Jump to content

Edward Lai

Member
  • Content Count

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Edward Lai last won the day on February 19 2020

Edward Lai had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About Edward Lai

  • Rank
    Wolf Eel
  • Birthday 02/04/1958

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Hong Kong

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Hong Kong
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Nikon D4, D800, D600, D7000, Canon 7D, 5DIII, 1DX
  • Camera Housing
    Nauticam
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Nikon SB-R200, Ikelite DS-200, Athena Ring flash, Inon Z-240, S&S YS-D1
  • Accessories
    L&M Photo light, Nauticam float arms, Nauticam arms

Recent Profile Visitors

7107 profile views
  1. A good article about the WACP-1: https://wetpixel.com/articles/review-nauticam-wide-angle-corrector-port
  2. Thank you Interceptor, We build the WACP-1 and WACP-2 for underwater photographers who demand superior image quality at larger apertures, such as f/5.6 or even f/4. While the WACP-2 in combination with the Nikon 14-30mm results with 140° AOF images with quite low distortion, and very good image quality across the frame, our main objective is not aiming for zero distortion. First of all, zero distortion doesn't exist at all for any lens in the wide angle range of 130° to 140°. For example, the Canon 11-24mm (max AOV 126°), the Nikon 12-24mm (max AOV 122°) and the Nikon 14-30mm (max AOV 114°) all have certain amount of barrel distortion at the wide end. Naturally, the WACP-2 as an afocal add-on lens mounted in front of a lens having barrel distortion, it will be not able to eliminate the inherent barrel distortion. Using any of these wide angle zoom lenses behind a dome port also doesn't help with barrel distortion. Until now we haven't seen anyone to be able to produce perfect zero distortion images using one of these wide angle lenses behind a dome port. Of course, the normal dome port theory applies here! People can't achieve relatively good sharp corners until closing down the apertures to around f/14, and a dome port could actually induce more barrel distortion to the system. Adding a corrective lens in front of the camera lens may further complicate the issue because it introduces another type of distortion to the system. There is now a 12mm (AOV 122°) lens in the market that claims to have zero distortion, at the price of heavily and unnaturally stretching the images at the corners. It is fine for shooting buildings, but any subject, in particular people, will look extremely unpleasant if placed near the corners. The result of using this lens behind a dome port is yet to be found out. Best regards, Edward
  3. Hi Interceptor, Thank you for pointing out the discrepancy here. Our colleague used a rough ratio of the difference of the angle of view between 114° and 140°, which is the amount of the increase of diagonal angle of view using the Nikon 14-30mm lens at 14mm with WACP-2, while rushing out the initial release. I agree that we should use the conventional way of calculation for the magnification ratio, as the market has been doing for a long time: Original angle of view and focal length of the lens: 114° at 14mm Resultant angle of view by using the WACP-2: 140° which is equivalent to the AOV of a full frame 8mm rectilinear wide angle lenses. Hence the magnification ratio should be: 8mm/14mm = 0.57X By the way, we have the privilege of inviting Dr. Alex Mustard to experience the WACP-2 during his workshop in the Cayman Islands in January, you may find some very nice pictures and his initial opinion here: https://www.facebook.com/amustard/media_set?set=a.10163542674385713&type=3 Best regards, Edward
  4. I know that my partners in the US had responded to Joe in early January. But I do want to repeat here. (I didn't notice this post until now because I was at a diving trip then) Both the MWL-1 and SMC-1 were designed for using underwater. You will see vignette when there is no water: 1) between the rear end of the lens and the port glass; and 2) water in front of the lens. Edward
  5. I would suggest for anyone who is interested of, or not sure of the rationale behind, the WACP to read the review by the Honorable Dr. Alex Mustard here: http://www.wetpixel.com/articles/review-nauticam-wide-angle-corrector-port Alex has been so supportive in contributing his time and effort, at his own cost, in field testing 2 different versions of the WACP at various sites during the development of the lens. It was only possible from his personal hands-on experience, and with his extensive knowledge and constant pursue of ultimate image quality, that he can help return his valuable feedback to me for making improvement before the final launch of the product. I would not have been involved in optical design without the inspiration and encouragement from Alex. It has been a most enjoyable journey for myself ! Edward
