Jump to content

Phil Rudin

Industry
  • Content Count

    1382
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

Phil Rudin last won the day on December 20 2020

Phil Rudin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

132 Excellent

1 Follower

About Phil Rudin

  • Rank
    Orca
  • Birthday December 31

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0
  • Yahoo
    Phil Rudin

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    LAKE PARK, FLORIDA

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United States
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Sony A7R IV
  • Camera Housing
    Nauticam NA-A7RIV
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Inon Z330 X 2, Athena ring flash
  • Accessories
    Nauticam float arms
  • Industry Affiliation
    Media, Instruction

Recent Profile Visitors

61365 profile views
  1. The Zen 230mm fisheye port is lighter by about 0.47kg (1lb), the shade blades are much easer to remove for use with a circular fisheye at the 8mm end and the cost is lower at $1899.00 US. ZEN ports have a cool logo. The Nauticam 230mm fisheye dome port II, comes with an elegant zipper carry bag which explains at least part of the additional cost. The dome shade is a more conventional petal-type port hood (four petals rather than two) at a cost of around $2240.00 US. Both ports have excellent optical coating and you will not be able to see any difference in image quality between the two. Regarding the S&S 77mm Internal Correction Lens I have used the lens with the Sony FE 16-35mm F/4, Zeiss Batis 18mm F/2.8, Tamron 17-28mm F/2.8, Nikon Z 14-30mm F/4.5 and others. I have also used the S&S lens behind ports from the Ikelite eight inch compact port, 170, 180 and 230mm. The bottom line is that the smaller the port the worse the results. If you intend to use the S&S lens on full frame I would highly recommend the 230mm or S&S large port. The S&S lens is limited to 77mm and 82mm and according to S&S they do not intend to make the lenses in any other size. I have used the 77mm S&S lens on two different zoom lenses with 67mm filter rings using a 67 to 77mm step-up ring. I would also not recommend trying the 77mm on a step-up ring smaller than 67mm, you will begin to defeat the effect of the lens. Last point for those using Sony full frame is that none of the wide angle zooms FE 12-24 F/2.8 or F/4, FE 16-35 F/2.8 or F/4 are going to give you better corners than water contact optics like WWL-1 and WACP. You now have options to use WWL-1 with Sony FE 28mm F/2 or Sony FE 28-60 zoom. Both combinations will be less expensive, lighter and smaller than the above listed lens options with gears, extensions and 230mm dome ports. The attached photo is Nauticam WWL-1 with Sony FE 28mm at F/10, I don't find the barrel distortion with WWL-1 to be near as bad as with a fisheye or fisheye zoom.
  2. I would not overlook the Nikon Z 14-30mm F/4.5 if you like the rectilinear look. It is $1100.00 cheaper than the 14-24 F/2.8 and I don't think you will see an upside v the extra cost underwater. Above water the 14-24 F/2.8 has advantages for several types of photography. A large port like the Nauticam/ZEN 230mm or acrylic 8.5 inch works best and as stated above the S&S correction lens (add $400.00) works natively as does the lens14-30mm on the Z 6/7. I have included images taken with the Nikon Z6 with an Ikelite housing and eight inch compact port. Results with a larger port should improve corner sharpness and be on par with any of the super wide rectilinear for U/W use. Regarding the Nikon 8-15mm circular fisheye lens I have used it with the Z6 and it is also an excellent lens. It is basically two lenses in one, a full frame 15mm fisheye and an 8mm circular fisheye. If you shoot this lens cropped to APS-C at 20mp you loose the circular fisheye end it becomes a variable fisheye that fills the entire frame. If you are not interested in the circular end and many do not you may as well go with an APS-c camera like the D500 and the Tokina lens because you loose all of the upsides of full frame. The 8-15 fisheye also works very well with 230mm ports for splits and non close focus W/A situations. Keep in mind that any port used for the 8-15mm needs a removable shade or blades to use the circular end of the lens. Regarding the WACP-1 with the Nikon Z FF cameras both lenses Adam mentioned are excellent but limited in zoom range. the 35mm has a 97 degree AOV and the 24-70 is limited to28-32 degrees or 130-121 degree AOV. The other problem is that if you zoom beyond 32 towards 70mm you risk bumping the lens into the backside glass on the WACP-1 Ouch did that testing the Tamron 28-75mm with WACP. At this time the only lens on the Nauticam Z port chart that zooms all the way through from 28 to 70mm with an AOV of 130 to 59 degrees is the Sony FE 28-70mm full frame with theTechart auto focus adapter. UWPMAG.com review of the Z 6 includes more shots with 8-15 and 14-30, back issue #113. Image #1 shot at 14mm, the rest are at 17mm with the Ikelite compact port.
