40 replies to this topic

[johnspierce]

Backscatter had "1" caddy in stock, so I bought it -- they can order more.

Edited by johnspierce, 28 September 2012 - 08:15 AM.

[KirkD]

Backscatter had "1" caddy in stock, so I bought it -- they can order more.

They must no have it listed on their website yet as I could not find it. On Aquatica's price list, has it listed as $65.
Kirk

[Stewart L. Sy]

Thanks Stu for the pics. Very helpful. I assume it can hold both diopters, one above (like shown in the picture) and one on the underside?
Kirk

Hi Kirk

Yes, the top mount is a quick disconnect like the holder, the bottom is a 67mm threaded mount...that the Aquatica diopters also have. A bit more secure that way.

S.

[johnspierce]

Just one more little FYI; if you use the Aquatica diopter with the older Nikon AF 60mm lens, 1.4 Kenko Teleconverter, Aquatica AF/MF macro port 14826 and the 18453 extension, you will get some *slight* vignetting. Not a big deal, but it's there nonetheless.

I guess the 60mm with the Tele is just a touch shorter than the 105mm VR which uses the same extension. You would probably get the same vignetting with the Subsee I suspect. BUT the 60mm with the tele/diopter combo focuses faster and more accurately than the 105mm which can be quite helpful. Use a good focus light and it's not an issue with either lens.

Edited by johnspierce, 28 September 2012 - 10:23 AM.

[Stewart L. Sy]

Not a vignette, but almost a lensbaby like effect. If you're not using the correct extension for the lens then the focal point of the diopter will not line up with the lens. I found this out shooting the Sigma 150 macro f2.8 with the +10. The extension was too long and pushed the focal point of the diopter too far. Kinda like moving a magnifying glass back and forth to start a fire...

[johnspierce]

I agree with what you are saying Stewart, but the 18453 extension is the only one that comes close enough for the 60mm/1.4TC combo - there is no perfect fit in Aquatica's lineup. It's not even listed on the lens chart, so I just "make do" with it. The vignetting is pretty minor, but well, there it is... As I said, with the 105mm I don't have this issue, but it hunts for focus a lot more than the 60mm/TC combo does so most of the time I prefer the 60mm. If Aquatica would just come out with 900 different extensions for every possible lens this would be no problem

I've actually wondered if the 18463 extension might work with my 60mm/TC combo, you wouldn't know would you Stewart?

Edited by johnspierce, 28 September 2012 - 11:08 AM.

[KirkD]

Just one more little FYI; if you use the Aquatica diopter with the older Nikon AF 60mm lens, 1.4 Kenko Teleconverter, Aquatica AF/MF macro port 14826 and the 18453 extension, you will get some *slight* vignetting. Not a big deal, but it's there nonetheless.

I guess the 60mm with the Tele is just a touch shorter than the 105mm VR which uses the same extension. You would probably get the same vignetting with the Subsee I suspect. BUT the 60mm with the tele/diopter combo focuses faster and more accurately than the 105mm which can be quite helpful. Use a good focus light and it's not an issue with either lens.

Thanks for the Tip.I'm thinking about adding the older Nikon 60mm AF lens with the 1/4 tele to my arsenal.
Kirk

[KirkD]

I agree with what you are saying Stewart, but the 18453 extension is the only one that comes close enough for the 60mm/1.4TC combo - there is no perfect fit in Aquatica's lineup. It's not even listed on the lens chart, so I just "make do" with it. The vignetting is pretty minor, but well, there it is... As I said, with the 105mm I don't have this issue, but it hunts for focus a lot more than the 60mm/TC combo does so most of the time I prefer the 60mm. If Aquatica would just come out with 900 different extensions for every possible lens this would be no problem

Would the 18463 extension work or would it me to short? The 18453 in 28.5mm/1.12" and the 18463 in 21.5mm/0.82".
Kirk

[johnspierce]

Would the 18463 extension work or would it me to short? The 18453 in 28.5mm/1.12" and the 18463 in 21.5mm/0.82".
Kirk

When I get home I'm going to measure the lens/port/extension and see if the 18463 might work -- that would be nice; I personally love the 60mm/TC combo; even though you give up 15mm in focal length it is so much more responsive it's much easier to shoot with a diopter, particularly the +10.

[johnspierce]

Now that I've thought about it, I think the vignetting might not be curable with a 60mm/TC combo because the older Nikon AF 60mm lens is not a constant length. It can "grow" from a minimum of 2.943" to 3.908" depending on distance from subject. At it's maximum length with the TC attached it's actually a touch longer than the 105mm.

[KirkD]

Now that I've thought about it, I think the vignetting might not be curable with a 60mm/TC combo because the older Nikon AF 60mm lens is not a constant length. It can "grow" from a minimum of 2.943" to 3.908" depending on distance from subject. At it's maximum length with the TC attached it's actually a touch longer than the 105mm.

I guess I did not know that it "grows". The AF-S version does not, but it does not work with a teleconvertor ... or not well. I've tried and it can't lock focus. It sounds as if it is turning back and forth a short distance. Don;t know if that is harmful or not.
Kirk

[TomR1]

The way it works is simple. The longer the lens the more magnification and the greater the diopter power the closer you can get resulting in increased magnification but shorter DOF and harder to focus.

Generally speaking I find it difficult to find the subject using the Af-105-VR and the +10 Subsee but when i do I get a clean shot (see attached). The closeup is a crop of the first. To get an idea of the magnification the green is a strand of Halimeda grass. This is about a 2:1 super macro shot.

The +5, however is much easier to focus and much easier to find the subject. You will have greater working distance and less magnification but still have a super-macro shot.

