GH4 - Nauticam Macro Lens/Port Thoughts

[Interceptor121 773]

I had tested the PZ 14-42 extensively you can read here

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 14-42mm / F3.5 – 5.6 / Power OIS and Nauticam Macro Port 35 | Interceptor121 Underwater Photo & Video Blog

http://interceptor121.com/2015/01/25/panasonic-lumix-g-x-vario-14-42mm-f3-5-5-6-power-ois-and-nauticam-macro-port-35/

On the gx7 you get to 44mm width so on the gh4 it will be 37 with an inon UCL-165 or similar +6. With UCL-100 equivalent to subsee +10 I get 31mm for the gh4 it would be 26mm that is super macro already. The gx7 has a tele mode that performs a 2.4x zoom so with that you don't really need more diopters I believe the gh4 has this mode to only in 1080p

For what concerns nick comment about cheaper the 35 port + PZ14-42 + wet diopter costs the same of olympus 12-50 plus port with macro switch however the 14-42 is stabilised and you can attach wet wide angle lenses on it with surprising image quality (for the gx7) I don't have a GH4 but I bet you can attach a different lens to get your 100 degrees diagonal.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Interceptor121

[Nick Hope 151]

A silly little video that gives you an idea of the range of the Oly 12-50. The 4 or so tightest shots are in the 43mm macro mode. Focus ain't great on some clips, which is user error.

 

[escape 84]

So I'm the only one happy with Oly 60mm? I even thinking why there's no teleconverter for m43.

[mintakax 0]

Thanks all. I like the video Nick !

 

Is this the correct port for the 14-42PZ ? The nauticam N85 macro flat port 35 with 67mm threads ?

http://www.backscatter.com/sku/na-36139.lasso

 

I Could then add this dual flip diopter holder ?

http://reefphoto.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=5791

[mintakax 0]

Also, apologies if this is a stupid question. I have just ordered the 14-42 PZ and the 35 flat port. Do people that use this, use the zoom gear or does the camera operate the power zoom ?

[thetrickster 328]

I've got the zoom ring - expensive but I think worth it, as you can use the touch screen to zoom, but that won't work in the housing!

[mintakax 0]

I've got the zoom ring - expensive but I think worth it, as you can use the touch screen to zoom, but that won't work in the housing!

Thanks Richard

I thought that might be the case so I ordered the ring also.

[Nick Hope 151]

So I'm the only one happy with Oly 60mm? I even thinking why there's no teleconverter for m43.

I'm very happy with it, but it's only for certain dives. I've been flipping the Subsee +10 in front of it a bit too.

 

Thanks all. I like the video Nick !

 

Is this the correct port for the 14-42PZ ? The nauticam N85 macro flat port 35 with 67mm threads ?

http://www.backscatter.com/sku/na-36139.lasso

 

I Could then add this dual flip diopter holder ?

http://reefphoto.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=5791

Thanks! What are you planning to put in those 2 flips? Just asking because I originally thought I needed that dual flip for +5 and +10 Subsee diopters but got the single Nauticam flip because it was quickly available here in Thailand. And now in reality I tend not to bother with the +5 and just use the +10 if I want a bit more magnification. With my Oly 12-50 I haven't been bothering with either diopter as some quick tests showed they didn't add much. Planning a more in-depth on that.

[Interceptor121 773]

I use a nauticam m67-LD adapter and then bayonet lenses that I put in lens caddies on the arms. Obviously are need either an m67-LD adapter per lens or get the inon bayonet lenses you are however then bound to inon (which is fine although more expensive than subsee)

[mintakax 0]

I'm very happy with it, but it's only for certain dives. I've been flipping the Subsee +10 in front of it a bit too. Thanks! What are you planning to put in those 2 flips? Just asking because I originally thought I needed that dual flip for +5 and +10 Subsee diopters but got the single Nauticam flip because it was quickly available here in Thailand. And now in reality I tend not to bother with the +5 and just use the +10 if I want a bit more magnification. With my Oly 12-50 I haven't been bothering with either diopter as some quick tests showed they didn't add much. Planning a more in-depth on that.

I was thinking a +10 to go with the +5, but probably would have been ok with a single like you mentioned.

[Interceptor121 773]

With the Pz 14-42 +6 gets you a 36mm frame width with GH4 4K a +10 will have more limited working range and will require you to be more steady. As a starter +6 is fine especially if you are handheld and never shot macro on a 4:3 camera

[ScubaBob 37]

With my Oly 12-50 I haven't been bothering with either diopter as some quick tests showed they didn't add much. Planning a more in-depth on that.

 

I found the same with the 12-50mm. I haven't tried the +10 subsee yet with the 60mm, I'll have to give that a shot (on a day where there's NO surge!)

[Nick Hope 151]

Very rough test with the Olympus 60mm macro in the housing in air. Minimum size to fill the frame:

 

60mm only: 13mm subject at 5cm distance

Subsee +5: 10mm subject at 2.5cm distance

Subsee +10: 9mm subject at 1.5cm distance

Subsee +5 and +10: 10mm at whatever range (working distance just 0 to 3cm)

 

Personal Conclusion: Worth taking the Subsee +10 alone for a bit more magnification (about 30%), but not really the +5.

 

Basically wet diopters seem of more value for non-macro lenses.

 

Remember that lighting becomes an issue when you get this close.

 

I'm not a good enough physicist to know how relevant this test was to performance underwater.

 

Would love some comparisons with the Nauticam SMC, CMC and the Aquako +15.