  3. Regarding Chris's points above, the WWL-1 works very well with Sony full frame cameras and the Sony FE 28mm which is an F/2 lens, It also works very well with Sony high res full frame like the Sony A7r III and R IV cameras, see my uwpmag.com WWL-1 review in back issue #114. Currently WWL-1 only works with Sony full frame cameras or with the Sony lenses adapted to Nikon-Z cameras. The new Sony FE 28-60mm now adds a very useful zoom range (130-68 AOV) to full frame with WWL-1. The 28-60 zoom also works with both WWL-1 or WACP, it also works with CMC-1&2 closeup lenses rather than the more expensive SMC 1&2. I will be doing a review of the new Sony FE 28-60mm zoom when the port and gear become available in my area. The reason that WWL-1 seems to work so well with the two Sony lenses is the small diameter of the optical glass in both lenses and the short zoom through range of the 28-60 lens. Regarding the WWL-1 working with other FF cameras brands I am sure Nauticam has had plenty of time to test other lens brands with WWL-1 just like they have with WACP. If WWL-1 worked on FF with a Canon or Nikon FF lens I think we would know about it by now. On another note the Nauticam housing for the Sony A7c should be introduced this month. You can see the first image of the rear of the housing in a Nauticam advertisement in the current issue of UWPMAG.com. The housing appears very close to the size of the Nauticam Sony A6600 housing.
  4. First from Adam's original post I would expand the small dome range to include the 140mm optical glass dome offered by Nauticam and used by many with Fisheye lenses. Second I think price point is what drives many investments in photo equipment. I reviewed the Canon SL3 a 24MP DSLR with an Ikelite housing recently. The Ikelite housing with the "kit" 6" dome port, gear, camera body and 18-55 kit lens package sells for less than my Nauticam 230mm fisheye dome port II. With fisheye lenses I like smallish ports for close focus and large ports for splits and larger scenics if you are carrying both. Full frame cameras with greater MPs like D850 and A7r IV seem to benefit from larger ports. I moved from 100mm to 140mm in 2016 when I started shooting Canon 8-15 fisheye zoom with Sony full frame. My photos, #1 Frogfish Canon 8-15 with Zen 100mm port on full frame, #2 Olympus 8mm F/1.8 with Nauticam 140mm, fingers in focus touching the port, #3 Canon SL3 with Ikelite kit port and Tokina 10-17 at 11mm, photo of me by Roman, #4 Canon EOS R with 8-15 fisheye and Ikelite compact 8 inch port which is around 6 inches and #5 Nikon Z 6 with Nikon 8-15 fisheye at 8mm also Ikelite compact dome. I am sure you could also fill a thread on circular fisheye love it or hate it.
  5. I owned the Aumann 2X tele converter and the 18mm for a number of years. I moved from a 35mm film system with manual focus and a Nikon 20mm lens with acrylic port to the RS system which I used for over 15 years. The 18mm lens was in fact the guts of a Nikon 18mm with the RS mount encased for U/W use with an optical glass eight inch port. Comparing image quality at that time was subjective, compared to my old manual system the auto focus 18mm was excellent, by todays standards not so much. I have attached a few images from low res scans. The biggest up side to the Nikonos RS system V. todays digital systems is that after 12-15 years of use depending on which individual item of equipment when I sold the complete system I got back more than $0.80 on the $1.00.
