Jump to content
WesleyD

Isotta Housing

Recommended Posts

Hello!  Do any of you use an Isotta Housing with Sony camera?  I would love to hear your experience!  Right now, there is no flat port for the 28mm f2 lens.  But I want to use the WWL-1...  Any thoughts or suggestions?  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The shortest Isotta flat port is the H63 and it fits the Canon 60mm f2.8 and the the Sony 55mm f1.8 lens both of which are 70mm  long approx.  The 28mm f2 is 60mm long so you have a 10mm gap (at least) to the port glass.  It sounds like it might work - but don't trust me on that as you would really have to try it to confirm it doesn't vignette. 

The Sony 28-60 might be a better option it is 45mm long but extends when in use to longer than the 28mm f2 but I can't find the extended length online.

The alternative is to use Nauticam as they have tested it and have ports that fit. Unless you can find a shop with everything you need in stock who is willing to let you test the setup it's a bit of educated guessing game.  You can test for vignetting on the shop bench.  My guess is it's highly unlikely Isotta will produce a port or test  to allow you to use a third party lens with their gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think that Isotta should really be interested in compatibility with wet lenses of any brand, especially as they don't make their own. However, I just don't think they are quite big enough to support as many lens options as Nauticam does. Nauticam does really well with testing new lenses quickly and constantly revising their port charts. I just looked at them again recently and they redid the whole port chart with additions to support their own wetlenses. No other housing manufacturer gives such a detailed account of compatibility. 

In general I perceive Isotta as a company that are slowly starting to produce more housings for more cameras. I think if they keep on that upwards trend the lens support will also improve, but right now they support more traditional setups (dome for wide angle, flatport for macro) better than wet-wide setups for larger formats. I really like their housings though and I think this will change if the overall market continues into the direction it is currently going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this context it would be very interesting to know, whether a versatile adapter for Isotta housings exists, that allows to use Nauticam ports/extensions. Does such an adapter exist?

I believe such an adapter is a prerequisite for someone who plans to spend thousands of $ for a housing. Certainly one will want to use then also special domes and wet lenses, e.g. Nauticam's WACP...

 

Wolfgang

Share this post


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

I would think that Isotta should really be interested in compatibility with wet lenses of any brand, especially as they don't make their own. However, I just don't think they are quite big enough to support as many lens options as Nauticam does. Nauticam does really well with testing new lenses quickly and constantly revising their port charts.

You would think that but I've looked at most of the housing manufacturer's port charts and currently none of them list anything about using Nauticam wet optics with their systems that I have found.  If you think about the economics, they would need to test a reasonable number of lenses and check the fit and ensure they don't vignette to allow them to sell you a $300 (at most) flat port and not sell you a 230mm dome because you've purchased a better solution. 

Then there's the number of lenses to be tested, Nauticam currently list 17 lenses for WWL-1 (excluding compacts) - which one do they pick and if they have to tool up or even just do the design work  to produce some different length ports, how many will they sell?  Nauticam can do this and justify it because it is enabling sale of an expensive WWL of some type.

Certainly there are port adapters available, these generally add a another degree of complexity as they add extension which will be OK for some lenses in the system but certainly no good for domes that need no extension - they'll vignette or for flat ports - you take up working distance with space inside the port.  For WWL lenses you are often looking for a shorter port than already offered.  It seems to me they are only viable for special purposes like fitting a WACP to another housing system and even this adds extension which you need to take into account when selecting which lens to use with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem to me, that wet lenses are where the market is heading, even for FF mirrorless. I really don't think that housing manufacturers will have a choice in the long term. And I don't think it's necessarily important that they have perfect compatibility with the WWL-1 and extensively test that. But just realising that standard zooms now also need to be tested for vignetting behind a flat port so that maybe they can be compatible to wet wide lenses. There are other manufacturers for them other than Nauticam (Weefine/Kraken, Inon, AOI). 

If people will only be able to use wet lenses with Nauticam housings other manufacturers will quickly find themselves in trouble and I would think they know. I also don't think that dome ports are their biggest money makers, so while a flat port may be cheaper it is also cheaper to produce. The biggest money is surely in the camera housings themselves, and they won't sell these if people can't bring over their wet lenses. In fact, I think it is much more likely that someone with a Nauticam system that is based on wetlenses moves to another housing brand when upgrading, if all they need is a flatport that works with their existing set of wetlenses.

