Jump to content
tursiops

New Nauticam Wet Wideangle WWL-C

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, mdo905 said:

Sorry for all the questions, but I'm still in search of a wide angle for the LX-10.  
 

Good questions - I'm in the same situation looking into the Inon UWL-H100 28M67 as well - no zooming needed in 4k video with its 36mm crop.

Edited by ben gazzal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't go with the UWL-H100 28M67.  I have one and you have to zoom to 34mm to eliminate the vignetting.  Without the dome, zooming in that far basically eliminates any FOV increase the lens is supposed to achieve. 100 degree FOV zoomed that far gives me very little increase in the FOV, I'm guessing around 75 degrees, whereas an underwater uncorrected 24mm lens is supposed to give ~63 degrees.   Granted, I've only tested it in my bathtub and those numbers are a rough guess, but I wasn't happy at all with the FOV.  Unfortunately, I bought it in just before the WWL-C was announced.  I expecting to use the UWL-H100 in March, which didn't happen for obvious reasons.  As for adding the dome of the UWL-H100, I've read that it's super heavy and has soft corners, so that's one I wouldn't invest in.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add on WA optics are impacted by not only choice of camera (and how wide the native lens goes) but also housing choice.

Some compact housings with a fixed port even with threads (67mm typical) when a glass WA lens is threaded on require zooming to 28mm, 35mm or more  negating any benefit.

One other choice is what is termed these days as an "Air Lens". Basically it's an air filled dome that underwater restores most or sometime all of native lens FOV (field of view or focal length) refraction a housing's flat port narrows the FOV.

They are usually less expensive and lighter and have been my choice shooting  compact camera's like the Canon G7X II compact (native lens is 24-100mm) for several years.  

While 24mm doesn't sound that wide if you frame "tight" and get close I've found them to be another possible choice for compact camera underwater shooters.

 

IMG_6947.jpg

Edited by dhaas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mdo905 said:

I wouldn't go with the UWL-H100 28M67.  I have one and you have to zoom to 34mm to eliminate the vignetting.  Without the dome, zooming in that far basically eliminates any FOV increase the lens is supposed to achieve. 100 degree FOV zoomed that far gives me very little increase in the FOV, I'm guessing around 75 degrees, whereas an underwater uncorrected 24mm lens is supposed to give ~63 degrees.   Granted, I've only tested it in my bathtub and those numbers are a rough guess, but I wasn't happy at all with the FOV.  Unfortunately, I bought it in just before the WWL-C was announced.  I expecting to use the UWL-H100 in March, which didn't happen for obvious reasons.  As for adding the dome of the UWL-H100, I've read that it's super heavy and has soft corners, so that's one I wouldn't invest in.  

 I understand.

However, I'm only using the camera for video, and was told there was no zooming necessary, and no vignetting given the crop when shooting 4K, which brings the FOV to 36mm already, so the Inon UWL works quite well as is, screwed directly on the Nauticam housing's 67mm thread. 

See:
https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/62691-lx10-nauticam-inon-uwl-h100-costa-rica-video/&tab=comments#comment-406965

For stills, yes, a lot of zooming I'm sure.

Have you looked into the Weefine WFL01 wide angle lens?

 

 

104287908_3009319999147819_8387014320106973360_o.jpg

Edited by ben gazzal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dhaas said:

Add on WA optics are impacted by not only choice of camera (and how wide the native lens goes) but also housing choice.

Some compact housings with a fixed port even with threads (67mm typical) when a glass WA lens is threaded on require zooming to 28mm, 35mm or more  negating any benefit.

One other choice is what is termed these days as an "Air Lens". Basically it's an air filled dome that underwater restores most or sometime all of native lens FOV (field of view or focal length) refraction a housing's flat port narrows the FOV.

 

Regarding air lenses, the Fantasea BigEye Lens M67 Mark II should restore the camera's land performance - Fantasea hasn't tested it but some here reported using it with good results.
For 4K video, this still leaves us with a 36-108mm fov due to the camera's sensor crop, so still pretty tight

Edited by ben gazzal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's an interesting article in issue 99 of UWPMAG about Nauticam WACP, they talk about several aspects and problems with dome sizes

Nauticam’s WACP
Wide Angle Corrector Port
By Alex Mustard

1. Download or Open in http://www.uwpmag.com/?download=99

2. And goto 37 page

- What is the WACP?
- Why use water contact optics?
- Dome size and position
- How much difference do water contact optics make?
- Conclusion

Edited by turandot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/13/2020 at 10:17 PM, ben gazzal said:

 I understand.