  6. Interceptor121 "That’s true for the cameras as phones are creating pressure but not for the housing and ports that generate majority of cost and bulk" Your point is well taken if you intend to invest in the same lenses and ports you would for a high res full frame like an D850. My point is that you can get into a full frame camera with excellent image quality in the 20-24MP range and with excellent AF. The A7c has better image quality than EM1-III or D500 and apples to apples about the same price. I really don't think many that picks a 20-24MP sub-full frame camera are going to be spending $4700+ on a WACP but many have spent $1388.00 for WWL-1 and are more than happy with the performance over Tokina 10-17 or Olympus/Pana 7-14mm. So apples to apples. Sony A7c with the FE 28-60mm retail at introduction $2100.00US Nikon D500 ( at introduction now 5 years old) $2000.00 Nauticam N100/45 flat port with focus gear knob $491.00 Tokina 10-17mm current price $471.00 Nauticam Zoom gear $201.00 Nauticam zoom gear for DX $198.00 Acrylic Glass Nauticam WWL-1 $1388.00 Nauticam dome port & extension $724.00 $1231.00 Nauticam NA-A7C housing $2586.00 Nauticam NAD500 housing $3620.00 Total $6766.00 Total with acrylic port/glass $7013.00/$7520 Olympus EM-1 III $1799.00 Panasonic 14-42mm power zoom/Oly 14-42 PZ $359.00/$299 Nauticam macro port $336.00 Nauticam PZ zoom gear $259.00 Nauticam WWL-1 $1388.00 Nauticam NA-EM-1 III housing $2068.00 Total $6209.00/6149.00 Beyond these items everything else is equal, strobes, arms and more. Obviously you can argue that the Olympus and Nikon cameras/lenses can be bought on sale for less and I fully agree but the D500 will be five years old next month and Olympus is going out of business so pricing may be depressed. Weight wise the Sony system will be much lighter and smaller than the D500 system. The Sony A7R IV housing is 2.71kg v 3.02 for D500 and the A7c housing will be much closer to the size and weight of the Sony A6600 housing at 1.65kg. The Olympus housing is 2kg about what I would expect the A7c housing will be. You can also argue that the Olympus and Nikon cameras are more robust and have more features but what matters to most is the best image quality and AF speed at an affordable price. The A7c surpasses both the Nikon and Olympus in IQ and the Olympus in AF speed, accuracy and features. AF speed is also quite close to the aging D500 which when replaced next year will easily sell closer to $2500.00. Again my point is not to argue that buyers will move to full frame rather than a cell phone but that buyers looking to move up from compact cameras or away from a DSLR can now find a reasonably priced full frame system in a smaller package. The A7c will of course lose any advantage if it is mated with a Sony 12-24mm F/4/2.8 and a 230mm dome port with 55mm extension. Sony has signaled an intension to introduce smaller lenses going forward which they have shown they can do and I am sure a smaller macro lens and port will be in the not to distant future.
  7. Good to know Wolfgang, thanks for sharing the photo. I use the circular end of the 8-15mm very sparingly as well, but it is nice to have when an opportunity presents itself. Many either seen to love the circular image or hate it. To crop to 1:1 or use the full 4:3 or 3:2 format is another area of debate.
  8. Nauticam has just added a housing NA-A7c for the Sony A7c compact full frame camera which will be coming soon. I expect this will be one of the smallest full frame housings on the market especially when mated with the very small FE 28-60mm zoom and WWL-1. Camera size compared to the Sony a7R IV and the aging FE 28-70mm zoom.
  9. The only circular fisheye that appears to cover the entire M4/3 frame without clipping at the top and or bottom is the Meike 3.5mm F/2.8 manual focus fisheye. It covers 220 degrees and if it could be fitted to a proper port the shade would need to be removable. 4 and 4.5mm don't appear to cover the entire frame.
  10. As I pointed out in the post the top image is 12mm fisheye and the bottom is Sony 28mm F/2 with the WWL-1 as recommended by Nauticam. Perhaps this will help. The attached photo is of the same wreck but from a bit further back with a 114 degree rectilinear lens the Olympus 7-14mm behind a 200mm dome port. If you compare to the two images posted above the rectilinear shot comes much closer to the WWL-1 than it does to the Fisheye shot. I missed where someone said they have the same image quality, I did suggest that lower res cameras don't show flaws in lenses as much a high res, cameras and that as a result the gap between WWACP and WWL-1 would not be as pronounced.
