Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Generally wide angle lenses don't work so well on flip adapters, because even with the nauticam you add some distance to the port. It depends on housing, camera and wet lens chosen, but more often than not a flip adapter will introduce vignetting. They are really only made for macro lenses. The exception may be the MWL-1. Nauticam provides a specific flip adapter for this lens, but it (and the lens) are very expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2020 at 1:48 PM, ChrisRoss said:

the WWL-C is a big heavy chunk of glass and the hinge will need to be stiff to prevent it moving under the weight of the lens.  

 

WOW, that is huge, it doesn't look big in photos, even if a sturdy flip adapter is used the lens will get in the way of anything you want to do with Macro. Compared to the older version it is massive, bigger than the housing lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/23/2020 at 4:08 PM, hyp said:

Generally wide angle lenses don't work so well on flip adapters, because even with the nauticam you add some distance to the port. It depends on housing, camera and wet lens chosen, but more often than not a flip adapter will introduce vignetting. They are really only made for macro lenses. The exception may be the MWL-1. Nauticam provides a specific flip adapter for this lens, but it (and the lens) are very expensive.

I guess the only option is to carry both lenses and removing one to use the other in the water, not sure how feasible that would be. I only had a macro lens on my RX100 VI in my last dive and it was easy just to unclip the lens and use the standard port. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible, but you better have sure hands or don't change lenses in the blue. And with lenses like the WWL-1 they become a bit too unwieldy to swap. I think with that lens it's really a choice you make before you start the dive and you stick with that, same as if you had a dome and wide angle lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, hyp said:

It's possible, but you better have sure hands or don't change lenses in the blue. And with lenses like the WWL-1 they become a bit too unwieldy to swap. I think with that lens it's really a choice you make before you start the dive and you stick with that, same as if you had a dome and wide angle lens.

Have to agree given the heft of the lens it dwarfs the little RX100 housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

Have to agree given the heft of the lens it dwarfs the little RX100 housing.

I've done a few dives with the WWL-C on a LX-10 (similar enough to the size/weight of the RX100) while waiting to get my a6400 setup complete and it is a big piece of glass. I've got it mounted with the M67 bayonet mount. I agree with the above points and would summarize:

1. I personally wouldn't mount it on a flip adapter. I think it would be to flimsy, especially for the types of dives I do.

2. I would only take on dives where the intention is wide angle. I would not plan on a "presto-change-o" mid-dive to remove the lens and shoot "true" macro on the same dive.

3. I haven't done any serious tests yet, but I believe that if you using a zoom lens, you could get a reasonable fish portrait type shot even with the WWL-C still attached.

- brett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2020 at 6:59 AM, TmxDiver said:

I've done a few dives with the WWL-C on a LX-10 (similar enough to the size/weight of the RX100) while waiting to get my a6400 setup complete and it is a big piece of glass. I've got it mounted with the M67 bayonet mount. I agree with the above points and would summarize:

1. I personally wouldn't mount it on a flip adapter. I think it would be to flimsy, especially for the types of dives I do.

2. I would only take on dives where the intention is wide angle. I would not plan on a "presto-change-o" mid-dive to remove the lens and shoot "true" macro on the same dive.

3. I haven't done any serious tests yet, but I believe that if you using a zoom lens, you could get a reasonable fish portrait type shot even with the WWL-C still attached.

- brett

Which bayonet mount or adapter do you use?

Re point number 2, what is the reason for not changing the lens to use macro in the water? Is it because of the size of the lens or any other reason?

What aperture do you use to get sharp images on the LX-10? Do you have to stop down to get sharper image? I have read and the Fantasea 09F has to be stopped down to get good results.

 

Thanks

Share this post


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

Which bayonet mount or adapter do you use?

Re point number 2, what is the reason for not changing the lens to use macro in the water? Is it because of the size of the lens or any other reason?

What aperture do you use to get sharp images on the LX-10? Do you have to stop down to get sharper image? I have read and the Fantasea 09F has to be stopped down to get good results.

 

Thanks

I use the Nauticam M67 Bayonet II adapter (part 83250):

https://www.nauticam.com/products/m67-to-bayonet-converter-ii

The reason for not changing mid-dive is size/weight and because I can zoom in with the WWL-C in place (but not true macro). Once you remove it, you have to store it somewhere and hope either the front or rear glass won't get scratched. You could install one of those lens holders on an arm I guess, but it is a pretty heavy piece of equipment. 

Most of my dives are wrecks and so I dive with the intent of shooting wide angle. If I see the occasional wolf eel or other cool creature, I just zoom in and take the pic. Will it be perfect? Nah, but I'm not shooting for the cover of a magazine either.

In terms of aperture, I'm still experimenting. Again, since a lot of my shots involve water or sand around the primary subject, it doesn't matter as much. Also, in Southern California on deep wrecks, I need all the help I can get in terms of light.

My general methodology has been:

1. Shoot natural light shots of the overall wreck with a wider open aperture just knowing the corners might be soft but also that they are generally water or sand

2. Shoot closer up features with a light (strobe or video) and close down the aperture. 

Below is a picture of a turbo supercharger on a P-38 that I shot earlier this week in San Diego. It is 1/80th, f6.3, ISO 1600. You can see that the corners aren't perfect - but my real "focus" is on the supercharger so I don't really care so much. I actually had to stop down the exposure in LR by a full stop. So, in reality, I should have stopped down f8 when I shot the picture. Still learning. :)

This week I've got my Sony a6400 ready to go so I'll be shooting with the WWL-C on that rig instead and we'll see how it works.

p38-1040265.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole premise of the WWL series is to break away from the need to stop down due to trying to accommodate the curved virtual image from a dome. 

Taking pictures of a 3D object brings a new set of challenges and you have to think in terms of depth of field for the subject  as well as the issue with getting the edges of the virtual image in focus.  On you example above the corners also appear to be a lot closer physically to the lens and you may be able to improve this by choosing what you focus on.  Depth of field in this type of image with wide angle lenses will have the DOF distributed 1/3 in front of focus point and 2/3 behind, so in the example above if you focus on the closest part of the image you have a better chance of the DOF covering the image.

I discovered this shooting with a fisheye on m43 - a lot of DOF available and no issues accomodating the curved virtual image due to  the different optics, but with a 3D subject in my case shooting along a wall and just using central focus point the wall very near to me was blurred, but that was due to the DOF not being placed properly.  The required DOF scales with with sensor size m43 at f8 or example is equivalent DOF to f16 on full frame.

So the summary is the need to stop down depends more on the 3D nature of the subject and because you are shooting wider open than a traditional dome you have to think more about what part of the image you focus on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

Depth of field in this type of image with wide angle lenses will have the DOF distributed 1/3 in front of focus point and 2/3 behind, so in the example above if you focus on the closest part of the image you have a better chance of the DOF covering the image.

...

So the summary is the need to stop down depends more on the 3D nature of the subject and because you are shooting wider open than a traditional dome you have to think more about what part of the image you focus on. 

Very good points, thanks Chris!

I'll try to keep it all "in focus" (hah!) when I'm taking pictures of a destroyer this week. So much to think about -- especially at 80 meters deep with deco time multiplying quickly. :)

I'm planning to get some pictures of the 5" guns which will present a very long depth-of-field picture so we'll see how those come out. I'll plan on focussing closer to the front of the gun as opposed to the turret or further back along the gun.

Brett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...