Jump to content

Phil Rudin

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Phil Rudin

  1. Regarding the difference between the Panasonic and Olympus lenses I don't think you will see much if any IQ differences behind the WWL-1. I am all for investing in the best glass you can afford but WWL-1 is going to out preform V. wide lenses behind a dome port with all M43 lenses. For significant increase in IQ with WWL-1 you would need to move to Sony full frame with the Sony FE 28mm F/2, not a zoom but the best in IQ.
  2. The idea that lens options are limited is a bit of a false narrative, I have used all of these cameras, including the Z6 and the EOS R cameras all with adapted fisheye lenses. With the proper adapter all work as well as they do on native DSLR cameras. I don't see DSLR users complaining about the Nikonos RS 13mm fisheye or after market fisheyes being used on DSLR's. The facts are that the Sony mirrorless cameras have a wide range of lenses suited to U/W work. Wet wide optics like WACP and WACP II can also be used with these cameras just as they are with DSLRs'. If you own Canon lenses like the 8-15mm fisheye zoom and macros these can also be used with the Sony cameras. Nikon DSLR lenses can also be used on the Z-cameras with a Nikon adapter. Currently auto focus Is outstanding on the A7R IV with Canon EOS R cameras running second and Nikon Z cameras running third. I realize that native lenses would be the best investment but the upsides of 21 century tech out weights the the downsides of 20th century tech and its is only going to get better. You can checkout my reviews on many of these cameras and lenses in the back issues of uwpmag.com.
  3. My bad regarding the search engine. It will work for some searches but not for others and in many cases it does not diferentuate reviews from product announcements. If for instance you put in WACP you will fine several listings. If you but in Sony A7R IV you won't find any listings in spite of several announcements and reviews. If you search Sony only you will get a full page including the Sony A7R IV information. The items that are listed direct you to the issue in which you appear the you need to open the issue and look for the article.
  4. The magazine does not have a search engine. Each issue in the back issues has an index when you open them, included in the index are product reviews but not by page number. It is up to the viewer to do the work. If you have a product you are looking for I may be able to help as I have done many of the reviews. Also if you have a new product you would like to see reviewed let me know and I will attempt to make that happen.
  5. Perhaps I was not clear. Go to uwpmag.com and enter your email. At the top of the page you will see back issues, click on that then select issue #93 the article starts on page #39.
  6. I have attaches the front page from an older review using the Canon 8-15 zoom and Zen 100 port with the Sony A7R II. Higher MP's and full frame add to softness in the corners at F/stops below about F/13. Since this review I have used this lens with a verity of other cameras and dome sizes. Works very well for splits with domes of 200mm or greater. I have also used the Nikon 8-15 with Nikon mirrorless cameras with like results. I have also used the Canon with Canon full frame cameras and see no difference in AF speed or image quality with or without an adapter. This is a free PDF download at uwpmag.com at the top od the page in back issues #93/
  7. The two full frame images are with the Zen 100mm port and the circular shot is with a 6 inch port With A7R II and A7R III. The split is with EOS R, Canon adapter and an 8" port. My personal equipment for the 8-15 with the A7R IV is the Zen 230mmII has removable blades and the Nauticam 140mm with removable shade. Of the smaller ports I like the 140mm size better.
  8. I have used the Canon 8-15 Fisheye for several years on Sony FF cameras from A7 II to A7R IV and with at least five different camera brands. I have also used the lens with the Metabones and Sigma MC 11 adapters which both work equally well. The idea of the lens is to give you a traditional full frame fisheye and a circular fisheye (360 degree) in one lens. Any of the zoom settings in between just cut off the top and bottom of the frame. On M43 you get a fisheye zoom range but you don't get the circular fisheye. I have used the lens with both optical glass and acrylic pome ports from 100mm to 230mm. As others have said you can also used the Sigma 15 fisheye with the Canon adapted. Nikon also has an excellent 8-15mm FF fisheye but alas the adapters for nikon AF on Sony don't work well. If you would like more information on using the Canon 8-15 with Sony go to uwpmag.com, back issues and you will find more than a dozen reviews where I used the lens.
