Decided on a new micro 4/3 setup now need help deciding on which camera?

[kstokell 4]

Coming from experience. IMHO I still think the 9-18mm is a mistake. Never bothered with diopters, mind, just upgraded to the 7-14mm.

 

Seriously look at one of the zooms starting at 12mm for your general use.

 

The 9-18mm will disappoint

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Do you have any problems with flaring with the Panasonic 7-14mm, and do you need the zoom gear, or does the lens have motorized zoom?

[kstokell 4]

I'm still struggling with what wide angle option to go with so I have made an overview of the comparative cost of what I think are my four main options:

 

$1130 - Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 (4 inch wide angle port)

$1880 - Panasonic Lumix 7-14mm lens (6 inch wide angle port)

$1350 - Panasonic 8mm f/3.5 Lens (4.33 inch dome port)

$1660 - Olympus 8mm f/1.8 PRO Lens (4.33 inch dome port)

In which order would you place these considering the price, size and quality, if you have any other options at 9mm or wider please let me know?

This is a breakdown of the prices:

$500 - Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 (for general/wide angle use)

$630 - Nuaticam 4 inch Wide Angle Port (36137) with zoom gear (36144) for 9-18mm lens

$800 - Panasonic Lumix 7-14mm lens

$680 - Nuaticam 6 inch Wide Angle Port (36164) + Focus knob for 7-14mm lens

$200 - Nauticam P714-Z Zoom Gear: Panasonic 7-14/4

$200 - Nauticam P714-F Focus Gear: Panasonic 7-14/4

$650 - Panasonic 8mm f/3.5 Lens

$500 - Nauticam 4.33 inch Dome Port for Panasonic 8mm F3.5

$200 - Nauticam P8-F Focus Gear for Panasonic 8mm

$800 - Olympus 8mm f/1.8 PRO Lens

$500 - Nauticam 4.33 inch Dome Port for Olympus 8mm F1.8

$180 - Nauticam N85 Mini Extension Ring 20 with lock

$185 - Nauticam O8-F Focus Gear for Olympus 8mm

Edited February 15, 2016 by kstokell

[Aleksandar 4]

To complicate things further, for Panasonic or Olympus 8mm you can also look at Zen 100 dome (4"), they are glass domes and can be found used for price of the acrylic ones if you care to spend some time.

 

Considering there were no big appraisals for 9-18, I would say that the Panasonic setup is a winner if you look at the parameters you mentioned as well (price, size, quality). However, yes, you have to come close to fill the frame - I use it.

[kstokell 4]

To complicate things further, for Panasonic or Olympus 8mm you can also look at Zen 100 dome (4"), they are glass domes and can be found used for price of the acrylic ones if you care to spend some time.

 

Considering there were no big appraisals for 9-18, I would say that the Panasonic setup is a winner if you look at the parameters you mentioned as well (price, size, quality). However, yes, you have to come close to fill the frame - I use it.

 

Unfortunately I live on a Caribbean island and will only be in Florida for one week to make all my purchases so don't really have time to shop around, which is a pity. Shipping stuff to Caribbean islands is very hit and miss and trying to buy local is impossible, I suppose that's one of the down-sides of living here, many up-sides though, like all year round shore diving !

[thetrickster 328]

The 8mm fisheyes are another kettle of fish altogether. These aren't for 'general' diving photos.

 

Look at the 12-40mm from Olympus. That behind a dome might give you everything you need. Or the Panasonic 12-35mm of going GX8.

 

As to the 7-14mm. You will need the zoom gear. It's mechanical zoom. Never encountered any issues with the 7-14mm, apart from no front filter holder and lack of OIS.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kstokell 4]

The 8mm fisheyes are another kettle of fish altogether. These aren't for 'general' diving photos.

 

Look at the 12-40mm from Olympus. That behind a dome might give you everything you need. Or the Panasonic 12-35mm of going GX8.

 

As to the 7-14mm. You will need the zoom gear. It's mechanical zoom. Never encountered any issues with the 7-14mm, apart from no front filter holder and lack of OIS.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I agree that the 8mm fisheyes are a completely different type of lens, but I think for me both the 12-40mm or 12-35mm, at the wide end, will not have the angle of view I'm looking for (74' horizontal, 59' vertical 86' diagonal).