I don't think a brand like Isotta will offer the same kind of detail on how the wetlens will perform, as Nauticam does, but I think they will have to provide reasonable port choices to use those lenses. Otherwise I think they will quickly be in trouble...

 

The new Sony lens is, well, new. It might take some time for a port to be released that fits, but if it turns out that it becomes an intersting and popular lens for UW I would hope that ports will come out from other manufacturers. For MFT Isotta already has a bunch of very short macro ports released. Nauticam is very much ahead of the game though, often having ports and housings ready very shortly after release. 

Share this post


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

It would seem to me, that wet lenses are where the market is heading, even for FF mirrorless. I really don't think that housing manufacturers will have a choice in the long term. And I don't think it's necessarily important that they have perfect compatibility with the WWL-1 and extensively test that. But just realising that standard zooms now also need to be tested for vignetting behind a flat port so that maybe they can be compatible to wet wide lenses. There are other manufacturers for them other than Nauticam (Weefine/Kraken, Inon, AOI). 

If people will only be able to use wet lenses with Nauticam housings other manufacturers will quickly find themselves in trouble and I would think they know. I also don't think that dome ports are their biggest money makers, so while a flat port may be cheaper it is also cheaper to produce. The biggest money is surely in the camera housings themselves, and they won't sell these if people can't bring over their wet lenses. In fact, I think it is much more likely that someone with a Nauticam system that is based on wetlenses moves to another housing brand when upgrading, if all they need is a flatport that works with their existing set of wetlenses.

I don't think a brand like Isotta will offer the same kind of detail on how the wetlens will perform, as Nauticam does, but I think they will have to provide reasonable port choices to use those lenses. Otherwise I think they will quickly be in trouble...

 

The new Sony lens is, well, new. It might take some time for a port to be released that fits, but if it turns out that it becomes an intersting and popular lens for UW I would hope that ports will come out from other manufacturers. For MFT Isotta already has a bunch of very short macro ports released. Nauticam is very much ahead of the game though, often having ports and housings ready very shortly after release. 

That all may be true, but no one has jumped yet, hopefully it will happen, more choice is always good, but I'm not holding my breath. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello
Sorry to dig up an old thread. I have an A7SIII and am in the process of buying a housing. I wanted to use the 28-60. There is a solution with flatport and WWL-1 at Nauticam, but I actually want to buy an Isotta for cost reasons. Meanwhile, does anyone know if there is a solution with wide angle converter for the Isotta housing? Unfortunately, I've been waiting for an answer from support for a month.

Thank you for the answers and best regards

 

Edited by Assist91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Assist91 said:

Hello
Sorry to dig up an old thread. I have an A7SIII and am in the process of buying a housing. I wanted to use the 28-60. There is a solution with flatport and WWL-1 at Nauticam, but I actually want to buy an Isotta for cost reasons. Meanwhile, does anyone know if there is a solution with wide angle converter for the Isotta housing? Unfortunately, I've been waiting for an answer from support for a month.

Thank you for the answers and best regards

 

You have two issues, first you'll need a custom zoom gear and second a flat port that fits well enough to avoid vignetting.

One way out might be to use Nauticam ports - the N-120 ports can be used on Isotta housings by swapping out this adapter:

https://www.backscatter.com/Nauticam-Sea-and-Sea-3-Lug-Bayonet-Ring-Converts-N

They can also use Sea and Sea ports which is why the adapter works.  You remove the Nauticam ring from the port and replace it with this ring.

On Nauticam the 28-60 uses the N100 macro port 45 with focus knob. _ the zoom gear meshes with the focus knob on the port - the zoom gear actually faces forward .  But it's an N100 port and you can't adapt that port size.

There is however a macro port 45 in N120 and for this to work you would need a zoom gear that mated with the Isotta housing zoom control.  Assuming the port length is the same  and you can get a gear that solution should work.   I have seen other people mention Isotta has custom made gears for them - so you could ask.

