Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About jordi

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Interests

Recent Profile Visitors

3890 profile views
  1. The problem to make adapters for Nikonos 15mm is the distance between housing bayonet and camera mount. Most of the housings have around 35mm (with dslr housings) and more in Mirrorless housings. So the Nikonos focus and f/stop knobs will interfere with the housing bayonet mount. Nauticam housings for Sony cameras has 100mm diameter bayonet which allows to place the bayonet closer to the camera lens mount and then you have enough space to let the Nikonos knobs out of the housing. I guess that when Nauticam designed the first Sony A housing they decided to use 100mm diameter bayonet in order of being able to use Nikonos lenses... I guess Subal did the same!! But this decision has consequences... when using big Af lenses and standard ports you have first to take ports out and the lens out, before taking camera out of the housing... This could be annoying if you just want to change the battery.
  2. Selling Nauticam Ninja V monitor. Gently used with and in very good shape. I sell because I cahnge my gear. I am based in Barcelona (Spain) and I can ship worldwide with expenses to be paid by buyer Selling price 1700€ You can contact me through Wetpixel or at: jordi@uwaterphoto.com
  3. Thanks a lot Todd and Alex for your answer! I'd really appreciate if you can post any picture at F5,6 or lower when you have the final WACP Unit. Thanks a lot for your help Jordi
  4. Hi Alex, I've been checking the images you linked, which are very nice as always, and I've seen than in most of them you are using high F/stops. The image quality is very good even in the corners but I am wondering what happens when you use open f/stops. I've been checking some images by Todd Winner (at Nauticam's website), and even at low res you can see that at F5,6 the corners are not good. If this is the case I think is a very expensive investment if you must use a very old lens behind, which has slow autofocus and you are bound to use closed f/stops. So the only real avantage would be a bigger zoom range than with any other lens... Am I right?
  5. This is my grain of salt: www.uwaterphoto.com/?p=82
  6. For those interested, I have posted different f/stops samples with and without filter in my website: http://uwaterphoto.com/?p=839
  7. Finally I had the opportunity to test the filter in a pool, in a more controlled situation. I also tried the Canon 16-35mm F4 IS, IMHO a better corner performer than the 17-40mm I was using in my previous tests. I have tried different combinations (230mm glass dome port and Sea&Sea Fisheye "acrylic" port) and I got slightly better results with the 230mm glass dome. The improvement is near the claimed 2 stops, which is very good news. At F8 the corners are very good and at F11 they are perfect.
  8. Hi Adam, Thanks for the info. I've been thinking that maybe my results are not so good because I am using the old 17-40mm. Some months ago I tried the new 16-35mm f/4 IS with the EOS 5DsR (50Mp) and the corners where very good, much better that the 17-40mm. So, I guess that with the S&S lens attached to the 16-35mm the results will be better. I'll try to borrow it again and try it!
  9. I had the opportunity to borrow a Sea&Sea 240mm Port. In fact the port has 240mm but the glass (acrylic) has less diameter than the glass 9,3" dome I used in my first test. The S&S dome has a dome of 210mm aprox. The radius of curvature seems bigger that the glass dome. In my tests the results are quite similar to glass dome and improvement is around 1 stop better with filter attached. I attach a crop at F11.
  10. Here I post another corner sample, now at f/8. As you can see the improvement is less evident when compared with the F/11 picture (Camera: 5DmkIII; lens: 17-40mm)
  • Create New...