Jump to content
Sebastes68

Comments on shooting the 9-18mm vs. 8mm fisheye?

Recommended Posts

I just bought the 9-18mm lens for my OMD 1 in a Nautucam housing but I have to buy another port specifically for it as of course my 8mm fisheye port won't work. Was thinking about getting a 170mm big dome but it's hideously expensive. Ideas? Thoughts? I like the 8mm fisheye but I felt a little limited at times in the Red Sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've shot with both the 9-18mm and the Panasonic 8mm fisheye and I thought the fisheye took WAY better photos. Even though the 9-18 isn't a cheap lens, I've always thought the photos I got from it looked flat and not much better than what I've gotten from the 14-42 kit lenses. The fisheye lens though, the photos using that are sharp and the color pop really nicely. AND the lens port for the fisheye is a lot cheaper than the dome for the 9-18. I've just replaced the Pana fisheye with the Oly fisheye so I'm looking forward to the results when I go to Indonesia next month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've used the 4" semidome with my 9-18, since that's what Nauticam recommended when I got my kit. There are some corner sharpness issues, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Red Sea the 18-36mm focal range is not really a great choice. Mostly you go from 8mm fisheye to 60mm macro as the water is clear. If you really want to add a lens the 7-14mm is a better choice for wreck interiors and split shots

The 4" port is a bit soft in the corners bit at least is compact and it is a cut of a larger dome so it is not the size to be the issue

Edited by Interceptor121

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9-18 in Zen port is annoying soft below f8-9 from what Ive shot. Dont get me wrong, love using this lens but really miss those extra stops some times. Looking forward to getting trying out the Oly 8mm FE

Edited by Purge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest you get softness with all rectilinear lenses in the corners. However the olympus has already an average performance off centre on land that gets worse in water. For shots in blue water such as sharks you will not notice it, the issue is only when there is a reef background. If this annoys you then the 9-18mm is not what you would take to the red sea. Better to get closer with the 8mm fisheye. If you look at this gallery you can see shots with the 8mm and the 7-14mm to get an idea. The 7-14mm is more expensive than the 9-18mm but works better at 9mm

 

https://flickr.com/photos/36174644@N05/sets/72157655487246695

Edited by Interceptor121

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was very disappointed with the 9-18mm when I had it with my EPL3 and the Zen dome (for the Olympus housing). Looking back I perhaps could get better results if I tried harder with the camera (back then I was a more 'P' mode user).

 

I have the 7-14mm and (Panasonic) 8mm. The 8mm is tack sharp. The Olympus might be more so. The 7-14mm was much better than the 9-18mm. But I even found that to be too limiting sometimes when you only get to dive a dive site once.

 

I've gone back to the 'Kit' 14-42mm mk ii lens and WWL-1. Super happy with the range and flexibility I have now.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thetrickster, quite nice photos. I see that some of them are without strobe. Can you tell me if 7-14 is fine for taking photos near the surface without a strobe ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...