Zoom gear for Sigma 17-70 macro in MDX300 housing?

[Underseabio]

Do any of you good people know of an existing piece (or a method of manufacturing my own) of zoom gear for a sigma 17-70 macro that would fit in my MDX300 housing???

 

[SEA&SEA]

Hello, You may use Zoom Gear (56350) from SEA&SEA. This gear was originally designed for the Nikkor ED 18-35mm lens. This gear has been tested to the Sigma 17-70mm lens and works well.

 

[HShark]

Hello, You may use Zoom Gear (56350) from SEA&SEA. This gear was originally designed for the Nikkor ED 18-35mm lens. This gear has been tested to the Sigma 17-70mm lens and works well.

Sorry, but the Zoom Gear (56350) does not work. The diameter is too small :no (but maybe you meant the Zoom Gear for the AF-S Zoom Nikkor ED 17-35mm f:2,8D).

I'm owning both, the SIGMA 17-70mm f:2,8-4,5 DC Macro and the AF Zoom Nikkor ED 18-35mm f:3,5-4,5D.
I adapted the Focus Gear (56140) for the AF Micro Nikkor 105mm f2,8D (the old one, not the VR) and I'm really happy.
You have to shorten the length and you have to use 3 screws for fixing the Focus Gear on the lens.

At the moment I'm recommending the SX-Extension Ring and the NX Fisheye Dome Port. Within the next month I'll try to use the Compact Wide Port L with the NX Compact Macro Port Base. Maybe it's the better solution...but I don't know now.

Many greatings from the beautyful Austria,

Harald

 

[rsanoian]

We would not reccomend using this lens as its performance underwater is lacking on both the wide and macro side. Typically the long zoom lens seem like a solution to having to just shoot wide or macro on a dive, but your better off with a 12-24 or 10-17 for wide and a 60 or 105vr for macro. I think in the long run you will be much happier with the quality of the pictures.

 

[HShark]

We would not reccomend using this lens as its performance underwater is lacking on both the wide and macro side. Typically the long zoom lens seem like a solution to having to just shoot wide or macro on a dive, but your better off with a 12-24 or 10-17 for wide and a 60 or 105vr for macro. I think in the long run you will be much happier with the quality of the pictures.

Hi "rsanoian"!

Your post is correct, if you don't get close as possible to the subject of your choice for the photograph. But, if you do so (shooting distance about 0,2m - 1m; depending of the subject, the visibility and the used focal distance), I cannot agree with your post!

Zooming underwater (including zooming with this universal lens) is often no problem when you know what you are doing. And the optical quality of many actual zoom lenses is good enough for that.
For some photographers, this lens can be an optimal start in the underwater photography and for other photographers, this lens is a perfect supplement to the their existing lenses (wide & macro). For instance, when the diving conditions are unclear and you cannot change the lens accurately timed or the size of the sujects is varying in a defined range.

To document your post and that we are able to follow your statement, please tell us more details. Your short post isn't helpful without them...
And for that, please answer the following questions:

• Did you use the lens underwater?
• If yes, where are the results (photographs) and your important notes (f-stop, shutter speed, sharpness, depth-in-field, ...)?
• If yes, which configuration did you use (camera, housing, port, strobe, ...)?

Thanks a lot in advance,

Harald

 

[auder]

...I'll try to use the Compact Wide Port L with the NX Compact Macro Port Base. Maybe it's the better solution...but I don't know now.

Hi Harald,

Do you have news about this solution?
Thank you, from Brazil!

Auder Lisboa

 

[JackConnick]

Well, you could of fooled me.

Jack