35mm 1.8

Hello all,
I picked up a Nauticam housing for my D90 last year. Love this setup! i am using a 10.5FE and a 60mm. I have a few topside lenses (zooms) that i have no plans for. I am considering trying the 35mm 1.8 with my 8.5" dome (Nauticam). Dimensionaly it looks ok. Has anybody tried this?
I love the 10.5 but I think the 35 would be great for larger fish portraits and it is such a fast lens that it should be great for low light situation.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Erik

The key question is where the entrance pupil of the 35mm will be relative
to the radius of the port. I suspect it won't be right. But jump in a pool
and try. Pay attention to corner sharpness and chromatic aberrations.

You might well get away with you macro port on the 35mm, provided it
doesn't vignette.


Chuck

People use the Tokina 35mm macro and I can't see much difference except the Nikon focuses at a foot away from the lens where as the Tokina focuses alot closer.

I dont think this is an issue with shooting larger fish portraits anyway.

I dont know about setting it up behind the 8.5inch dome which dioptres you might need.

Regards Mark

I'm not so sure that having fast glass underwater would be a significant benefit in the lighting department, unless you do a lot of natural light shooting. When shooting with strobes, it does allow for more ambient light in the background, but otherwise, your subject lighting will be strobe dependent. There may be a benefit for the AF system with a f/1.8, though how much this is I cannot be certain.

I occasionally use my 35mm f2 AF. I've tried it behind the fisheye dome and behind the standard flat port. I prefer it behind the flat port. It is useful for larger fish portraits and schooling shots between 18-48 inches. In clearer water, it might be good for diver shots. I've taken those, but you need a bit of distance and in our green water that's limiting. I find that the 35mm works a bit better for smaller scene shots where the 60mm requires too much distance from the subject for good detail in darker water. Being a fast lens also helps in that even though I might not go to f2, at f5.6, you're three steps up and can get pretty good DOF without going too low on the shutter speed. I've used it at f4.5/60-80 and f5.6/80-125 and gotten decent light with pretty good DOF and corners.
These were taken with the 35 f2.0 in the flat port
1/125 f11 ISO200

Have you thought about using the Sigma 17-70 Macro? Its a bit more versatile and its regarded as a good in between lens especially if you already have a FE and the 60mm Macro.

Regards Mark

AussieByron:

Have you thought about using the Sigma 17-70 Macro? Its a bit more versatile and its regarded as a good in between lens especially if you already have a FE and the 60mm Macro.

Regards Mark

Click to expand...

OP was looking to use his existing topside lenses but since you brought it up, do you use the 17-70 macro DC, the 17-70 macro HSM or the 17-70 macro HSM 0-S. I've seen several articles/posts on these lenses, but not much mention of differences. Are they different lenses, do they differ in size, what's best UW?
What kind of dome spacing do you use with it. Does it need a diopter?