  9. Interesting topic, I just finished watching and well worth the time. Keep up the great work.
  10. I have watched five of the new Wetpixel Live videos and they are well worth the time. Keep up the great work..
  11. Hi Thomas, Regarding battery life as with all batteries things are not always equal however during my tests I exceeded the specs. of 2000 flashes per charge by a lot. I also used the S-Turtle shooting models in the Mexican Cenotes at 5 to 10 frames per second and the S-Turtle was able to keep up without overheating or misfiring. If you would like to read my full review of the S-Turtle for Sony it is in the back issues at uwpmag.com, issue #110. This is a free PDF download and contains lots of useful info on how to use the S-Turtle. As with a lot of U/W equipment failures I ignored my own advice and managed to pinch the wiring for the S-Turtle when closing the housing. This was complete Pilot error on my part and no fault of the S-Turtle but resulted in damage to the wiring which has put the S-Turtle out of commission for the time being. I hope you enjoy my take on this excellent tool.
  12. Hi Dave, The best example would be Chris Kippax's photo shown above. The adapter bolts to the pickup finder on the Ikelite housing. This puts greater distance between the rear element on the finder and the EVF. In addition you are now looking through two viewfinders. The result is that the image size is reduced in the viewfinder. It works the same way a closeup lens works the more distance you put between the rear C/U lens element and the lens the weaker the magnification. 2 or 3 mm may not seem like much but it can make a big difference. The viewfinders that, in the case of Ikelite thread into the housing are designed to get the VF as close to the EVF as possible without hitting the EVF and causing damage.
  13. Again on the up side in the time it has taken to produce the content on the second half of this second page Sony has announced a brilliant new 12-24mm F/2.8 GM lens and Canon has announced two new mirrorless cameras. The two new Canon cameras now have IBIS and dual card slots missing on the first EOS R. In addition Canon has announced four new Mirrorless lenses and two tele converters. It seems that in spite a reduction in sales the camera market is moving forward and trying to reinvent itself with 21st century equipment.
  14. Regarding your original question I have used both the Inon and Ikelite viewfinders on Ikelite housings. If both are correctly placed in relation to the viewfinder them you will have identical performance. I have attached images of both the 180 and 45 viewfinders from both companies. Look closely and tell me what you see. I have also used the more expensive Nauticam 45 & 180 viewfinders and they are as you would expect better if the placement is proper.
  15. I can understand the concern of many regarding the CIPA sales figures but the topic I thought was digital camera stagnation. Cellphones and action cameras are digital cameras and I would suggest that you goggle sale figures for both from 2010 to present. You can also go to the same site statista.com listed by 121 and you will find sales are robust to say the least. The same is true for U/W equipment to support phones/action cams. We are seeing a shift in the entire camera market described by me as growing pains. To exclude tphones and action cams from the discussion seems short sighted. I would guess that if you want to talk about underwater photo/video world wide phones and action cams have the lions share of the market. To assume that these cameras are all being used by amatures for FB, Insta and youtube would be a bit short sighted also. Action cams like GoPro's are being used extensively by professional film makers for the likes of BBC and Nat Geo to name just two. A good deal of the footage for programs like Shark Week is shot with action cams. I know dozens of top notch photographers who have never used a film camera in their lives and I am sure 1000's of cell phone and action cam shooters have never used a DSLR. These facts do not prevent them from being artistic and talented photographers both above and underwater. The cream is always going to rise to the top regardless of the equipment they use. If you think camera manufactures are set in their ways think about the underwater equipment industry prior to Nauticam. In ten years Nauticam has reached the top and it has forced other manufactures to step-up their game or be left behind. Sony has pretty much done the same thing in the camera/mirrorless camera industry. One of the reasons Sony has succeeded so quickly is that they have spent more time listening to their base both Pro and amateur than other manufactures (with the exception of menus LOL). Last regarding Olympus, I think most would have expected to see Pentax and Hasselblad exit first. So as a guy who is still seeing the glass half full remember that Sony started out by buying up the departed Minolta turning it into a contender. Perhaps the same may happen with Olympus. I continue to have a positive outlook for U/W photography, Wetpixel and uwpmag.com (full disclosure I am Senior Reviewer at uwp). Without a stable market we won't be around because our advertisers won't be around.
