Nikon 40mm lens

[Magrone]

Anyone using this lens underwater? Does it work in a standard 60mm port? Very tempted because of the close focus and low price. Thanks.

[mjh]

It would probably work behind most flat ports but for Macro work the problem is you would have to be touching the subject to fill the frame. There maybe applications for this lens but I would stick with the 60mm.

[Magrone]

Thanks for the reply mjh. I have already used the 60mm a lot. I realize that getting 1:1 macro would be very difficult with the 40mm but I'm only interested in it for medium sized fish shots. I think it may be more useful in places like Lembeh where the water clarity is poor and there are quite a few creatures like octopi etc that you could get close enough to with the 40mm to light properly and not have to cut some of them out of the frame, as is the tendency with the 60mm.

That being said, It seems the barrel length is a bit shorter than the 60mm, and with a wider angle of view this may be a problem behind the standard 60mm ports. So anyone who has experience with this lens, please let me know. i may just have to buy one and try it myself. If nothing else it seems to be a fun lens for land use.

[Chuck Tribolet]

1. Check with your housing vendor for compatibility.

2. This lens on a crop sensor would be just like the 60mm on a full-frame sensor. It should work if you have a port for it.


Chuck

[Larry C]

I use a Nikon 35mm f2.0 in the standard Sea & Sea flat port and it works fine. I like the ability to get wide enough for small schools, portraits of larger fish in green water and the flexibility to take a variety of pictures. The 40mm seems like it might be a better choice, as it will get a bit closer as well. I mostly use my 60mm AF-D because my subjects tend to be small, but occasionally, I like to take the 35mm out when I expect there might be a larger subject as well. Some people have also suggested the Sigma 17-70 macro zoom, although I've also heard the picture quality underwater is limited. If you can afford another lens, it never hurts to try it. If you hate it, people seem to get about 70% of new price for used lenses on E-Bay.

[Chuck Tribolet]

It should be noted that there are two different Sea and Sea flat ports. One is bigger than the other. I'm pretty sure Larry has the big one.


Chuck

[Larry C]

Sea & Sea NX Standard Port - Sea & Sea Ports - Sea & Sea Housings & Accessories - Optical Ocean Sales Underwater Photo - 800-359-1295!
This is the one I have. The 35mm is a very short lens, only 1.7" deep by 2.5" wide, with a 52mm filter size. Minimum focus is 9.8" and magnification is only .24
The 40mm micro is 2.7x2.4 with 6.4" minimum focus and 1:1 at that distance. Not much working distance. 1:1 would be right on top of the port, but it should still give you decent macro, which the 35mm won't.
I've also used the 35mm in the NX Dome port, where it works, but not as well. With it's shorter focal length, the 40mm might work in a dome as a wide angle close focus, but being a macro you would not likely get a sharp background, but rather a bokeh.

[Magrone]

Thanks Chuck and Larry,

I wonder how the 40mm would perform behind the new mini domes, like the Zen 100mm. The min. focus distance on the 40 is 6.4 while the Tokina is 5.5. Not having any experience with this dome, (but seriously considering buying one) I don't know how much that inch will matter. Though it would be nice to be able to travel with only one macro port for the 105 and one wide angle port for the 10-17 + 40 mm. Thoughts?

[Chuck Tribolet]

Sea & Sea NX Standard Port - Sea & Sea Ports - Sea & Sea Housings & Accessories - Optical Ocean Sales Underwater Photo - 800-359-1295!
This is the one I have. The 35mm is a very short lens, only 1.7" deep by 2.5" wide, with a 52mm filter size. Minimum focus is 9.8" and magnification is only .24
The 40mm micro is 2.7x2.4 with 6.4" minimum focus and 1:1 at that distance. Not much working distance. 1:1 would be right on top of the port, but it should still give you decent macro, which the 35mm won't.
I've also used the 35mm in the NX Dome port, where it works, but not as well. With it's shorter focal length, the 40mm might work in a dome as a wide angle close focus, but being a macro you would not likely get a sharp background, but rather a bokeh.

I think that's the big port. Let's compare in the parking lot (though not this weekend, surf's up).

Remember that to use a dome port the entrance pupil of the lens has to be at the center of curvature of the dome.

[lamwayne]

I have put the 40mm micro AF-S behind Aquatica standard macro port with no problem; no extension collar is required. The total length of the 40mm micro AF-S, with the inner barrel fully extended at 1:1 magnification, is about 7-8mm shorter than the 60 micro AF-S, the 40mm with the hood mounted is about 4-5mm longer than the 60mm (more on that later). So whatever port that is designed for the 60 should also accommodate the 40. It is a nice lens e.g. good sharpness, very smooth bokeh and the greater FOV allows you to shoot medium size subjects. However it is not without shortcomings:

First, it would be impractical to do 1:1 shot behind this setup as the subject will only be approximately 1 cm in front of the port glass. At that distance lighting of the subject becomes difficult. Second, the focusing speed is noticibly slower than the 60. With the focus limiter on (infinity to 20cm) the speed is still a bit slower than the 60 and the magnification only goes down to about 1:3, but now you have a more reasonable 5 cm working distance. Faster focus and better lighting, what more can you ask! . Third, I get reflection problem from the internal flash but the problem was solved when I mounted the hood.

Hope this help.