Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Panasonic 12mm 1.4 Summilux with Nauticam 180 and/or 140 Dome


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 bubffm

bubffm

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:57 AM

I am planing to pretty much retire my Panasonic 7-14 with my GH5 system for underwater use. Its just not fast enough if the conditions are less than perfect.

 

As a replacement, I plan to use the Panasonic 12mm 1.4 Lens, either with the 180 Nauticam Optical Dome (with 85 to 120 Step-Up Knob Adapter) or alternatively with the 140mm Optical Dome for M85.  

 

With the 180 Dome, the lens seems to stick slightly out, but a 20mm Extension ring on the other hand looks too long. On the 140 Dome, not sure whether its the 17mm or the 20mm extension ring. 

 

Any advise would be much appreciated.

 

Burkhard

 

 



#2 thetrickster

thetrickster

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 768 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 September 2017 - 11:06 PM

I want the 12mm f1.4 so bad... what a lens!!

 

Do you know by how much it sticks out from the domes base?


Regards, Richard

---

www.RichardWait.com


#3 bubffm

bubffm

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 09 September 2017 - 03:51 AM

Hi Richard. I got really frustrated with the Panasonic 7-14 in those nasty conditions we had during our Fiji trip.  Had to pull up ISO badly to see anything!  Ya the 12mm f.1.4 really is a low light stunner.

 

On the 180 it sticks out about 5-6mm I'd say, not sure the photo is of any help.  On the 140 cant check yet as I havent got it at hand, but I think with either the 17 or 20 mm extension ring I should get there. But the 180 would be my preferred option anyway.

 

I asked Jussi from deepshots wether he can do me a focus gear for the 180 with the focus knob extension. Not so easy as the lens is quite fat. As I said before, Nauticam's N85 system reaches its limits on far too many lenses these days...

 

 

Attached Images

  • IMG_3511.JPG


#4 Phil Rudin

Phil Rudin

    Orca

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1250 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA

Posted 09 September 2017 - 11:04 AM

I use the Olympus 12mm F/2 underwater for models and other work also a stellar low light lens with excellent image quality. I have used the lens with the following dome ports, Zen Underwater 100mm, Zen Underwater 170mm, Zen Underwater 200mm, Nauticam 180mm and Nauticam 140mm Fisheye.

 

For split images the bigger the better (ZEN 170mm for the attached split image) but you can get away with the 140mm if you have fairly calm water. I really like the Nauticam 140mm because the lens focuses all the way to the port glass. With the Olympus 12mm F/2 a 20mm extension is required. I can also use the Olympus 8mm F/1.8 Fisheye with the N140 and a 17mm extension. Since the Panasonic lens is 70mm in length V. 43mm for the Olympus I would expect you to need a longer extension with the Panasonic lens.

 

The B&W photo is with the Nauticam 140mm and 20mm extension.

 

I love the small and light combo of the Olympus 12mm and N140 port.

 

  

Attached Images

  • untitled-3230461.jpg
  • untitled-4180276.jpg
  • untitled-2.jpg


#5 bubffm

bubffm

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:36 AM

Thanks Phil, nice pics.

So if i get the math right, given the Summilux is 27mm longer than the Olympus, I would be looking for a total of 47mm extension ring for the 140 dome, ie. a the 30mm plus a 17mm extension. Correct?

#6 Phil Rudin

Phil Rudin

    Orca

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1250 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA

Posted 10 September 2017 - 07:57 AM

It is never an exact science, even though both lenses have a minimum focus distance of 20mm according to the specs that does not mean they both have the same nodal point. Should be a good starting point.

#7 Xanderwater

Xanderwater

    Moray Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 September 2017 - 10:58 PM

Does anyone have experience with the Panasonic 12mm 1.4?

I already have a Zen 170mm N85 dome, would this dome option fit?


flickr.com/xanderwater

#8 Pajjpen

Pajjpen

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 25 September 2017 - 11:27 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong but does it really matter how fast of a lens u have, since you're almost always gonna be using at at least f6-8 to get everything in focus?
I mean a 1.4 lens used at f8 has the same low light capabilities as 4.0 lens used at f8, right?

#9 bubffm

bubffm

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 26 September 2017 - 01:36 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong but does it really matter how fast of a lens u have, since you're almost always gonna be using at at least f6-8 to get everything in focus?
I mean a 1.4 lens used at f8 has the same low light capabilities as 4.0 lens used at f8, right?


I guess that's correct if you say the lens is too soft at 1.4 in the corners. I cant confirm that from my use of it above water. Its actually pretty sharp. I would assume it would behave similar underwater but havent been able to try it out yet.

#10 Pajjpen

Pajjpen

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 140 posts

Posted 26 September 2017 - 06:22 PM

I guess that's correct if you say the lens is too soft at 1.4 in the corners. I cant confirm that from my use of it above water. Its actually pretty sharp. I would assume it would behave similar underwater but havent been able to try it out yet.

I just assumed this was for video as he's talking about the gh5, and I've never heard of anyone shooting wide open like that for wide angle at least. But if it is indeed sharp and u manage to get everything in focus (doubt it) then obviously it would be very beneficial and it would really be a superb lens. I'd love some updates on this btw!

Skickat från min VTR-L29 via Tapatalk

#11 bubffm

bubffm

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 26 September 2017 - 11:30 PM

yes, its for video and played with the lens for video on the GH5 overland. Lovely lens.  I'll update this when I had the chance playing with it underwater.



#12 adamhanlon

adamhanlon

    Harbor Seal

  • Admin
  • 2115 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lancaster, UK

Posted 27 September 2017 - 12:02 AM

Whilst not really relevant for video, dome port optics will create problems when almost all lenses are shot wide open.

 

A lens' sharpness on land has little relevance to its performance behind a dome port! Many very sharp land lenses perform badly..

 

Adam


Adam Hanlon-underwater photographer and videographer
Editor-wetpixel
web | Flickr | twitter | Linkedin | Facebook


#13 bubffm

bubffm

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 27 September 2017 - 04:20 AM

Fair comment, thats why I will really only know once I tried it out. Will report back. If it doenst work, no big loss as I have good use for it above the water column.

#14 ChrisRoss

ChrisRoss

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 22 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney Australia

Posted 16 October 2017 - 05:20 PM

My understanding is the lens needs to stop down as the virtual image it focuses on is very close to the dome and is curved, stopping down pulls the edges into focus.  Whether that is important depends on whether you need sharp corners or not. 

 

So this would indicate that a larger dome port will be better as the curvature of the virtual image relates to the curvature of the dome and more likely to be able to produce a sharp image all the way across the field.