However, I'm only using the camera for video, and was told there was no zooming necessary, and no vignetting given the crop when shooting 4K, which brings the FOV to 36mm already, so the Inon UWL works quite well as is, screwed directly on the Nauticam housing's 67mm thread. 

See:
https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/62691-lx10-nauticam-inon-uwl-h100-costa-rica-video/&tab=comments#comment-406965

For stills, yes, a lot of zooming I'm sure.

Have you looked into the Weefine WFL01 wide angle lens?
 

Correct, the UWL-H100 does not have any vignetting with the Nauticam LX-10 case when using video.  I did see that thread, and I just tested it in my tub to confirm. 

Any interest in buying a UWL-H100 Type 2 in great shape?

The Weefine WFL-01 is the same lens as the Kraken KRL-01, and it received a pretty poor review on this thread:  https://www.scubaboard.com/community/threads/the-results-are-in-i-finally-got-into-the-pool-to-test-these-lenses-krl-01-vs-uwl-09-pro.566574/

I've also tried a Nauticam wet-made dome port (their "air lens") and zooming to eliminate the vignetting also cancels out any benefit the lens provided, to the point I actually lost FOV.

Because I think I'll have to zoom to ~32mm for any wide angle lens, I feel the WWL-C is my best bet at this point.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The angle of view can be calculated.  The 100° lenses are 18mm full frame equivalent (100° diagonal field of view) so for wet lenses that are designed for 24mm lenses they are 0.75x lenses.  at 34mm FL x 0.75 you have a 25.5mm lens equivalent, so slightly worse than an air lens giving you 80° as opposed to 84° from an air lens.   

For converting from equivalent FL to FOV , I use a field of view table and for everything stick to full frame equivalent focal lengths.

For the INON UWL-H100 28M67 lens it's designed to produce 100° from a 28mm lens so it's 0.64x so on that lens 34mm becomes 21.8mm so slightly better than an air lens and achieving about 90° field of view.  An air lens gives you 24mm FOV, which is 84°

All of this assumes that the front element is close enough to the port glass to not impact the performance of the lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ChrisRoss said:

The angle of view can be calculated.  The 100° lenses are 18mm full frame equivalent (100° diagonal field of view) so for wet lenses that are designed for 24mm lenses they are 0.75x lenses.  at 34mm FL x 0.75 you have a 25.5mm lens equivalent, so slightly worse than an air lens giving you 80° as opposed to 84° from an air lens.   

For converting from equivalent FL to FOV , I use a field of view table and for everything stick to full frame equivalent focal lengths.

For the INON UWL-H100 28M67 lens it's designed to produce 100° from a 28mm lens so it's 0.64x so on that lens 34mm becomes 21.8mm so slightly better than an air lens and achieving about 90° field of view.  An air lens gives you 24mm FOV, which is 84°

All of this assumes that the front element is close enough to the port glass to not impact the performance of the lens.

Interesting thanks - what would the angle of view be with the 36mm sensor crop we get while fully zoomed out in 4K video?

Edited by ben gazzal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mdo905 said:

Correct, the UWL-H100 does not have any vignetting with the Nauticam LX-10 case when using video.  I did see that thread, and I just tested it in my tub to confirm. 

Any interest in buying a UWL-H100 Type 2 in great shape?
 

 

I would actually, but I'm currently in Thailand, on a visa extension running out on July 31st, so it's a bit of a gamble it will get there in time :mellow:

Edited by ben gazzal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why the UWL-H100 may not vignette is because it does not have a big hood. If you put the dome on and the hood is likely to vignette. I don't recall the sensor size of the LX10 Inon lenses work totally fine up t 1" sensor. On MFT they struggle I found the best lens to be the old UWL-100 M67 of which I still have a copy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that would be 36mm x 0.64 (assuming a INON lens as described above) = 23mm FL,  so about an 86° field of view.  I assume you mean you are zoomed to 36mm equivalent FL and that includes impact of the crop.  