 

This leaves me back with the Panasonic 7-14mm (104', 88', 116') at the wide end, or the Olympus 9-18mm (90' 74' 103') at the wide end. Of these the 7-14mm would seem the perfect fit, my only reservations are the price, the size and the minimum focus distance of 25cm, which eliminates CFWA (wide angle/macro shots) shots which I quite like taking.

 

Both the fisheye lenses have very close focus capability which would be ideal for CFWA shots, but of course they come with their own limitations in more general use.

 

I know it sounds like I want everything from one lens but please be patient with me, I'm just trying to think through the options to come up with a solution that will best suit the type of pictures I like to take, and all help regarding other more experienced peoples feedback will help me make these choices and is much appreciated.

Edited February 15, 2016 by kstokell

[Draq 118]

Well, the good news is that you have simplified things for yourself. If 12mm is not wide enough and a fisheye isn't what you want, then you have three choices. In descending order of both quality and price, you can get the Oly 7-14 in a 170 or 180 dome, the Panasonic 7-14 in a 6" or 170 dome (and maybe works in a 180 dome; not sure) or the 9-18 in a smaller port of around 3.5-4.33".

 

You just need to decide higher price/quality and large size vs lower price, lesser quality and smaller size.

 

No one can really tell you how to resolve this...it is personal and we all struggle with the same or similar issues.

 

Welcome to underwater photography.

 

Oh, and I believe the minimum focus of the Oly 7-14 is 20cm.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Draq

[kstokell 4]

Well, the good news is that you have simplified things for yourself. If 12mm is not wide enough and a fisheye isn't what you want, then you have three choices. In descending order of both quality and price, you can get the Oly 7-14 in a 170 or 180 dome, the Panasonic 7-14 in a 6" or 170 dome (and maybe works in a 180 dome; not sure) or the 9-18 in a smaller port of around 3.5-4.33".

 

You just need to decide higher price/quality and large size vs lower price, lesser quality and smaller size.

 

No one can really tell you how to resolve this...it is personal and we all struggle with the same or similar issues.

 

Welcome to underwater photography.

 

Oh, and I believe the minimum focus of the Oly 7-14 is 20cm.

 

Correcto Mundo, although I haven't yet ruled out the fisheye option, I'd like to hear some feedback from people who use it on a regular basis, and what they consider the main advantages and disadvantages? I'm worried there would be to big a gap to fill between the 60mm macro and 8mm fisheye. Although I have to say I currently mostly use either my UWL-04 Fisheye Wet Lens, or my +7 diopter on the RX100, I don't use the bare lens often, so perhaps 60mm / 8mm would suit what I do?

 

I've ruled out the Oly 7-14 as to expensive and bigger than the Panasonic 7-14 and I'm not sure it's much better. So it's either the Panasonic 7-14 in a 6", the 9-18 in the 3.5 or 4.33", or maybe a 8mm fisheye option.

 

Decisions Decisions!

[Aleksandar 4]

12 is definetly not wide enough (I have the 12-50), and 8mm is too wide, for sure.

 

Advantage of the fisheye is that everything fits in the frame. Disadvantage at the same time is that too much fits in the frame and you do need to come close in order to fill the frame with one object/animal. Another advantage is the size for travelling, 8mm + 3,5 or 4" dome is very portable.

 

However, everything comes with a price/performance or value tag, my setup includes only 60mm macro and 8mm, and if I need less than 8mm, I pick up the 12-50 which came as a kit lens with my EM5 and use it with the flat port for 60mm macro as a cheap workaround (3 lenses, two ports). In ideal life, 7-14 would be an option, but then again, I do not make money with this hobby, so for me it makes no sense spending that much on top. If I had a chance to try the 7-14 it might change my mind, but luckily where I live, mirroless systems underwater are so rare (even for topside, 7-14 is very egzotic to find), that it will not happen. Which is maybe good.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Aleksandar

[thetrickster 328]

The Panasonic 7-14mm you won't be disappointed with, as long as you don't try any CFWA stuff with it (due to soft corners) but apart from that it's stellar .

 

It works with the Nauticam 7" acrylic dome, the zen 170mm glass dome (which i had) and also the new Nauticam 180mm glass dome. The bigger the dome, in theory the better the corner sharpness.

 

However even at 14mm it's still quite wide. So you will be limited to wide angle shots.

