Emailed Aquatica have not heard anything. Anyone know if they are going to make an extension ring for this lens? Could you get away with the extension ring and zoom gear for the 17-35mm lens?

If you have a camera shop there, like we do here then take it in and see if they have another zoon gear that will work, many times you can use one that was designed for another.

I have it - I am actually testing it out for Blake I think I was the first that asked about it he made the zoom gear custom. When you talk to him tell him Steve in Florida's zoom gear works perfectly. The extention I have I think is for the 105 I have two together I think the 105 and a smaller one anbut he knows, and appears to fit just fine. I am trying to set up some kind of grid in my pool to test it on Sunday. I will keep you posted.

Photobeat, so I am understanding you: it looks like we will need a custom zoom gear but the 105 extension ring might work?

Look forward to seeing your results in the pool!

Good luck. Can't wait to see your test. Anyone looking for a lightly use 17-35mm nikon lens????

Ok here it is - Took all kinds of pics in my pool- over and unders you name it . The most important to me was chromatic abberation at 17mm. 2.8. I am happy with all results. And even more happy that I have the 10.5 lens it will complemet the 17-55 nicely.

Specifics - I measured installed on the camera body. I have a 2 and 1/4" extender, then a 1"extender then the dome. This puts the lens just past the dome plane fully extended.

The zoom is on the right corner nothing was done the pics no sharpening no RAW adjustments - all auto. See the Tide subject pics below Hope this helps

This gives a better subject view. Crop looks good at 200% Who needs a freakin D200 when you have a good lens Don't try to zoom on any of these low res jpgs. I can email you the RAW's if you want them .

First pic is 1/350 at 2.8 17mm. 200% on the crop. I used auto levels on the 1st pic which brightened it a bit - no other edits. Keep in mind this is wide open 17mm and 2.8, although not a real U.W test this is the worst it will perform, more depth of field wil give even better results in a real U.W situation. I sent Blake an email with a link to this post as he and Aquatica are always so helpful and was nice enough to send me the zoom and extender to test.

I just have to say this -

at the time of this post there is like 170 views for this little test for like a minute number of people using Aquatica and this lens combo. We are too gear oriented.... look at some show cases and pics for people for God' sake. My manatee thing about their eroding habitat has like 130 views, Seagrants scar pics even less and this stupid thing is at 170 GO look at some pics God@#$% it

I'm happy your happy with the rig and the 17-55mm, just got back 15 minutes ago from Morrocoy's nat'l park in Venezuela, logged three dive, busted my toe on a stair (hairline fracture) end of diving! just enough time u/w to apreciate the 10-20mm from Sigma, but definetly looking for the 17-55mm for a fish lens.

P.S. ended up doing a trip to the jungle and Angel falls in Amazonia, big bugs but what a scenery oumph!!!, the rivers are like milk chocolate subzero viz so no diving possible in these neck of the wood.

Thanks for the work Photobeat. So I guess I will be emailing Blake about a gear for this lens. Did you end up using the 105 extention ring with the 8" dome"?

No problem - was a little cold in the pool though

I quoted myself from above. Give Blake the measuremens for part numbers to order.

Use 17-35 Aquatica's port extension for the 17-55, order 17-35 zoom gear and remove material on the inside of the gear (a 2h job) to fit slightly larger zoom ring of the 17-35.