| Your 35-70 is actually an outstanding
fish lens. If you were able to get a maximum magnification
closer to 1:1 instead of approximately 1:3 macro with it,
the 35 - 70 might be just about the best general lens around.
If your subject is cooperative, you can make your shot at
35mm and eliminate a substantial amount of water between your
camera and subject, with all of its problems of backscatter
and degradation of image sharpness, color, and contrast and
achieve a crisper, cleaner shot. If your subject is shy, you
can zoom to seventy to bring him in and at least still fill
the frame with the image you’re after.
The fact that many if not most of the best photos taken by
the majority of underwater photographers are of subjects four
inches or smaller in size. This means somewhere between 1:1
and 1:3 macro. This magnification is best provided by macro
lenses (Nikon calls them Micro) of sixty, 105, and 200 millimeter
focal lengths. Of these three, the sixty is the least expensive
and the most versatile. You can fill your frame with a subject
a little over an inch long or fill most of your frame with
a fish a couple of feet long at a camera-to-subject distance
which will be within reach of your strobe and will not interpose
too much "wash water" between you and the object
of your intentions. The 105 pushes you back to twice the distance
for a similar image. This might be just what the doctor ordered
for tiny, jumpy little fishlets that dart away as you approach
within 60mm range, and if these are your major target, consider
the 105. Soft coral, flamingo tongues, crinoids, and the like
can easily be photographed at 1:1 with the sixty. Although
nudibranchs will kick in their afterburners and try to beat
it the hell out of there on your approach, you can still generally
head them off with the shorter focal length lens. For an angel,
grouper, or groupa fish, the 105 is too long. You’ll
be shooting from three to five or more feet away, making your
strobe marginally effective or totally ineffective in most
tropical ambient light situations. You won’t get the
tack-sharp fish photos you’re used to seeing in magazines
when you’re shooting at that distance. The 200 is just
much more of the same. It’s a great special purpose
lens but would be much too limiting as your primary lens.
It comes down to this. If you’re going to have just
two lenses—one wide and one not-wide—the sixty
is your best choice to cover the not-wide from macro to fish
shots. You already have the 35-70, so the hole in your system
that you really need to plug is higher magnification macro,
which is best handled by the 105. Simple, isn’t it?
Of course not!
The sixty macro costs around $400 to $500, and it is very
sharp and quite durable. The 35-70 and the newer 35-to80 lenses
cost around $100 to $150. Hmmmm! One hundred bucks for a Nikon
zzzoom lens! Is this reasonable (referring to reasonable/logical,
not reasonable/cheap)? Is the zoom as sharp and rugged as
the sixty? Like there’s an Easter Bunny, it is! Sharpness
is generally good in most of these lenses when they’re
new, but declines with use and especially abuse more than
the more solidly built sixty. On the other hand, where the
lens could be better protected than locked safely inside a
housing? If you’re confused by any of this, please remember
that generally, if you’re not confused, you don’t
have all the facts. In this case, I think I’d opt for
the 105, since anywhere in the South Pacific where there are
soft coral and sea fans, there are nifty little critters lurking
in them there coral and fans—perfect for the 105! I
would shoot a test roll with the zoom to check for sharpness
and then give it the little extra TLC that it requires.
You have several choices for a wide-angle lens. The two
most commonly selected are the twenty-four and twenty millimeter
optics (that’s what us erudite folks call lenses). The
24mm in a housing will give about the same view as a twenty
on the Nikonos V. The twenty in a housing is about like a
fifteen Nikonos lens. The advantages in using the housed lens
are the ability to view and focus through the taking lens
for a higher probability of properly focused and perfectly
framed photos, and cost. Adding an eighty or so or ninety
or so degree lens to your Ikelite-housed N90 system will cost
about $500 and $1200 respectively less than adding these capabilities
to a Nikonos V system. You also now own the same lens for
your land photography. The advantages of the Nikonos system
are compactness and sharpness. The Nikonos optics are simply
the sharpest optics obtainable for underwater work. You’ll
notice the greatest differences in sharpness as you approach
the edges of your photograph; don’t get too close—they
call this phenomenon "falloff" for a reason! You’ll
probably prefer the twenty-four to the twenty for your Palau
trip as it’s generally a better shark lens. And in Palau,
the big dive is Blue Corner—for sharks. Most photographers
would probably prefer the twenty for most wide-angle if you’re
OK about an extra cost of 200 to 300 big ones. If the sharks
are in the mood to be approachable, or better yet, to approach
you, then the wide-angle lenses will do the job. If they’re
not sociable on the particular dives you make, you might consider
using your zoom lens to photograph them. The thirty-five end
of your zoom might be just about right a good deal of the
time. For a compromise between the twenty-four in the wide-angle
port and the thirty-five behind the flat port, you might try
the thirty-five behind the dome. You may need to add a close-up
lens to be able to obtain sharp images at all focal lengths
as you zoom behind the dome port. You’ll be able to
get the same subject to fit in the frame from a little closer
with the dome because it doesn’t magnify 25 percent
due to refraction as does the flat port. Of course, you have
to decide which lens to set up before you get in the water.
The good news is that you can ask around at the hotel or on
the dive boat as to how approachable the sharks have been
lately. Although they may do a 180 on your dive and behave
in a manner totally opposite to the latest trend, the odds
are that you’ll increase your chances of having the
best setup if you take a poll. The bad news is that the longer
focal length lens you set up in your housing, the closer the
sharks will come—Murphy’s Law # 1027. Conversely,
the shorter the lens, the more distance they’ll keep
between you—Murphy’s Law # 1027.1.
|
