ikelite 8"dome vs 6" dome

[puffer 0]

Hi All

 

I have just got my 10-17 lens tokina. Which would be a better dome port for the ikelite housing. The 8" dome which would be not so good for travelling, or the 6" standard dome less orings to think about and with the port shade off you would get no vignetting. Not sure which one to go for any help.

[Diediealsomustdive 2]

Hi All

 

I have just got my 10-17 lens tokina. Which would be a better dome port for the ikelite housing. The 8" dome which would be not so good for travelling, or the 6" standard dome less orings to think about and with the port shade off you would get no vignetting. Not sure which one to go for any help.

I used the 6" dome for ease of travel as well as having the 20mm port already in my cupboard.

 

Careful strobe placement is necessary or there will be flare. I do not notice any loss in sharpness, although I do not have the 8" port to compare. I am happy with the 6" dome port.

[oskar 7]

People here refer to over/under pictures not working with a smaller dome. Could anyone please expand a bit on that, what happens?

 

Ta

/O

[Diediealsomustdive 2]

People here refer to over/under pictures not working with a smaller dome. Could anyone please expand a bit on that, what happens?

 

Ta

/O

 

Sorry, I have heard the same thing as you did but have not had a chance to try that on a 6" dome. Having said that, I will continue to use the smaller dome as the travel ease part is more important than the over/under picture aspect.

[rtrski 20]

Basically, the smaller the dome, the harder it is to keep it right at halfway through the water surface. An 8" dome gives you much more 'height' to play with.

 

Neither is easy if water is choppy, of course.

[UWphotoNewbie 1]

I like the 8" dome better FOR travel. Sure the dome is bigger but if you are trying to house multiple lenses both macro and WA then the 8" dome system is better. You end up with less gear to deal with--one dome and one flat port with several extensions.

 

I also like the port better for use with zooms that don't quite break the 12" close focus mark, namely the Nikon 12-24mm. I think its a little sharper on the 8" dome, though its not terrible on the 6" dome with a +2 diopter. Some still use a weak diopter on the 8" as well.

 

As was mentioned with a bigger dome its much easier to get the waterline in the middle.

[Will_Clark 0]

Bumping this thread-

 

I'm about to buy a Tokina 10-17 for my 40d but I'm still not sure which Ikelite port to get - I already have various 6" ports (for Canon 10-22mm, 17-85mm, 60mm macro flat), and I'm willing to convert to the 8" system for the 10-17 and 17-85 if convinced.

 

Beyond making over & unders a bit easier, & the above opinions - is there anything else of note to add?

Edited October 20, 2009 by Will_Clark

[oskar 7]

I'm about to buy a Tokina 10-17 for my 40d but I'm still not sure which Ikelite port to get - I already have various 6" ports (for Canon 10-22mm, 17-85mm, 60mm macro flat), and I'm willing to convert to the 8" system for the 10-17 and 17-85 if convinced.

 

 

Sorry for twisting you bump of this thread slightly out of focus ;-) But, are you happy with the performance of the 6" dome with all other lenses, like the 10-22 in particular? Going to 8" would benefit that one I would think? (I asked about that here: http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=32735)

 

 

Cheers

/O

[blueglass 3]

I use both, the 6" and 8" domes with the Tokina 10-17.

8" is much easier for split shots.

6" is much easier to light in extreme CFWA where the 8" makes a bigger shadow.

 

With 6" and wide apertures you may get slightly soft corners.

[Will_Clark 0]

Thanks for that.

 

Using my 6" with the 10-22 makes lovely images, but there are sometimes soft corners.

 

I'm changing to the 10-17 because of the more extreme fisheye effect, and how it has been loved by users of wetpixel.

 

Perhaps I need to take both 6" AND 8"... but I already have to lug so much gear around!

[Christian K 0]

Thanks for that.

 

Using my 6" with the 10-22 makes lovely images, but there are sometimes soft corners.

 

I'm changing to the 10-17 because of the more extreme fisheye effect, and how it has been loved by users of wetpixel.

 

Perhaps I need to take both 6" AND 8"... but I already have to lug so much gear around!

 

A fisheye is actually less sensitive regarding the dome radius compared to a rectilinear lens. Your 10-22 will most probably be the lens benefitting the most from a wider port. Not the 10-17 fisheye.

 

cheers

Edited October 20, 2009 by Christian K

[oskar 7]

Using my 6" with the 10-22 makes lovely images, but there are sometimes soft corners.

 

I'm changing to the 10-17 because of the more extreme fisheye effect, and how it has been loved by users of wetpixel.

 

 

Aha, thanks for that, do you happen to have any samples to share of how the 10-22 performs with the 6"?

 

/O

[rainmaker 0]

Aha, thanks for that, do you happen to have any samples to share of how the 10-22 performs with the 6"?

 

/O

 

I too would be fairly interested in seeing some shots with the 10-22 in a 6" dome - especially a wide short or two with big animals (sharks/whales/dolphins/Worlds Largest Burrito underwater, etc..)

[UWphotoNewbie 1]

Perhaps I need to take both 6" AND 8"... but I already have to lug so much gear around!

 

 

Now I think that would be insanity. Just pick one system and stick with it.

 

I originally went with the 8" to help cure the 12-24mm softness because its right at the bleeding edge for close focus without a diopter. The 10-17mm doesn't have these issues. FE lenses work very well inside domes. If all I had was a 10-17mm for WA and I wasn't into split levels I'd go with the 6".

 

If you are a nut like me and want to travel with all your lenses, then the 8" makes some sense.

Advantages:

-Actually lighter if you need to use:

-Macro: 60mm, 105mm VR w and w/o diopters w and w/o focus

-WA: 10.5mm, 12-24mm, 15mm

 

-Better corners/focus with rectilinear WA zooms

 

-Better split levels

 

Cons:

- More expensive

- Bulkier if you have less lenses

- More O-rings and some difficult assembly (its a bugger to disassemble these requiring a strap wrench or 2)

[Will_Clark 0]

This thread was based on a pic taken with the 10-22mm and a 6" Ikelite dome. Not sure if it was at the 10mm though, as I am on another computer.

 

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showt...mp;#entry214680

[oskar 7]

This thread was based on a pic taken with the 10-22mm and a 6" Ikelite dome. Not sure if it was at the 10mm though, as I am on another computer.

 

Cool, it is quite low-res. but in this resolution it does not seem to have any edge softess problems at all! (it may depend on focal length, but It looks like the wide end to me)

[heyross 0]

G'day. I also am in somewhat of a similar delimmea with 6" or 8" domes, but of a slightly differt kind. I am new to underwater photography. I am setting up as a sports action photograher and a lot of the photos I will have to take are surface shots of surfing, kite surfing etc, as well as underwater shots. I have a Canon 5D and am looking for the corresponding Ikelite housing. Can anyone advise as to refraction effect on a dome lens for photos taken out of the water. Which dome refracts the least? Many thanks. heyross