Edited February 12, 2015 by Nick Hope

[Interceptor121 773]

Very rough test with the Olympus 60mm macro in the housing in air. Minimum size to fill the frame:

 

60mm only: 13mm subject at 5cm distance

Subsee +5: 10mm subject at 2.5cm distance

Subsee +10: 9mm subject at 1.5cm distance

Subsee +5 and +10: 10mm at whatever range (working distance just 0 to 3cm)

 

Personal Conclusion: Worth taking the Subsee +10 alone for a bit more magnification (about 30%), but not really the +5.

 

Basically wet diopters seem of more value for non-macro lenses.

 

 

The diopter is effective in shortening the working distance in water however it only shortens the actual distance from the port to the subject not the total working distance.

a lens like the 60mm has a minimum distance from the sensor of 19 cm however only 5cm are left between the port and subject in water those become 6.65 cm. The lens by itself has already 15 diopters and the focal length is now 80mm a +5 only has a 1.5 cm net benefit

However if you have the pz 14-42 that has 20cm outside the port in water the equivalent distance becomes 26.6cm a +5 brings this down to 8.8cm which is 2.34x closer

In short the diopter only brings a benefit is it is more powerful than the lens on its own. As a rule of thumb you want something at least with the same power of the lens in air. Example 60mm you need a 15cm to make a real difference however you maybe left with no distance. Pz 14-42 benefits start at +5.

[escape 84]

 

 

Would love some comparisons with the Nauticam SMC, CMC and the Aquako +15.

Just got Nauticam CMC so hopefully I can try all three with 60mm and 14-42 soon. Water temp still damn cold here (3~5C) for macro shooting.

[Nick Hope 151]

EunJae, some quick tests on dry land to see what minimum size you can fill the frame with would be very interesting, and at what distance.

[escape 84]

 

Ok, just lazy quick topside test. Min size to fill the frame.

GH4 + Oly 60mm.

 

Nauticam CMC : 8mm subject at 2.7cm

Nautcam SMC : 10mm subject at 2.8cm

Aquako IV (2.5x) : 8mm subject at 2.2cm

Subsee +5 : 11mm subject at 3.2cm

Subsee +10 : 9mm subject at 1.7cm

 

I guess CMC will be best choice for 60mm and personally I'll bring down CMC and Aquako IV with 60mm.

I'll try to do similar test with 14-42 when I have port.

HTH

Ej.

Edited February 13, 2015 by escape

[thetrickster 328]

Sorry to be so dumb, whats the differences between the SMC and the CMC?

 

From what I read the CMC is a higher magnification and better optically - if that is the case, whats the status of the SMC?

[escape 84]

Sorry to be so dumb, whats the differences between the SMC and the CMC?

 

From what I read the CMC is a higher magnification and better optically - if that is the case, whats the status of the SMC?

It's works better with compact and m43.

http://www.nauticamusa.com/news/2015/2/3/the-cmc-has-arrived

Edited February 13, 2015 by escape

[thetrickster 328]

Thank you - didn't see that - and the info in the bottom of the screen is excellent!

 

Will have to get one now! WOW!

[SwiftFF5 134]

I've wondered about using the CMC to replace my Subsee diopter on a flip mount with a Canon camcorder. That is not a listed option, but I wonder how well it would work. Does anyone have any thoughts on that?

[Interceptor121 773]

 

Ok, just lazy quick topside test. Min size to fill the frame.

GH4 + Oly 60mm.

 

Nauticam CMC : 8mm subject at 2.7cm

Nautcam SMC : 10mm subject at 2.8cm

Aquako IV (2.5x) : 8mm subject at 2.2cm

Subsee +5 : 11mm subject at 3.2cm

Subsee +10 : 9mm subject at 1.7cm

 

I guess CMC will be best choice for 60mm and personally I'll bring down CMC and Aquako IV with 60mm.

I'll try to do similar test with 14-42 when I have port.

HTH

Ej.

What is interesting is that the focus point moves backward with this lens so you end up with more working distance.

At practical level though you need to see how much range you have in focus between the camera focussing at infinity and focussing on the closest point. When this approaches one cm you know this becomes a very very specific tool that can be good for still images but for video less so. This CMC lens seems a response to the new compact with short zoom but on a normal 100-120 equivalent look an overkill

[Nick Hope 151]

Thanks EunJae. Looks like CMC going on my shopping list and I might even sell my Subsees. Not only the best magnification but also looks like the smallest and lightest of the bunch.

[Interceptor121 773]

Those are two shots with PZ-14-42mm at 42mm end and Inon UCL-100 on the GX7 for the GH4 you are looking at 26mm horizontal after 4K crop and 1.5cm height

For me this is already very small

[Nick Hope 151]

Do you remember what distance you were at?

 

Interesting to compare that 26mm horizontal with my Olympus 12-50mm. My minimum subject to fill the frame (in air, in 43mm macro mode) was about 25mm at about 4cm distance without any diopters.

 

Looks like, in general, Panasonic PZ-14-42mm/+10 diopter is in the same ballpark as the Olympus 12-50mm as a combination that gives you reasonable macro and a bit of wideish angle too. Oly may give a little bit more magnification but doesn't have any stabilization on a GH4 body.

 

With any combo of +5 and +10 diopters on the Oly 12-50mm I could fill the frame with about 20mm at 1cm distance. Hence I decided not to bother taking them as the extra magnification is not really worth it on that lens.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Nick Hope