It would appear the shortest Isotta N120 macro port is a H63 which it seems is too long.  I would talk to your dealer to see if you can confirm the N100 and N120 ports are the same length.  Another thread here conformed that you can use the Nauticam port chart to get the right distances for the Isotta housing when using the adapter ring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the detailed answer. It seems to me that these are all rather untested and therefore probably not really satisfactory solutions? I'm basically a little unsure if I should really go for Isotta. The detailed and proven port chart seems to me to be a huge advantage of Nauticam, or how do you see it? Sorry for my English, I actually speak German:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Assist91 said:

Thank you for the detailed answer. It seems to me that these are all rather untested and therefore probably not really satisfactory solutions? I'm basically a little unsure if I should really go for Isotta. The detailed and proven port chart seems to me to be a huge advantage of Nauticam, or how do you see it? Sorry for my English, I actually speak German:)

I use the isotta housing and this is my current set up with a 15mm sigma fisheye lens.  I use the mc11 adapter, 17mm extension and a 4 and a half inch dome and it's great!!!!  No issues at all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of camera do you have? Also the SIII? Maybe I need to ask again in more general terms. I would like to have a set up with which I can capture the reef scenery as a whole. So I'm not the type to sit in front of the snail for 2 hours with a macro lens. My research so far has shown that actually a wide angle zoom like the 12-24 would be best. But I've also read that a wide angle zoom requires a huge dome port which is firstly very expensive and secondly very large to travel with. Currently I am in possession of the following lenses:
- 24-105 G
- 20 mm G
- 55 mm Zeiss
- 28-60

However, I wouldn't be averse to buying another lens as long as it's not a $3000 GM.

Thanks for the advice and best regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Assist91 said:

What kind of camera do you have? Also the SIII? Maybe I need to ask again in more general terms. I would like to have a set up with which I can capture the reef scenery as a whole. So I'm not the type to sit in front of the snail for 2 hours with a macro lens. My research so far has shown that actually a wide angle zoom like the 12-24 would be best. But I've also read that a wide angle zoom requires a huge dome port which is firstly very expensive and secondly very large to travel with. Currently I am in possession of the following lenses:
- 24-105 G
- 20 mm G
- 55 mm Zeiss
- 28-60

However, I wouldn't be averse to buying another lens as long as it's not a $3000 GM.

Thanks for the advice and best regards

I have a Sony A7iii.  If you get an 8 inch dome, you can use both the 12-24 and a fisheye.  The sigma 15mm fisheye was less that $400 used which has worked great for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And both lenses would be good for the whole reef scenery?

Do you travel with the 8"?

Edited by Assist91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use an 8" dome with the 12-24, but the corners won't be great, an 8"dome is regarded as too small generally to use even a 16-35mm - the problem is with getting the corners to lie within the depth of field - the dome port forms a curved virtual image at 3 dome radii away from the port glass and the edge of that image is too close to be in focus at the same time as the centre - bigger domes help but a 12mm lens with the wider field is even more of a problem to get the corners in focus.

In general rectilinear lenses are recommended for wrecks where you want straight lines to remain straight or for sharks that don't get quite close enough for a fisheye lens.  For reef scenes, a fisheye is most recommended, you can use much smaller ports and move in very close to your target.  You can also use a WWL - it has a smaller field of view bu also has the zoom capability with the 28-60 zoo, but in general a fisheye is preferred for thsi type of work.  Both the fisheye and WWL do not have the same issues dealing the virtual image and can shoot at wider apertures and still get good corners.

The fisheye is generally favoured for reef scenics and close focus wide angle (CFWA).  You can do CFWA with rectilnears and the WWL, but generally the fisheye is preferred.  The small domes you can use with the fisheye allow you to get in closer and the subject is larger and more dramatic.  The WWL allows you to also zoom in and is easier to shoot slightly smaller creatures perched on the reef.

On the Isotta housing the only thing to confirm is if the lens vignettes or not and this can be done on land in the shop and of course you need to obtain a zoom gear.  If the N120 45 port is the same length as the N100 port it should be fine for the WWL.  I would follow up with Isotta, perhaps asking the question differently:  Confirming you can pick ports from the Nauticam chart to use on the Isotta housing and if a zoom gear would be available.  Of course it is easier to go with Nauticam as it has all been worked for you.