This argues FOR the swingarm setup as opposed to the screw adapter. I have used both. My process:

In clear I hunt with the camera set to f/11 or 13 and the shutter to 1/160. This allows me to quickly snap a very nice fish portrate with a 105 or 150 lens.

If I come across a 1:1 opportunity I move in to minimum focus distance and take the shot without a focusing light, moving the F/stop to 22 or greater and the shutter to 1/200 or greater.

If the critter is still around and the rest of the group not that far off, I swing the +5 in and take the shot increasing the F/stop. (This is where the shots attached were taken)

If I still have time and my buddy is around I swing the +10 into place, have my buddy illuminate the subject with a small flashlight and increase the f/stop to 32 and the shutter to 1/250.

If I still have time I try some lighting mods but I often back out and use the +5 or nothing to get more working distance.

I have found that maximum magnification is NOT necessarly the best shot and i am not good enough to visualize what shot will turn out best. Sometimes a crop from a greater distance turns out better because of the lighting. That is why i prefer the quick change capabilities of the swingarm dispite the weight.

Regards,

Tom

Attached Images

• 
• 

[scubamarli]

I have used the Subsee with my Aquatica system for a few years. What I like is the ability to fold the lens out of the way during a dive. It tucks nicely beside my strobe arm so it doesn't flop about. That way I can switch back and forth between using it and not. I had difficulty with the 10x, so went for the 5x. Now that I am comfortable with it, I have opted to add the 10x.

Cheers,
Marli

[Phil Rudin]

The current issue of UWPMAG.com (a free PDF download) has a review of the SEGA 67mm flip adapter. The cover shot was taken with the flip adapter and the Subsee +10 closeup lens.

Phil Rudin

[operam]

I agree with what you are saying Stewart, but the 18453 extension is the only one that comes close enough for the 60mm/1.4TC combo - there is no perfect fit in Aquatica's lineup. It's not even listed on the lens chart, so I just "make do" with it. The vignetting is pretty minor, but well, there it is... As I said, with the 105mm I don't have this issue, but it hunts for focus a lot more than the 60mm/TC combo does so most of the time I prefer the 60mm. If Aquatica would just come out with 900 different extensions for every possible lens this would be no problem

I've actually wondered if the 18463 extension might work with my 60mm/TC combo, you wouldn't know would you Stewart?

When I use the Nikon 60mm AF-D and the 1.4TC, I use the 18456 extension ring. This is after checking with Jean. No vignetting issues that I can tell.

Edited by operam, 30 September 2012 - 07:05 PM.

[SlipperyDick]

Since one of Aquatica's salesmen is on here backing them up, I think it's only fair that I chime in on this topic as well (designer/manufacturer of the SubSee lenses).

IQ wise, there would be no difference really with the Subsee or Aquatica diopters.

I understand your motivation to downplay competing products, but this statement is not true. The SubSee +10 is a 4-element achromatic lens system, while the Aquatica +10 is a 2-element achromat. By using 2 more lens elements, we are able to use less steeply curved surfaces, resulting in lower levels of edge distortion than most regular doublets can achieve alone (excluding aspherics, which are prohibitively expensive). Since we opted for the highest image quality possible, the +10 SubSee was indeed forced to be larger than previous versions of the SubSee and Aquatica's new lens.

I have both the Aquatica and the Subsee diopters.

I'd be interested to see some test shots against a grid with both SubSee and Aquatica lenses. If you feel like sharing your results, I'm sure the community would find that beneficial.

Keri
--
Keri Wilk | ReefNet Inc. | www.reefnet.ca | 888-819-REEF or 905-608-9373

[KirkD]

Hey Keri,
What is the weight of the +5 & +10 diopters? I'm looking to add either Aquatica or Subsee. I like Subsee's mounting option better as I would prefer to have the ability to flip down the individual lens instead of popping lenses on and off like the Aquatica design. My only concern with the Subsee mount would be tge screws.Are the still metal? Or do you offer a nylon screw option? Does mounting both the +5 & +10 diopters on the dual flip mount make the front of the camera nose heavy? I do you the Stix float belt around the macro port.

Thanks

Kirk

[KirkD]

Just one more little FYI; if you use the Aquatica diopter with the older Nikon AF 60mm lens, 1.4 Kenko Teleconverter, Aquatica AF/MF macro port 14826 and the 18453 extension, you will get some *slight* vignetting. Not a big deal, but it's there nonetheless.

I guess the 60mm with the Tele is just a touch shorter than the 105mm VR which uses the same extension. You would probably get the same vignetting with the Subsee I suspect. BUT the 60mm with the tele/diopter combo focuses faster and more accurately than the 105mm which can be quite helpful. Use a good focus light and it's not an issue with either lens.

I spoke with Jean and he says to use the 18456 extension. You may already have it as that is the extension for the Tokina 10-17.

[johnspierce]

I spoke with Jean and he says to use the 18456 extension. You may already have it as that is the extension for the Tokina 10-17.

Thanks for the info -- I have been using the 60+1.4TC with the 18453 simply because that's what my 105 uses; I do indeed have the 18456 and will try it.

thanks,
John

[SlipperyDick]

KirkD - The +10 SubSee is 200g in water and the +5 SubSee is 140g in water. On land, they are 345g and 240g, respectively.

The new SubSee adapters do not use a set screw design like in the past (or like the Aquatica mounts). Instead, we use a circumferential o-ring clamp system, which applies an even pressure around the entire port, holding it in place much tighter than ever before.

In the worst case, when using a dual-hinge adapter with both the +5 and +10 lenses installed, it will add approximately 0.75lb to the rig. I don't often hear people complain about this, but you could certainly add a float belt around the port to compensate.

Keri
--
Keri Wilk | ReefNet Inc. | www.reefnet.ca | 888-819-REEF or 905-608-9373