Jump to content

Interceptor121

Member
  • Content Count

    2572
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    84

Interceptor121 last won the day on October 19

Interceptor121 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

322 Excellent

About Interceptor121

  • Rank
    Humpback Whale

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://interceptor121.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Woburn Sands, UK

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Panasonic GH5
  • Camera Housing
    Nauticam NA-GH5
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    2x Sea and Sea YS-D2, 2x Inon Z240
  • Accessories
    Too many

Recent Profile Visitors

59605 profile views
  1. In terms of lenses on the fisheye once you go past f/4 there are no differences For macro the Panasonic lens is better However while Panasonic bodies work well with Olympus lenses the opposite is less true so I would go with the Olympus fisheye and skip the 30 to go for the 60mm Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  2. Look my blog for the lx100 test there is also the dome and it stops focusing pretty soon The lx10 has only one port tho Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  3. Sony doesnt white balance but filters work well The dome port is the least useful as it supports very limited zoom 24mm is ok for reef scenes and people sharks dolphins etc not good for very large animals but overall workable Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  4. The panasonic 7-14mm is a great little lens that is not bright enough but in terms of native distortion is better of any other lenses that can be housed It was one of the first lenses and suffers from port issues so it got a bad reputation Looking at nauticam port chart it suggests a 47 N85 to N120 adapter and the 180mm glass dome that I believe is the same or few mm less of the zen. The N120 ring will allow a longer extension before it starts vignetting However nobody has got this combination because the lens reputation is not good anymore for no fault of the lens Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  5. The nauticam and inon arms have soft orings that tend to move more on land The ULCS arms use standard BUNA that are hard and grip better I changed all my orings to buna it is better not to mix on the same segment
  6. GorillaPod are good for off camera strobes or best case video lights With nauticam housing or ULCS tray base you can build a base that is on 3 wide feet and works well for macro https://interceptor121.com/panasonic-gh5/macro-video/
  7. The op question was wet lens vs dome The Fantasea dome is a 6 inches port likely a cut of a smaller dome but still 1" less than what nauticam recommends The 10-18 like any rectilinear lens will blur corners I would suggest to go for a fisheye that is supported by Fantasea actually a Tokina fisheye with a metabone adapter and a smaller dome. This is likely to be much sharper of anything else but it is a fisheye zoom so curved framesInsert other media
  8. I have done the tests in the bathtub back in the days. The key issue is 1. Use of antireflactant glass between the lens elements 2. Very wide rear opening 3. being close to the port https://interceptor121.com/2015/09/14/nauticam-wwl-1-wet-wide-angle-lens-review/ When I tested the Inon UWL-H100 with dome on the LX100 that at that date was the best lens and potentially still is in the rest of the pack the gap with the WWL-1 was considerable For what concerns the Fantasea this is not different from many other lenses like the Fix UWL-04: 1. Front part is poly-carbonate not glass this is to contain costs, it means this lens will have less contrast and tend to flare. Whilst on a typical acrylic dome you do not have multiple glass elements exposed in a wet lens you do so this will compromise performance 2. The rear opening looks like the inon so it won't help the situation 3. Closeness to the port can only be assured with a good match between port glass and wet lens. This is guaranteed with nauticam products not sure what fantasea does but any gap deteriorates performance It may be true that people do not have money but then you should not wonder for lack of performance. It is obvious that all the other lenses of the pack are made by the same subcontractor in china and they all have similar flaws. Right now the best option still seems the Inon UWL-H100 with dome but being all glass is more expensive than the Fantasea or other that have parts in acrylic There is no way to magically create performance out of weaker design or materials and wet lenses have been historically a compact camera small sensor business not MFT or APSC or full frame
  9. @ChrisRoss so if the measurement of the entrance pupil was correct this port is 2 cm shorter and there would be barrel distortion and the field of view would be wider than air. Also need to consider that the camera body and lens are likely trying to correct this distortion already as the lens has some of it's own. Also this is a thick dome so usually the real distance is corrected to a shorter one. Interestingly nauticam port chart for n120 has a 47 mm extension for the 180mm dome that had the dome centre 27mm behind so theirs would also be 5mm shorter and am pretty sure with the n120 neck it would not vignette easily Do you see barrel distortion in your uncorrected raw files? Or a wider field of view? Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  10. Not all wet lenses are created equal to put one APSC size format I would not consider fantasea For what matters I would only consider Nauticam
  11. OK so if it was where you say it was it would be around 5 cm from the base considering the distance from the hood. The whole lens is 83mm and 25mm are in the housing so that should place the centre of curvature around 2.5 cm from the port which means the Zen dome should be 13.5 long excluding the part in the housing to be correct. I think the port is actually that long if not longer?
  12. The best optical performance of a rectilinear lens will always be a larger dome regardless of materials There are some cases on Nauticam chart where a glass port is suggested when the size is identical. I asked them why and they told me generally glass has better durability and resists reflections but there is no performance difference actually. In other cases for mid range zoom the dome suggested in glass is smaller than acrylic this is because of the durability point above and the fact that the glass has more trim On larger ports acrylic becomes very buoyant and the trim becomes unacceptable so there is a tendency to use glass
  13. I am of the opinion that renting a guide is only valuable when you need the experience of someone local to find the subjects or to navigate a wreck When you go to south east Asia everybody is critter hunting the problem you have are people hogging a subject guides tend to cater for small groups that are photo orientated When it comes to wide angle especially in tricky conditions there is no issue spotting a school of fish but then you get locked into the situation where the rest of the group is doing the 'tour's and you simply don't have time to close the shots as you need to stay with the group here a dive buddy together with knowledge of the sites help but I have found the biggest issue is the schedule that is generally done visiting different sites each time. This is not conducive to getting good shots and the reason why I ended up arranging a boat myself that will do what I say maximising photo or video opportunity In terms of costs my boat of 12 people max will cost €1250 vs average €950 for a larger 20 pax boat visiting a different site each time. A workshop would cost €1400 and you will have some form of tuition not at individual level of course and still be 20 on the boat. Now you need to think is it worth to spend the additional €300 to be on a smaller boat and maximise your opportunities or would you rather spend less and have almost the certainty you will be lucky to pull 3 good shots? Likewise would you leave it to compete for a critter or hire your guide for few hundred dollars? With the cost of equipment involved if you have a gopro or a little rig you may want to go with the crowds, if you have invested 1000s in equipment those additional hundreds are totally appropriate because is not good to have the gear without a subject as you found out Obviously this is my personal opinion By the way I still have spaces for my 2020 red sea trip... Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
  14. @Algwyn distortion and field of view are related I found this great model https://oceanity.com.au/tools/dome-port-positioning/ In the case I discussed the entrance pupil is further away from the centre so you have pincushion distortion that reduces the field of view once corrected. So your 114 degree lens may become less than 110 practically @ChrisRoss if what you say about the entrance of the 7-14 is correct the lens will be closer than ideal this would generate barrel distortion that actually increases field of view when corrected Do you see this in your uncorrected raw images? The lens already has 5.2% barrel distortion so this would be apparent However looking at the construction of the 7-14 I am not sure at all the entrance pupil is towards the front as looking at the lens schematic you can see that there are a number of converging lenses than a flat one located behind mid point and then diverging. Have you measured the entrance pupil with a pano head on a tripod or by hand? Sent from my SM-A505FN using Tapatalk
×
×
  • Create New...