  6. Hello, The 28mm + WWL-1 has been my only option for wide angle when shooting with a Sony A7 or A9 camera, and I never find I want something else! Here is a link to a gallery of pictures taken in January: https://nauticam.smugmug.com/HousingTests/NA-A7Riii
  7. Hi KL, We revised the internal design in the beginning of 2016. Edward
  8. Hi Dustin, We have revised the design of the Flip Holder some time ago (sorry that I forgot the exact time!) and I believe this problem have been fully resolved as I also dive a lot and I don't experience this problem anymore. I would like to send over 2 of the new ones to you to help testing the new design in the field. Please let me know the best way to get them over to you. Best regards, Edward
  9. Hi Johnqdiver, I am interested. I will be in London mid of June so if you don't mind the delay I can pay you the cash then. Edward
  10. Hello Herve, You really have nothing to worry about the file quality of the Sony RX100iv. If you download photos from our Smugmug site you can look at the Exif data and find the ISO setting of the photos. For example the Whale Shark photo (1st one in this thread) was shot at ISO640, and some other wide angle photos were shot at ISO320. My personal feeling is the files from the RX100iv is even cleaner than the EM5 Mk I. I can usually use 1 battery for 2 dives. Edward
  11. Hi Interceptor, I used the PZ Panasonic 14-42 with a flat port shortened to 29mm. The macro 35 port will fit very well with the new Panasonic 14-42 mark II, and our zoom gear will be shipping soon. I look forward to sending you our lens in less than 2 weeks so that you can experience various aspect of this lens personally (sharpness, contrast, close focus and lack of CA/distortion etc.). Zooming through the lens is no problem. Would it be fine to send the lens to Alex T and let him arrange local delivery? Edward
  12. We received some inquiry recently about whether there is a possible solution for using a wet wide lens with the Panasonic and/or Olympus 14-42mm lenses, and I would like to share some photos I shot with a prototype wet wide lens during a test we carried out in May this year. When working with the 14mm end of the lens the FOV was 120° then and we were able to increase it to 130° now. The entire gallery is here: https://nauticam.smugmug.com/HousingTests/NA-EM5II/
  13. Hi Interceptor, that's good idea. I will arrange a loan lens to you. The first production ones will be available about 2 weeks later.
  14. Thanks everyone for the encouragement and constructive comments! I must say that it means a lot to me for what Alex said about the lens and the photos, from someone who owns so many W/A lenses and has such broad knowledge about photography and optics, and has been judge for so many renowned worldwide competitions. Not to mention having shot and shared so many stunning photos himself. Alex surely gave me much inspiration during our brief meeting in Milan in 2013 discussing future of underwater optics. After several years of full commitment in underwater lens design I can say that no single one lens is perfect, whether it is Zeiss or Samyang, for land or for underwater. So, this Wet Wide Lens is never meant to be perfect. A good lens design is always a good compromise between cost, size, glasses chosen, complexity and ease of production and quality assurance. I hope I have found a fine and reasonable balance this time. For some of the questions: - when used with the RX-100 IV, I had to zoom the camera lens to around 25-26mm equivalent. - Haven't compared image quality with the Inon lens. I hope someone can do that and tell us what he/she thinks. - Haven't tried the white balance capability of the camera. All my w/a photos were shot with Magic Filter at sunlight wb and color corrected in post. - We already tested most versions of Panasonic/Olympus 14-42mm lenses and they all worked with the appropriate ports at all focal lengths. Greetings from Hong Kong. Edward
  15. Many thanks Alex, it actually looks even better on my display with the original file. Developing wide lenses is so hard! This is my fifth design/prototype until I think it is good enough for production, and each round takes 3-4 months.
×
×
  • Create New...