Hello I finally housed my nikon F4s in an Aquatica housing and want some advice about the lenses Sigma 17-35mm f2.8-4.0 and nikon 20.35 f2.8. Is there a big difference in quality between the 2 lenses, because I am shooting fotofilm I think the 3mm diffrence isn't a big deal? but the 2.8-4.0 versus 2.8 is ? What about sharpnes difference between the two?
Thanks
Rob

I have the Sigma 17-35 for Canon but I asume the one with the Nikon Mount is very similar.

The Lens is very good but also very thick (82mm). this can be a problem when housing it. So first check

1) If there is a fitting Port and a Zoom Gear for your housing
2) If you can find a fitting Diopter (which you'll probably need) for a reasonable price

Simon

The Aquatica ports are broad enough, but not sure about gearing.
You should consider the 18-35 Nikkor also Fantastic Lens, I have the Sigma 17-35 and that's quite a sharp lens, but adding filters/dioptres is Very expensive due to the 82mm diameter. Edge definition is good on both too. Out of the three I'd pick the Nikkor 18-35mm.

Hello Simon,
First thank you very much for your uick reply.
Yes there is a port at aquatica and it wouldn't need a diopter.
what are your experiences with your regarding edge sharpness at f 2.5-8 and what canon camera do you use for the lens?
Rob

Hello Cybergoldfish,
Thanks for your reply.
The thing is I sure would like the nikon 17-35 mm but that lens is way over my budget so I have to choose between the nikon 20-35 or the sigma 17-35.
What are your experiences with edge sharpness at f2.5-5, do you think I would miss the extr 3mm?
Rob

Those extra 3mm are 'Useful', but you will require a dioptre. edge sharpness is very good on them all. There are plenty of used 18-35's around, but I got a great deal on a spanking new one off ebay last year.

I only used it on a D60, so with crop factor, there the Edg shapness was very good. for the results on Film better ask Bob.

Simon

Hi thank you all very much, I decided to go for the nikon 20-35 mm

Rob