Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Canon 14mm /w Nauticam 8.5" Dome


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 betti154

betti154

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 349 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 17 February 2019 - 02:18 PM

Hi guys, 

 

Just wondering if anyone has the Canon 14mm with Nauticam 8.5" dome and getting good results on full frame?

 

It's not on the port chart, I've guessed 30mm extension but getting serious edge blur. I have 20, 30 and 50mm port extensions in my bag at present. 

 

I don't want to run a bigger dome for various reasons, so just wondering if this lens/port combination is viable with a different extension. Diopter probably not possible as there's an integrated shade petal on the 14mm. If not, the 1.7x crop on 4K video makes this a rather nice video lens.

 

Thanks, Damien

 

 


Damien Siviero
Canon 5Dmkiv, Nauticam
http://damiensiviero.com


#2 ChrisRoss

ChrisRoss

    Manta Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 422 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney Australia

Posted 17 February 2019 - 04:18 PM

If the lens isn't on the chart go to other system port charts see what extension they recommend and then see if another lens uses the same extension and cross reference back to the Nauticam port chart. 

 

The Canon 14mm type II is listed as using the the same extensions as the EF-S 10-18mm on the Aquatica Canon typeII charts on the same dome.    Nauitcam charts recommend the 50mm extension with the 8.5" dome.  http://www.bluewater...anon_type_2.pdf

 

The min focus distance on the 14mm type II is 20cm, which is plenty short enough and should just about focus on the dome, so a diopter is no use.  The only reason to use a diopter is if the lens won't focus close enough.  On the subject of dome size, 14mm is very wide - on full frame so an 8.5" dome may be marginal.  On 1.7x it's the equivalent of about 24mm so dome size should be OK, you may need to stop down quite a bit to get the corners to come in??  There are some lenses that just don't work well in domes for various reasons, the Canon may be one.?? 

 

I'd suggest trying it out with the 50mm and seeing what happens.



#3 betti154

betti154

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 349 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 17 February 2019 - 04:31 PM

Thanks Chris, I"ll give 50mm a go since nothing to lose. 


Damien Siviero
Canon 5Dmkiv, Nauticam
http://damiensiviero.com


#4 errbrr

errbrr

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 24 February 2019 - 06:55 PM

Hi,

 

I am using this with the 30mm as recommended by Peter. I think the blur is slightly worse than my previous combo of the 5D2 + Canon 14mm, Aquatica housing, Aquatica 8" port and 39.5mm extension, but I have been happy enough with the results. The FOV is noticeably better than the 16-35.

 

Would prefer to go WACP but can't justify the cost in aussie dollars.

 

Cheers,

 

Liz



#5 betti154

betti154

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 349 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 03 March 2019 - 05:51 PM

Hi Liz, 

 

Yeah I agree, WACP looks great but quite steep. Probably not that bad if you don't have any lenses, but hard to justify with a bag full of existing glass. 

 

Given my track record it wouldn't take long until a wreck connected with WACP dome too :( Not sure if it's easily replace but would doubt the glass would be cheap. 

 

Regards, ds

 

Hi,

 

I am using this with the 30mm as recommended by Peter. I think the blur is slightly worse than my previous combo of the 5D2 + Canon 14mm, Aquatica housing, Aquatica 8" port and 39.5mm extension, but I have been happy enough with the results. The FOV is noticeably better than the 16-35.

 

Would prefer to go WACP but can't justify the cost in aussie dollars.

 

Cheers,

 

Liz


Damien Siviero
Canon 5Dmkiv, Nauticam
http://damiensiviero.com