  16. This has been an interesting discussion to watch and has taken several turns. Being a member of the aging dive population certified in 1963 and taking up U/W photography in 1967 like Adam and others I have had an opportunity see dramatic shifts in the dive industry. When I moved to Florida fifty years ago I was frequently the only diver on a dive boat with a camera. I fact spearguns outnumbered cameras by about ten to one and hunting/collecting were the common interests. When it comes to the age demographics of the diving industry I see the glass as half full rather than half empty. Attracting young divers has a lot more to do with mentoring than it does with economics. Every year at DEMA and I have attended a lot of years, PADI announces that they certified over a million new divers world wide during the year but they never talk about the million that dropped out of diving during the same year. What has stagnated is the ability of dive operators, dive clubs, dive certification agencies and more to keep young people involved in diving. I see plenty of young divers doing certification training at Blue Heron Bridge and I see plenty of them using GoPro’s and cellphones to capture images. The problem is that without mentoring they move on to snow boarding, hang gliding, skydiving and many other equally expensive sports. What we should be concerned with is keeping young diver’s involved in diving. To illustrate the dive industries desperate attempts to attract young people into the sport you need only look at the attached photos. At DEAM 2007 the dive industry launched sponsorship for the SCUBA Race Car. The industry spent over a million on sponsorship in an attempt to get young people who were watching stocker car racing to make the crossover too SCUBA. In hindsight the industry may still be questioning whether this was money well spent. Back to the original topic of the camera industry being in “stagnation” again I see the glass half full. I think it would be more correct to say that the industry is having growing pains just as it did when it shifted from film to digital. During that shift we witnessed winners and losers. In the U/W photo realm we lost the Nikonos line of cameras arguably the gold standard for U/W cameras to digital SRL’s. I kept my Nikonos RS and lenses for over fifteen years and reluctantly entered the digital world with an Olympus E-1 that I used most for crime scene photography in my former life. I did not begin using digital underwater until Olympus E-300/330. Adam may appreciate that among the first six lenses dropped for this 4/3 system was an 8mm fisheye, 50mm F/2 macro (still one of the best macros made) and the 7-14mm zoom. With the switch to mirrorless cameras we see a move away from 20th century tech and a move toward 21st century tech. The fact is that DSLR’s will suffer the same fate as film cameras, it is only a matter of time. So the question is which companies will best adapt and who will be left behind. If you are starting to build a new system will it make more sense to buy into 21st century mirrorless glass and expect the more recent entries into mirrorless to equal or exceed their DSLR models going forward. The flip side is to invest in the excellent line of DSLR’s now available and see what the future brings. Regarding glass will you want to carryover DSLR glass to a mirrorless system going forward. This did not workout as advertised when moving from film to digital and it is safe to say it won’t be the best answer when moving to mirrorless. Olympus riding off into the sunset has brought on some panic and gloom but I see it as an opportunity for others to succeed. The M43 market remains strong with many new camera lines like Z-cam embracing the lens line. Olympus has many brilliant M43 Pro lenses with more to come including the 150-400mm F/4.5 Pro and 8-25mm F/4 Pro. The idea that new product are revamped 2016/2017 vintage is just wrong. The Sony A7R IV is nothing like the A7R II, Nikon and Canon have announce new high end cameras like the EOS R5, Canon EOS-1D X Mark III (an Olympics offering as Alex suggested) Nikon D780, Sony is about to announce a completely new A7S II replacement, Z Cam E2 and more. All of these cameras have or will have housings for U/W use. Many new lenses are coming as well including several which are applicable to U/W photography. Again an excellent thread, I can buy into the premise that digital sales are declining but I can’t buy into the premise that the camera industry is stagnating. I also think that the U/W photo market is excelling with a verity of new products. I have never seen so many new strobes, lenses including water contact optics, housing options and more as I have seen in the last three years.