 

If you are looking at the 7-14mm and a dome, please consider (again) the 14-42mm plus the WWL. You get better image quality, massive more flexiblity and all about the same size / weight. Plus add the CMC you in theory could get rid of the 60mm.

 

All the lenses you mention, Ive had underwater and I've gone full circle to the 14-42 with the WWL and CMC.

Still have the others, but in the process of selling off.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Griff 23]

If you use the camera and lenses above water also, I would go for the 7-14. I use mine all the time when taking pictures around top side and have just purchased the Nauticam 6" dome for it for underwater and the 4.3" dome and 20mm extension for my Olympus 8mm Pro.

[EspenB 15]

If you are looking at the 7-14mm and a dome, please consider (again) the 14-42mm plus the WWL. You get better image quality, massive more flexiblity and all about the same size / weight. Plus add the CMC you in theory could get rid of the 60mm.

 

All the lenses you mention, Ive had underwater and I've gone full circle to the 14-42 with the WWL and CMC.

Still have the others, but in the process of selling off.

 

Surely, the Olympus 8 mm f1.8 fisheye will be better in low light than the 14-42 and WWL?

[tursiops 81]

Get the vacuum port for the Nauticam housing; the comfort level provided by a little green light is amazing.

 

I'm also looking at using my 12-50 with a WWL on a flip mount. Unless I'm doing a pure muck/macro dive, I'm not happy with the constraint of a dedicated macro setup, as good as the 60mm is. Equally, I'm not happy with the constraint of a no-macro dive, so see the WWL as my only solution rather than a dedicated WA lens/port.

[thetrickster 328]

 

Surely, the Olympus 8 mm f1.8 fisheye will be better in low light than the 14-42 and WWL?

Yes the 8mm f1.8 will blow the 14-42mm away in terms of low light. But the OP wants a 'general purpose / wide angle' lens. Hence why I haven't recommend either of the 8mm's.

 

I think all the suggestions here and the lenses come down to where does he want to compromise on. Size, weight, optical quality, range etc.

 

It's a shame the 9-18mm is so soft behind a dome, as if I'm honest that's probably the closest lens to what he wants out of all this. (Cost, weight, range).

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kstokell 4]

Yes the 8mm f1.8 will blow the 14-42mm away in terms of low light. But the OP wants a 'general purpose / wide angle' lens. Hence why I haven't recommend either of the 8mm's.

 

I think all the suggestions here and the lenses come down to where does he want to compromise on. Size, weight, optical quality, range etc.

 

It's a shame the 9-18mm is so soft behind a dome, as if I'm honest that's probably the closest lens to what he wants out of all this. (Cost, weight, range).

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You hit the nail right on the head "thetrickster", the 9-18mm does seem to be the lens that would fit me best, and as wide angle shooting only comprises about 15% of my total underwater shooting (85% is macro), I'm thinking although it is "soft behind a dome" it may be sufficient for my needs. Does anyone have any comparison shots between the 7-14 and 9-18, or examples of the 9-18 so I can judge this softness?

 

I've just received quotes from a shop in the US, and the complete rig with the 9-18mm is $900 cheaper than with the 7-14mm option. This, and the fact that the 9-18 is slightly wider, are pulling me in the 9-18 direction.

 

I did consider the WWL option combined with the CMC on the 12-50 Olympus lens (with the 42mm macro mode), but the quality was definitely not there in macro mode, which as previously stated makes up the large proportion of my underwater photography. Also I heard that the WWL, even when fitted with the Nauticam bayonet connection, was not easy to remove during a dive, which if true rather negates the purpose of the lens, if anyone has experience of switching this lens underwater, it would be interesting to get feedback on this?

 

So to sum up, I think that unless anyone else has any other suggestions, like a zoom fisheye for micro 4/3, similar to the Tokina 10-17mm which is for Canon APS-C, or I see some pictures that really show what I would consider really "soft" shots, I think it is going to be the 9-18mm for me.

 

After all I do live in Curacao and do most of my diving there or in Bonaire, so apart from the occasional turtles, sharks, rays and the odd wreck dive now and then, wide angle is of secondary importance for me.

 

Thanks for everyone's input, it has really helped me in moving on from my RX100 setup and choosing my next underwater rig!

 

Below is a full list of what I will probably be ordering, if anyone has any advice on things that I may need in addition to this list, or things that can be changed for a better overall solution please let me know?

