freedivenz

Thanks. I've been tossing up whether to get it for topside WA when hiking, so I guess I was hoping for another reason to convince myself I may still, in which case I'll see how it does behind the 3.5 and report back

The lens specs seem pretty compelling for a super-compact wide-angle setup. The close minimum focus distance, short overall length, and moderately wide AoV seems to suggest to me that it could be well suited to a very small dome - like the Nauticam 3.5 or 4.33. It seems like that could work well for diving where size is at a premium (either for drag or weight allowance), but rectilinear is preferred over a compact fisheye setup. Surely someone has had a nudge with one, or could tell me why it wouldn't work (or would)?

Probably not a good solution for my freediving rig then :'(

I'm not quite sure how products like Saltaway may affect coatings, but I would be pretty surprised if soaking in a Saltaway solution would do any harm - I'm open to correction though! Whether it helps depends if it's stuck together from corrosion or salt crystals. If it's the former, I don't know there's much you can do except lubricate as much as you can, then take Davide's advice and have at it with an oil filter wrench or strop. Probably offer some prayers to your preferred deity first.

This is where colloquial names and brand naming differences are a problem. Here, LV is referring to the camera applying your shooting settings to the EVF or LCD view, as opposed to S-OVF, which tries to replicate the experience of an OVF (kind of), and does not apply your shooting settings to the view.

If using S-OVF was a disqualifying feature, nobody would be able to use a DSLR for UW WA. I have it and only shoot WA. I might not be the best photographer, but somehow I still manage. Compared with my E-M5 II, the ability to shoot in bright conditions and focus in the dark are life-changing.

I have moved from the 140mm to the 4.33 for the small win in weight and size, so if you want that it's surplus to me now. Just the minor issue of shipping from New Zealand

Nauticam came back to me to say the 4.33 dome uses the same extension (as you said above), and that the EOS-M port is not compatible.

Anyone feeling brave? I've asked Nauticam, but I think the answer will be that it isn't officially supported

I see in another thread you're now advocating a bit for the 4.33in acrylic dome. This interests me a lot - especially if you got a suggested extension from Nauticam. The size is one thing, but the weight is another entirely. After all, if you want a neutral(ish) rig, weight == size anyway. Of course what I'd really like is if the n85 EOS-M dedicated port for the 8-15 also worked for m43, but I fear that is too much to hope for

Has anyone had a go with the Nauticam 4.33in n120 port, with either the Canon (which I have with the 140), or the Tokina? By the look of the charts, it should need 10mm less extension than the 140, but I don't know how accurate that is. I also don't know how much the smaller dome will affect IQ, though I'm assuming it would be similar to the Zen 100, but potentially with more reflection issues due to acrylic vs glass. As much as I like the 140, anything to make my rig smaller and lighter helps - I do >95% of my photography on breath-hold, so less drag = better. Getting it closer to neutral without bulky arms and the like is significant too.

Heya, I'm a freediver, spearo and photographer based in New Zealand. I've been reading the forums for years, mostly for tips and techniques, and for gear that allows me to get reasonable photo quality when freediving - anything to make my rig lower drag in the water! Of course with that comes either reduced light gathering capability, or compromised image quality. No free lunches I'm using m4/3 gear for that reason, and do a mix of strobe work with s2000s for the size, and natural light pics. Cheers!