  17. Nikonos II, 28mm lens and Nikonos bulb flash.
  18. So your two best choices for the Canon 8-15mm Fisheye are the Nauticam 140mm optical glass port and the Zen 100mm optical glass port. Both Zen and Nauticam make the ports with and without the removable dome shade. You will need to remove the shade if you want to use the 8mm end of the lens, I am sure you are aware but what to point this out for others reading the thread. I have used both ports a good bit, the Z100 with the A7R II and III and the Nauticam 140 with A7R III and IV. The 140 port requires a 30mm extension which you may own, with Zen the extension is built in. I have used the 8-15 fisheye with both the Metabones and Sigma MC-11 adapters and see no noticeable differences. Both of these ports work very well but I lean a bit more towards the 140mm for a bit more sharpness near the edges of the frame at like f/numbers. I have also used this lens with ports from Aquapazza, Inon and Ikelite ports. I shoot this lens only at 8/9mm or at 15mm anything else crops off the top and bottom of the frame which is not to my liking. Images at 8mm and 15mm. I am sure all Sony A7 users would rather be using a Sony FE 8-15 or 15/16mm Fisheye but it does not appear that is in the cards any time soon for any of the full frame mirrorless cameras. A significant upside to mirrorless is that just about any lens can be mounted to the cameras with an adapter. Only some will have excerptible auto focus, case in point Nikon has an excellent 8-15mm fisheye I have used several times on Nikon Z6 & & with FTZ adapter. Unfortunately no quality adapter existed for Nikon to Sony hence the greater exodus of Canon DSLR users to Sony over Nikon DSLR users.
  19. I have reviewed both of these cameras for uwpmag.com and this is my take as a still photographer. First these cameras are Nikons first jump into the full frame mirrorless market. I reviewed the Z7 as a pre-DEMA teaser for the Nov/Dec 2018 issue #105. At the time the only lens I used was the Nikon 60mm F/2.8 macro with the FTZ adapter and Nauticam's MWL-1 and SMC-2 C/U lenses which were also about to debut at the DEMA show. At the time the auto focus was not up to par but that has been corrected with firmware updates. With the Z6 (M/A 2020 issue #113) review all of the introductory shortcomings has been corrected and I also had the opportunity to use the excellent Nikon Z 14-30mm F/4 S and the also outstanding Nikon 8-15mm Fisheye with FTZ adapter. As stated above both cameras are very similar using the same frame and excellent built quality Nikon is known for. Both cameras fit into the same housings without any modification. This reduces production costs and benefits the U/W photographers like myself who carry the high MP camera while traveling and use the low MP camera as a backup and surface camera. At the $2000.00 and $3400.00 price points I would have expected Nikon to offer a little more on the high end. Both have the same EVF I would have expected the higher 576,0000 rather than the 369,0000. Both have a 1/200th flash sync speed, I would have expected 1/250th for $3400.00. Both have a single card slot which they got slammed for on release by terestrial reviewers and both use in-lens stabilization which only works with the limited Z lens line. I apologize if this issue has been corrected in a FTZ firmware update. Most U/W photographers don't use the higher frame rates of the Z6 but it is always nice to have and I would rather have the Z7 ISO range on the bottom end rather than the top 204800 ISO on the Z6. Most of my U/W work is done in the ISO 50-1600 range so the Z7 suites me in this regard. Most U/W photographers will be more than happy with the Z6 and if you find the need for more MP's as you expand your horizons you can always add the Z7. The biggest issue is how much are you willing to spend because the housing, ports, extensions, strobes, arms, lenses, gears and more will all be the same for both cameras making the overall difference an additional $1400.00 for the Z7. If you wish to read my reviews they can be found in the back issues at uwpmag.com, these are free PDF downloads.