If you mean you are zoomed to 24mm and the crop means you have 36mm equivalent field of view, the 0.64x impact of the lens may not hold as the lens element is further back behind the lens port. Though it is probably close.

The LX-10 is a 1" sensor I believe from memory

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ChrisRoss said:

So that would be 36mm x 0.64 (assuming a INON lens as described above) = 23mm FL,  so about an 86° field of view.  I assume you mean you are zoomed to 36mm equivalent FL and that includes impact of the crop.  

If you mean you are zoomed to 24mm and the crop means you have 36mm equivalent field of view, the 0.64x impact of the lens may not hold as the lens element is further back behind the lens port. Though it is probably close.

The LX-10 is a 1" sensor I believe from memory

 

Yes it's a 1" sensor - Sounds right, a user I talked to using it for video (without the dome) was estimating it at around 80°, but it's good to have the maths to back it up.
Thanks again
b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ben gazzal for video you don't need a fisheye type lens rectilinear will be better get the Inon UWL-H100 if it does not vignette it gives you the max fox

When I tested on the LX100 it did not vignette but the edges were bad because the sensor is too large for it

LX10 has 1" sensor it should work fine for video

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

@ben gazzal for video you don't need a fisheye type lens rectilinear will be better get the Inon UWL-H100 if it does not vignette it gives you the max fox

When I tested on the LX100 it did not vignette but the edges were bad because the sensor is too large for it

LX10 has 1" sensor it should work fine for video

 

Thanks, I will definitely do that!

cheers
ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well..I just. bought a WWL-C.  I have a trip in October and really wanted to have the lens for it.   

I tested it in my wash basin with the nauticam LX-10 case and vignetting was eliminated at 28mm for f/11, f/8. f/5.6, f/4, f/2.8, which is way better than I was expecting considering Nauticam's compatibility chart:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SLJDkS0NLLbYHUShF6Krof-dufWMynop/view

says 32mm-72mm.  Am I missing something here?  I made sure to burp the lens. Could it be the photo aspect ratio or because I was using aperture priority mode during the test?  Right now, I don't see why they stated 32mm.    

I am super happy though with only having to zoom to 28mm, which gives a 122 deg FOV (using ChrisRoss's ratio method above). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vignetting is mechanical,  depends on the size of your adapter and how far it is from the lens - I would guess Nauticam takes a worst case scenario so they don't have people yelling at them that their rig vignettes at 28mm.    Basically you need to zoom in till you can no longer see the edge of the lens in the corners.  It may change with focus though as those types of zoom lenses often change focal length as they focus closer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mdo905 said:

Well..I just. bought a WWL-C.  I have a trip in October and really wanted to have the lens for it.   

I tested it in my wash basin with the nauticam LX-10 case and vignetting was eliminated at 28mm for f/11, f/8. f/5.6, f/4, f/2.8, which is way better than I was expecting considering Nauticam's compatibility chart:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SLJDkS0NLLbYHUShF6Krof-dufWMynop/view

says 32mm-72mm.  Am I missing something here?  I made sure to burp the lens. Could it be the photo aspect ratio or because I was using aperture priority mode during the test?  Right now, I don't see why they stated 32mm.    

I am super happy though with only having to zoom to 28mm, which gives a 122 deg FOV (using ChrisRoss's ratio method above). 

I've done 4 or 5 dives with mine on a LX-10 and I find I need to zoom in to about 30mm. I could see a slight vignette in my pool tests at 28mm (see the lower left corner in the 28mm photo below vs. 30mm).

As Chris says, it is a "mechanical" issue so it could be that you are attaching the WWL-C closer to the port than I am -- but I'm not sure how that would be possible since the only way I know to attach is via the M67 bayonet adapter which just screws directly onto the fixed port of the NA-LX10 housing.

First picture is 28mm and second is 30mm.

pool-28mm.jpg

pool-30mm.jpg

Edited by TmxDiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between 28 and 30mm is minimal - I could see how someone would say 28mm is fine.  Because the edge of the mounting ring is not in focus it's a transition, rather than a hard edge vignette.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...