 

Thanks again, Kevin

 

Nauticam NA-EM5II Housing for Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II Camera

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II Camera Body, Black

Nauticam 45 Degree Viewfinder for MIL Housings

Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm f/4.0-5.6 Zoom Lens

Nauticam 4” Wide Angle Port For Mirrorless Camera Housings

Olympus MSC ED M.Zuiko 60mm f/2.8, Black

Nauticam Macro Port 65 for 60mm F2.8 Macro Lens

Nauticam Compact Macro Converter 1 (CMC-1)

Saga Dive Flip Lens Holder 67mm

2 x Sea and Sea YS-D2 Strobe

2 x Nauticam Sea & Sea -> Sea & Sea Fiber Optic Cable

Nauticam M16 Vacuum Valve

Nauticam Flexitray II With Left Handle

2 x Nauticam Carbon Fiber Float Arm 200mm x 60mm / 8 In. x 2.4 In.

2 x Nauticam Multi-Purpose Clamp With Shackle

2 x Nauticam 125mm / 5 Inch Double Ball Arm Segment

Nauticam Adjustable Right Handle II for Easitray II & Flexitray II

Nauticam 1 Inch Strobe Mounting Ball for Cold Shoe

Nauticam 18cm / 7 Inch Lanyard With 2 Snap Hooks

5 x Nauticam Clamp for all 1 Inch ball arm systems

2 x Nauticam 1 inch Base Ball for Easitray and Flexitray

2 x Maha Powerex 2400mAh Imedion Rechargeable AA Batteries w/case

Maha Powerex MH-C801D Eight Cell - 1hr. Charger for AA / AAA 79.95

Edited February 16, 2016 by kstokell

[thetrickster 328]

I presume you have read this review: http://www.uwphotographyguide.com/node/668- They seem pretty happy with the 9-18mm

 

I sold my 9-18mm many years ago, so can't do a side by side for you.

 

If you go with the 9-18mm - don't forget to add the 'Nauticam 36144 Zoom Gear' for the 9-18mm lens.

[thetrickster 328]

To confuse you further, if you considered the E-M1? The Nauticam housing for the E-M1 comes already with handles/ tray etc - so might work out around the same price.

[kstokell 4]

To confuse you further, if you considered the E-M1? The Nauticam housing for the E-M1 comes already with handles/ tray etc - so might work out around the same price.

 

I did look at the E-M1, and ideally if the release timeline for its replacement had aligned with my purchase date I would have probably gone with that. Both the EM5 mk2 and EM1 seem to be pretty much the same apart from a few pro's and con's for both systems, none of which really effect how I intend to use the system (apart maybe for strobe sync time being slower on the EM5?), so I though I would go with the newer slightly smaller model (for surface use), rather than the old soon to be replaced model. I also looked at the EM10 mk2, and the GX8 as well, and nearly went for one of them, but in the end I settled on the EM5 mk2, as it seems the most popular (apart from maybe the EM1), which is always handy when you are trying to get tips on setup etc.

 

Thanks for the heads up regarding the zoom gear for the 9-18, I've asked for it to be added to the list along with a focus gear for the 90mm, and the Nauticam Shutter Release Trigger.

 

I have also asked if is it possible to mount the 9-18mm behind the 4.33 inch dome (NA36132) with an extension ring, as this would allow me to also buy the Panasonic 8mm fisheye lens, either now or at some time in the future, if I think I need it.

 

Now all I've got to do is get the best price I can, as the total is close to $10,000 !

 

Thanks for all your help!

Kevin

 

PS. I saw the article and it was one of the reasons I choose to go with the 9-18!

Edited February 16, 2016 by kstokell

[EspenB 15]

 

 

You hit the nail right on the head "thetrickster", the 9-18mm does seem to be the lens that would fit me best, and as wide angle shooting only comprises about 15% of my total underwater shooting (85% is macro), I'm thinking although it is "soft behind a dome" it may be sufficient for my needs.

 

Remember that the 9-18 also can be used in the 180 mm glas dome, with the optimum solution being the the 180 mm dome with the 47 mm adaptor and 20 mm extension.

 

This is the "most optimized dome port" as stated in the port chart.

[kstokell 4]

 

Remember that the 9-18 also can be used in the 180 mm glas dome, with the optimum solution being the the 180 mm dome with the 47 mm adaptor and 20 mm extension.