  20. As Adam points out the Sea & Sea correction lenses page lists some of the lenses that are supported. That page also omits some lenses like the Sony 16-35mm F/2.8 and Nikon Z 14-30mm F/4. If you go to the port charts for those cameras and lenses they indicate compatibility with the correction lenses. I ask Sea & Sea about the possibility of a 72mm corrective to accommodate the much more frequently used Sony 16-35mm F/4 and was advised that is not in the cards at this time. As a result I have used the 77mm with the step-up ring. I have tested the lenses with the Ikelite eight inch compact done (not eight inches in diameter.), Nauticam 180mm dome and Zen 170mm and 230mm domes. As you would expect the larger dome port diameter the better the results assuming the proper port extension is in use. I used all manufactures recommended port extensions both with and without the corrective lenses for comparisons to conclude the one to two stop advantage on full frame.
  21. The Sea & Sea correction lens is available in 82mm and 77mm thread sizes. I have used the 82mm with the Nikon Z 14-30mm F/4 which is 82mm using the Nikon Z6. I have also used the 77mm with Sony A7-cameras using the Zeiss Batis 18mm F/2.8 which is 77mm and the Sony 16-35mm F/4 which has a 72mm thread size. With the Sony zoom lens I used a 77/72mm step-up ring. I also own the Sony 20mm F1.8 but the thread size is 67mm and a 10mm jump may defeat the purpose of the S&S lens. All three of these lenses I would shoot at F/13 and above if possible on full frame. Assuming the lenses are fitted with the proper dome size my results have added about 1-2 stops of like corner sharpness on full frame v. not using the S&S lens. S&S list both the 82mm and 77mm lenses as suited to the 240mm/230mm NEW 210/AR and 165 port II. I used the Nikon 14-30mm with a mini port (about 152mm) the type cut from a larger radius dome and the results were awful. While the subject in the center of the frame was tack sharp about two-thirds of the frame was soft. All of the lenses listed in the S&S compatibility chart are zooms but my results with the fitted 18mm lens were the same. If used with a larger (200mm plus) sized port expect a stop or two better results depending on your equipment. I would add that the S&S correction lenses while providing an improvement are not going to come close to the results you can get with water contact optics like the Nikonos RS 13mm Fisheye, WACP I/II or others.
  22. I am interested in your dome port shipping to Lake Park, Florida. Excepting the $300.00 price, have PayPal if you would like to be paid that way. Direct contact Phil Rudin at tropicalone@bellsouth.net
    Nauticam N120 8.5" acrylic dome port with shade (sku #18802) in pristine condition. Rarely used - no marks or scratches. Includes spare o-ring, neoprene cover and silicone grease. Retails new for $680, asking $300 + shipping in the US.
    1. lbaldwin99


      Hi Phil - sorry this is no longer available.  I'll update the post to reflect this.


  23. Just to be clear the N-120 170mm Zen Underwater port has the removable shade for the circular end of the 8-15 zoom.
  24. My first suggestion would be to look at the Saga and Zen port charts at zen underwater.com and sagadive.com. These 100mm ports are very lens specific and according too the charts neither brand supports the Sigma full frame 15mm lens. In fact the only full frame lenses they support are the 8-15mm fisheye zooms. The Nauticam N120 140mm optical glass fisheye ports support both the sigma 15 and the outstanding Nikon 8-15mm fisheye zoom. The fisheye zoom requires the port with the removable shade for the 8mm and and an N120 40mm extension. The port with the removable shade is a bit more expensive but if you ever intend to move up to the 8-15 zoom it will have been money well spent. Photos are with the Nikon 8-15mm F/3.5-4.5 fisheye zoom at the circular 8mm and and the 15mm full frame end using a Nikon Z6 with Nikon lens adapter. The housing is Ikelite with the eight inch compact acrylic dome and Ikelite DS-161 flashes.
  • Create New...