  11. First I will be testing the Sony FE 28-60mm zoom with the Nauticam WACP, WWL-1 and CMC-1&2 in the future. At this time the N100/45 port with focus wheel (for WWL-1) and the zoom gear are not available in my area. Second WACP mounts direct to the housing without a port so use on Ikelite DL or older housings is unlikely. I would guess you would also need a custom flat port with 67mm threads to use the WWL-1. Ikelite has listed the Sony A7c as a housing they may support and if they do I would expect support for the 28-60 kit lens with 67mm thread. Regarding image quality WACP has been designed for full frame cameras with high numbers of MP's. So on my 62MP A7R IV I would expect a noticeable difference in image quality V. WWL-1 with the same lens. That said we have outstanding full frame cameras in the 20-26MP range like the Canon EOS R6, Nikon Z6 II and Sony A7 III and A7c. With these lower numbers of MP's I would expect the gap between WACP and WWL-1 to narrow a bit. Without addressing the weight and cost differences both lenses are going to exceed current rectilinear and dome port choices without question. I suggest that anyone that does not grasp how a kit lens can out preform a high quality zoom lens and port read Alex Mustard's excellent review in back issue #99 at UWPMAG.com. This is a free PDF download and includes graphs of lens performance tests by Nauticam. I agree with Adams post that the WWL-1 has barrel distortion on full frame as does the WACP but I would hardly agree that it would be the same as using a fisheye lens on mirrorless full frame. I have been using the Canon 8-15mm fisheye for several years now on full frame with an adapter and to me I can see a clear difference. You can decide for yourself between the images below of the bow of C-53 in Cozumel Mexico. Both images are taken at about as close as you can to the same distance and angle. The first is on a Sony full frame with a Rokinon 12mm fisheye and the other is with the Sony 28mm F/2 and WWL-1.
  12. First I will be testing the Sony FE 28-60mm zoom with the Nauticam WACP, WWL-1 and CMC-1&2 in the future. At this time the N100/45 port with focus wheel (for WWL-1) and the zoom gear are not available in my area. Second WACP mounts direct to the housing without a port so use on Ikelite DL or older housings is unlikely. I would guess you would also need a custom flat port with 67mm threads to use the WWL-1. Ikelite has listed the Sony A7c as a housing they may support and if they do I would expect support for the 28-60 kit lens with 67mm thread. Regarding image quality WACP has been designed for full frame cameras with high numbers of MP's. So on my 62MP A7R IV I would expect a noticeable difference in image quality V. WWL-1 with the same lens. That said we have outstanding full frame cameras in the 20-26MP range like the Canon EOS R6, Nikon Z6 II and Sony A7 III and A7c. With these lower numbers of MP's I would expect the gap between WACP and WWL-1 to narrow a bit. Without addressing the weight and cost differences both lenses are going to exceed current rectilinear and dome port choices without question. I suggest that anyone that does not grasp how a kit lens can out preform a high quality zoom lens and port read Alex Mustard's excellent review in back issue #99 at UWPMAG.com. This is a free PDF download and includes graphs of lens performance tests by Nauticam. I agree with Adams post that the WWL-1 has barrel distortion on full frame as does the WACP but I would hardly agree that it would be the same as using a fisheye lens on mirrorless full frame. I have been using the Canon 8-15mm fisheye for several years now on full frame with an adapter and to me I can see a clear difference. You can decide for yourself between the images below of the bow of C-53 in Cozumel Mexico. Both images are taken at about as close as you can to the same distance and angle. The first is on a Sony full frame with a Rokinon 12mm fisheye and the other is with the Sony 28mm F/2 and WWL-1.