 

This is the "most optimized dome port" as stated in the port chart

 

The 180mm glass dome is a bit to big for me and also costs much more! But you are correct it seems the 9-18mm behind the 4.33 inch dome will suffer from too much distortion due to excessive curvature, and the larger dome is the only solution for both the 9-18 and 8mm behind the same glass.

 

So I think I'll am going to stick with the 9-18 and 4" wide angle port, and if needed I'll buy the 8mm and 4.33 inch dome port at a later date !

[Griff 23]

I have an EM1 and EM10 both in Nauticam (vacuum valves essential!) and I bought the EM1 with the 12-50 and 60mm macro lens as 80% of local dive sites are macro. The 12-50 fits snugly in the 65 macro port and you don't need a zoom gear as it can be assigned to the left and right buttons on the camera. You could use this with an Inon UWL 100 wet lens and the CMC which gives better magnification than the 43 macro mode. Don't waste money on the dedicated Nauticam port 77. The 60mm macro lens is my go to lens and can do small fish portraits too. I have the Oly 8mm and Pana 7-14 but have only just got ports for them to photograph the Grey Nurse sharks at Nelson Bay Australia. (Awesome dive with 20 to 40 sharks in one dive site!) The 8mm was too wide but good for video and the 7-14 was pretty good (my wife had that lens).

I would start with the 12-50 as general and top side lens and the 60 macro lens if that's 85% of your dives. You could also mount the RX100 on top of the housing with its wet wide lens and you'll have best of both worlds.

I also bought a Panasonic G7 for top side use for its 4K abilities and for 25fps in camera Timelapse videos (Oly only 5fps in 4K and only 10-15 fps in HD). If I was buying a set up now I would go for Oanasonic GX8 with Pana 45 or 30mm macro (both have IS for 4K macro video) Nauticam housing and use the 14-42 with an Inon wet lens for 100deg wide angle. Would come I a lot cheaper than the options you have now and you get the benefits of 4K that Olympus steadfastly refuse to fit to their new cameras i.e. The Pen F which is more expensive than the Panas and also EM5 and EM1!!

[BengalBoy 2]

I do not think the CMC will work with the Saga flip. Something about the mounting pins for the diopter being different. You might want to check on that before you buy the Saga? I think I'd just stick with the Nauticam flip made for the 67mm port 65.

[michaeltsantos 4]

Dear Kevin,

 

 

Just to confuse you even further, I choose the following options for the EM-10 in a Nauticam housing:

 

Nauticam 4" wide angle port for the following lenses:

- Oly 9-18mm with nauticam zoom ring and a +2 diopter for better corner sharpness

- Oly 60mm (no need for zoom gear as AF is fast and reliable). No corner distortion with this lens and wide-angle port. I also made a DIY flip diopter holder for the CMC for about $10. But Nauticam also sells a flip diopter holder for this port for about $400.

 

eventually, I added the following:

 

Nauticam 4.33" dome for for a Samyang/Rokinon 7.5mm fisheye lens. I use the zoom gear for the 9-18mm lens to manual focus the lens. But, aperture is set pre-dive. Thus, I can only adjust with SS and ISO during the dive.

 

Had a very limited budget but I find this set-up adequate for most shooting conditions (fisheye, wide angle and macro).

 

Hope this helps.

 

Happy shopping!

 

 

Mike

[BengalBoy 2]

Nauticam's flip diopter holder for the Port 65 costs $260. The Nauticam CMC is designed for use with this diopter holder and the Port 65. Making sure you have correct information.

[kstokell 4]

I looked at the idea of putting both the 9-18mm and 60mm behind the same 4" wide angle port, but the price of the flip holder is the same price as the 60mm port, plus the 4" wide angle port is larger and I do like the manual focus option.

 

To save a little money I am thinking of not bothering with the flip holder for the 60mm, and just keeping the CMC-1 in my pocket or on a lens holder, I can't see that it would be too much trouble to screw on underwater, and it won't get in the way when not in use, does anyone else do it that way?

 

Another couple of quick question for you guys, I have requested two "Nauticam Carbon Fiber Float Arms (60mm x 200mm)" to hopefully make the rig more or less neutral in the water, being carbon fiber are these float arms fragile, and if so is there a better solution, also is this enough flotation or will I need more?

 

I'm getting there slowly not long now!

Edited February 18, 2016 by kstokell