Finetuning my Rig

[Interceptor121 367]

So you are saying the horizontal /vertical field of view are equivalent to about a 7mm/8mm rectilinear lens and you only get 130° field of view along the diagonal due to distortion.  I take it that the FOV column in your table is your estimate of the angular field of view, but I'm not sure what the other values are?   Are the values calculated or measured, you are talking about calculations and verifying them? 

The values are calculated using an equisolid equation I then jumped in a pool and tested them against tiles and the correspondence is very high

That however should not come as a surprise that the wet lens only has the 130 degrees along the diagonal.

You can measure yourself the ratio vs diagonal on the image with the tiles

There is also to be said that the 7-14mm depending on the dome used has different performance and that the WWL-1 doesn’t give the 130 degrees with all lenses but only with the 14-42mm that sit very close to the port

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Interceptor121 367]

But it will give it to me in a much smaller size. That is my main annoyance with the 8-18. I would then add true fisheye later, as a 4.33" dome is much easier to handle while travelling. In the end that would give me a smaller rig with more shooting options. So long as the Image quality that the UWL-100 puts out is acceptable.

That is a consideration for sure the 7” is very positive the inon is negative

However unless you have the UWL-H100 with dome the older UWL-100 will loose most of the field of view as you zoom. Try in a sink or bathtub or better in a pool with tiles

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hyp 17]

Just wanted to follow up on what I actually did in the end. I bought (used) a flip adapter for the 12-50, which will allow me to add wetlenses easily, including the UWL100 and Saga+10 my parents owned. The Saga works perfectly and nearly doubles maximum magnification. The UWL100 unfortunately vignettes until zoomed in to about 20mm at which point the 12mm without the wetlens provide an equal FoV. As I will be using the flip adapter for macro, there is no money lost here. I will keep using the 8-18 for my rectilinear wideangle needs.

I also got lucky and managed to secure the Panasonic Fisheye + 4.33" Dome for less than 600€ total. Now I will just need to decide before each trip, which lens I need more. For my trip to the red sea in two weeks I've already decided to leave the huge dome at home. For my trip to Bali (Mantas) and Lembeh I am not sure yet. Is it better to shoot Mantas with a Fisheye or with the slightly narrower 8-18mm.

[Interceptor121 367]

Red Sea is fisheye and a portrait lens generally however the 8-18mm works well for some wreck interiors

Where are you exactly going?

[hyp 17]

Marsa Alam, land based dives as my GF will do her AOWD. I was already set on the fisheye for the redsea. Question is really for Mantas in Bali.

[Interceptor121 367]

Just now, hyp said:

Marsa Alam, land based dives as my GF will do her AOWD. I was already set on the fisheye for the redsea. Question is really for Mantas in Bali.

Abu Dabab has nice turtle you can get close the vis is low so fisheye it is

Mantas in Bali WWL-1 better as the 8mm does not zoom. Alternatively 8-18mm is good

[hyp 17]

WWL1 I don't have and can't afford. 

[Interceptor121 367]

Just now, hyp said:

WWL1 I don't have and can't afford. 

8-18mm then fisheye will make them look small unless you get super close