  13. First I will be testing the Sony FE 28-60mm zoom with the Nauticam WACP, WWL-1 and CMC-1&2 in the future. At this time the N100/45 port with focus wheel (for WWL-1) and the zoom gear are not available in my area. Second WACP mounts direct to the housing without a port so use on Ikelite DL or older housings is unlikely. I would guess you would also need a custom flat port with 67mm threads to use the WWL-1. Ikelite has listed the Sony A7c as a housing they may support and if they do I would expect support for the 28-60 kit lens with 67mm thread. Regarding image quality WACP has been designed for full frame cameras with high numbers of MP's. So on my 62MP A7R IV I would expect a noticeable difference in image quality V. WWL-1 with the same lens. That said we have outstanding full frame cameras in the 20-26MP range like the Canon EOS R6, Nikon Z6 II and Sony A7 III and A7c. With these lower numbers of MP's I would expect the gap between WACP and WWL-1 to narrow a bit. Without addressing the weight and cost differences both lenses are going to exceed current rectilinear and dome port choices without question. I suggest that anyone that does not grasp how a kit lens can out preform a high quality zoom lens and port read Alex Mustard's excellent review in back issue #99 at UWPMAG.com. This is a free PDF download and includes graphs of lens performance tests by Nauticam. I agree with Adams post that the WWL-1 has barrel distortion on full frame as does the WACP but I would hardly agree that it would be the same as using a fisheye lens on mirrorless full frame. I have been using the Canon 8-15mm fisheye for several years now on full frame with an adapter and to me I can see a clear difference. You can decide for yourself between the images below of the bow of C-53 in Cozumel Mexico. Both images are taken at about as close as you can to the same distance and angle. The first is on a Sony full frame with a Rokinon 12mm fisheye and the other is with the Sony 28mm F/2 and WWL-1.
  14. Nauticam added the FE 28-60mm lens to its Sony port chart and Sony owners should be excited. First the lens works with all Sony FF cameras. It also works with the excellent but not cheap WACP-1 resulting in an AOV of 130 to 68 degrees, the older Sony FE 28-70 goes to 59 degrees. The new Sony FE 28-60mm also works with the less expensive WWL-1 which until now only worked on Sony mirrorless with the SonyFE 28mm F/2 so young have the same added zoom range. Because the 26-60mm lens takes a 40.5mm lens filter the diameter is small enough to work with the sub-full frame CMC-1 and CMC-2 closeup lenses that many M4/3 and APS-C owners now use. At this time Nauticam lists the Sony FE 28-70mm with Techart Sony to Nikon Z AF adapter for use with WAPC-1.If you want a zoom lens for the Nikon Z system and WACP-1combo the Sony 28-70 is the only choice. Sony and Nikon Z both use the same 120/20mm port extension for the Sony FE 28-70mm and WACP-1. No port extension is required with the Sony FE 28-60mm and WACP-1 so I would expect the same may be true for Nikon Z and WACP. I would also point-out that Nauticam WWL-1 was designed for full frame even though it has been widely adopted for sub-full frame cameras. Even on high res full frame cameras like the 62mp Sony A7R IV results are excellent and superior to any wide angle lens and port combination I have tested. You can read my review of the WWL-1 on full frame in back issue #114 at uwpmag.com. I have attached photos of the Sony A7c with 28-60 zoom and A7R IV with 28-70 zoom for a size comparison.
  15. You have two different issues with the two different types of lenses. The full frame fisheye covers the entire sensor while the circular fisheye covers a full 360 degree area of the sensor when used with the format for which it was designed. This is what makes the Canon, Nikon and other 8-15mm fisheye zooms so unique. You can get the best of both worlds in one lens. The bubble ring image is the 8mm end of the Canon 8-15mm zoom on a full frame Sony A7R II with a Metabones adapter. The Turtle was taken at the 15mm end of the same lens 8-15 Canon lens using a Canon ESO R with a Canon adapter. The bent horizon is evident. The third photo is a selfie taken with an Olympus EM-5 and Panasonic 8mm fisheye using the in camera Olympus Key Lime Art filters. For Snell's window to fill the full frame on M4/3 you would need a fisheye of around 3.5 to 4mm. Keep in mind that with a 4/3 format the image is taller than with an APS-C 3/2 format so it should be easer to fill the frame. The fourth photo is with an Olympus EM-1 II and Olympus 8mm fisheye with a 200mm dome port. Unlike the second photo the downward curvature is a result of the dome port being above the center line and not a result of Snell's window.
×
×
  • Create New...