Interceptor is correct, you do need a 'fairly large dome' for wide rectilinear lenses. Definition of 'large' depends on how critical you are. You can use it with as 'small' as a 170mm dome. The Zen Underwater DP170 does come in a Sea & Sea mount version.

Zen Underwater recommended dome for 10-24mm Nikkor is DP200 or DP230mm, you wouldn't be satisfied with the 170mm with that lens.

I can't say anything about 'cold water performance'. Here in southeast Florida, we think 72 F is torture.

 

[Diver Dave1]

Ever thought of the Tokina 10-17 fisheye instead? For mid-range, you could add a 1.4X and a 20mm extension on the dome. The 10-17 works well with 4" or 100mm domes, which can cost considerably less than larger domes and travel easier.

This link to a trip to Cozumel was shot exclusively with the 10-17 and 1.4x with extender and minidome.

Cozumel 2010 - shiningseastudio

 

[kenns]

Thanks for commenting so far. I really am torn. I think the Tokina 10-17 is definitely one to get, but I would use it rarely here. I was looking at the Nikon 10-24, thinking that might be better, but the though of putting a 1.4 on the Tokina is intriguing. Thanks. Keep the comments coming!

 

[Interceptor121]

You need to get over the fact that for best performance you will buy lenses for underwater that you will not use on land. It's part of having an SLR. I love the sigma for land use is the lens to carry around at all times but I wouldn't bother putting it behind a 9" dome

 

[James R]

I have the 10-17 along w/the Zen 100mm dome etc...I have the 1.4x kenko pro dgx tx and will get the extension ring 20 and other focus gear before I go to Socorro, but I still think about getting a bit more reach. The issue, as you know, is that more reach (different lens) would also require a bigger dome, which certainly wouldn't travel as well as the compact Zen DP100.

I know of one person that shoots the 17-70 sigma, with a 230mm dome, and does OK with it.