Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Nauticam WWL-1 on different setups

WWL-1 Olympus E-M1 Mk II Sony A6400

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#21 horvendile

horvendile

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 47 posts

Posted 02 July 2019 - 05:09 AM

I just found the neighbor thread on dome choices for the 8-18. Will read it before posting more questions which may have been answered there.



#22 ChrisRoss

ChrisRoss

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney Australia

Posted 02 July 2019 - 05:39 AM

I think you'll find soft corners at 8mm going away by 9 or 10mm as the task of bringing that very close edge of the image into focus gets easier.

 

I will say though I have a 12-40, 7-14 and a fisheye (8mm) and rarely if ever use the 7-14 UW.  It does depend though on what you want to shoot.  The 8-18 is the m43 equivalent of the 16-35 which seems to be the tool of choice for sharks and more skittish large animals on SLRs.  The grey nurse sharks we get round Sydney,  I use my 12-40 on and it seems to do the trick nicely, though plenty of people seem to use fisheyes for them as well.  I forget now, what is your proposed subject for this new rig??



#23 horvendile

horvendile

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 47 posts

Posted 03 July 2019 - 03:53 AM

  I forget now, what is your proposed subject for this new rig??

 

 

I’ll try to not make it into a novel.

 

I now shoot with an LX100 in an Ikelite housing, with a detachable dome-like wetlens (restoring topside FOV and improving corners) and some kind of diopter for macro. Can swap underwater, sometimes do. Also two DS-51 strobes. All in all I think it’s a decent setup considering its relatively low cost, and it’s also fairly transportable.

 

The things I would most like to improve include

* Pixel count. I’m often pixel limited, especially when I have to crop, which is often. (That may be a liveware problem, but it’s still a problem I have.)

* Sensor performance. I frequently find both base ISO dynamic range and higher ISO noise limiting factors.

* The ability to go wider than 24 mm (equiv), and I would also like better macro.

 

(“Better” macro isn’t necessarily more magnification; it could also be the ability to focus on longer distances than super close with the diopter lens. And frankly, the image quality with the diopter is not good.)

 

I’ve been spoiled with the possibility to be able to select type of photography during the dive. That’s why I keep looking for setups that allow me to do that.

 

I’m still beginner enough that I can’t point to a specific kind of shooting I want to optimize a new rig for. I still want to be able to do most things, even if I accept that I have to choose what I want to do before entering the water. If I had to choose between wide-angle or macro to begin with, I’d go with wide angle. But I would also want to add macro later. Nowadays all my photography is done in tropical waters but hopefully that will change, and diving in dark, murky Swedish waters complicates things.

 

I’m primarily a stills shooter. I may take the odd video clip but that’s just a bonus. I post process everything in Lightroom.

 

I don’t know, was than an answer or was it just rambling?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: WWL-1, Olympus, E-M1 Mk II, Sony, A6400