Perhaps the first question to answer is the lens you want to use.  Based on your description I think a fisheye lens solution would be very good, either a 15mm sigma or a Canon 8-15 which also gives you a circular fisheye option.   I hear mixed reports about using the sigma on Sony, but universally good reports about the Canon with adapters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Assist91 said:

And both lenses would be good for the whole reef scenery?

Do you travel with the 8"?

I would imagine a 12-24 is good for reef scenery but I currently use only a fisheye at the moment.  I travel with a 4.5 inch dome and the corners are sharp.  However, I have more leadway with a fisheye versus a 12-24. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again for the very detailed and helpful answers. I think that a 12-24 is therefore out of the race. Also because the large dome ports are very expensive. A fisheye seems to be a really worthwhile option for me. Do you have any sample images? It's a shame that Sony doesn't seem to offer a FF fisheye. I am not a big fan of adapters but you seem to have had good experiences. Maybe I'll just buy the housing and take my time with the lens decision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Assist91 said:

Thank you again for the very detailed and helpful answers. I think that a 12-24 is therefore out of the race. Also because the large dome ports are very expensive. A fisheye seems to be a really worthwhile option for me. Do you have any sample images? It's a shame that Sony doesn't seem to offer a FF fisheye. I am not a big fan of adapters but you seem to have had good experiences. Maybe I'll just buy the housing and take my time with the lens decision...

I don't shoot Sony, but this gallery is mostly shot with a full frame fisheye lens, every thing except the Pasir Putah reef and the lone Nudi shot.  Shows the sort of shots that can be taken:  https://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Weda Resort Halmahera/index.html. 

Most of the shots are very close to the subject, within 1m or less, some much closer.  The big table coral at Kobe was 5m across and the divers give some scale and the camera was under 0.3m from the edge of the coral. You need to be confidently able to manoeuvre in very close to your subjects for the most part.  The fisheye barrel distortion is not apparent for the most part but you can see it in the second shot with the curving line of the reeftop you would expect to be straight- you need to be careful not to place divers in that part of the frame.

In general adapted wides work OK on Sony and have no AF problems - I've seen a lot of good experience reported with metabones adapters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice shots, no question about it. I'm currently shooting with an Osmo Action, which also has a fish eye lens. I have had good experiences with it. Let's see what it will be in the end. ;)

 

Edit: Isotta answered. They recommend the H63-B120 Flat Port with M67, so I could use wide converter as well...

Edited by Assist91

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Assist91 said:

Very nice shots, no question about it. I'm currently shooting with an Osmo Action, which also has a fish eye lens. I have had good experiences with it. Let's see what it will be in the end. ;)

 

Edit: Isotta answered. They recommend the H63-B120 Flat Port with M67, so I could use wide converter as well...

If their nomenclature means the port is 63mm long it might be a little long for a WWL.  The recommended macro port 45 for the WWL and 28-60 is 45mm from inside of the port glass to the outside of the port mount.  So if you held a ruler next to the mounted port the inside of the glass is 45mm from the outer surface of the housing port mounting surface.  Isotta probably have not tested this as the WWL is not their product but it would be helpful to confirm the same measurement on their port.

It might be OK but it could vignette a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it seems that Isotta doesn't really have much knowledge without trial and error. Isotta probably meant that the lens would fit in the port in terms of length and that there would be a thread to use wet lenses. So I think I would start with a Fish Eye if it becomes an Isotta. If I don't like the feel of the housing and go for the Nauticam, I'd probably go with the 28-60 and WWL-1 solution, since I already own that lens. Difficult difficult the whole thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Assist91 said:

Thank you again for the very detailed and helpful answers. I think that a 12-24 is therefore out of the race. Also because the large dome ports are very expensive. A fisheye seems to be a really worthwhile option for me. Do you have any sample images? It's a shame that Sony doesn't seem to offer a FF fisheye. I am not a big fan of adapters but you seem to have had good experiences. Maybe I'll just buy the housing and take my time with the lens decision...

Here are some images.  

243239505_10160123018149528_9209156012813325262_n.jpg

243444822_10160123023704528_7895763181759423421_n.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Assist91 said:

Thank you, very nice :)

YOU BET!  It was a very anxious process when I went with Isotta as well.  It was hard for me to figure it all out so please feel free to reach out if needed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...