Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
phxazcraig

Confused about WACP-1 - help!

Recommended Posts

I have been shooting a wide zoom behind a 230mm dome port since 2015.   I'm kind of sick of traveling with it, and I'm more than willing to consider other options.   The main driver for my discontent has been carrying the 230mm dome in a carry-on where I constantly worry about getting it gate-checked if I'm late boarding and can't find overhead space.   I carry it in a Thinktank roller bag, not particularly suited to going in the cargo hold.

So I'm considering a WACP-1.   But I'm confused as to how much the thing ends up weighing and what lens to use behind it.    I'm now shooting a Z9 in a Nauticam housing, using a 14-30 behind that 230mm dome, plus the Sea & Sea Internal Correction Lens.

If I simply swap out the 230mm dome for a WACP-1, it seems that at the least I get a smaller chunk to pack, though I'm not sure if I save any appreciable weight.   It also looks like the WACP-1 is a better candidate for checked luggage than the 230mm dome.  I would love to have less to carry on.

So help me out here - compare the 230mm dome port + 14-30 to a WACP-1 and ??? lens.    What is my closest equivalent lens choice, and how much does it all weigh compared to the 230mm dome with 50mm extension?   

My carry-on is ridiculously heavy at 42 pounds.  

I'm really wondering about lens options - I don't have a feel for angle of view expressed in degrees.   I do have a feel for the 16-35 and the 14-30 lenses behind that 230mm dome on FX cameras.  What is closest with the WACP-1, and what less-wide options can I use as well?  (24-70 instead of 14-30?   Same zoom gear.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the lens of choice seems to be the Sony 28-70 f3.4-4.5 lens with an adapter as it's the only one that gives you full zoom range.  It is equivalent in field of view approx to a 10-25 rectilinear.  the WACP-1 port chart is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bEtIGoZh1XAzrwolt9JNcUQ2_-XIygWh/view

You can also consider the new WACP-C with the same lens and it is lighter and cheaper than a WACP-1.  There is a seperate thread on the WACP-C. 

Of course if you really want to save weight and size you could go for a fisheye lens in a 140mm Nauticam port which should have similar image quality to a WACP in a lighter, cheaper , smaller package with a lot more barrel distortion of course.  You would only really consider that option for reef scenics and CFWA, not so good for pelagics and wrecks for example.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll have the 28-75 with WACP-1 on a Z9 next week. Hoping to get out to the southern Great Barrier Reef in October and will let you know how it performs. It doesn’t have the same zoom through (the Nikon gives 28 - 48mm) as the Sony that Chris mentioned however it’s native and faster. 

Im curious to know how the 28-60 Sony goes on the megadap adapter, I haven’t found any info on it but that could open up the possibility of WWL for weight / cost saving option. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, phxazcraig said:

I have been shooting a wide zoom behind a 230mm dome port since 2015.   I'm kind of sick of traveling with it, and I'm more than willing to consider other options.   The main driver for my discontent has been carrying the 230mm dome in a carry-on where I constantly worry about getting it gate-checked if I'm late boarding and can't find overhead space.   I carry it in a Thinktank roller bag, not particularly suited to going in the cargo hold.

So I'm considering a WACP-1.   But I'm confused as to how much the thing ends up weighing and what lens to use behind it.    I'm now shooting a Z9 in a Nauticam housing, using a 14-30 behind that 230mm dome, plus the Sea & Sea Internal Correction Lens.

If I simply swap out the 230mm dome for a WACP-1, it seems that at the least I get a smaller chunk to pack, though I'm not sure if I save any appreciable weight.   It also looks like the WACP-1 is a better candidate for checked luggage than the 230mm dome.  I would love to have less to carry on.

So help me out here - compare the 230mm dome port + 14-30 to a WACP-1 and ??? lens.    What is my closest equivalent lens choice, and how much does it all weigh compared to the 230mm dome with 50mm extension?   

My carry-on is ridiculously heavy at 42 pounds.  

I'm really wondering about lens options - I don't have a feel for angle of view expressed in degrees.   I do have a feel for the 16-35 and the 14-30 lenses behind that 230mm dome on FX cameras.  What is closest with the WACP-1, and what less-wide options can I use as well?  (24-70 instead of 14-30?   Same zoom gear.)

I remember your earlier posts, when you first got the 230mm dome and were displeased about the size.  I have simply refused to even consider dealing with it and that was a big factor in going with DX instead of FX when I was ready to upsize from M43.  I was surprised that even my primary retailer of dive photo stuff discouraged me from going with full frame, even though that meant less money for them.

Although I am happy with my 8-15 or 10-17 in a small domes, there are times I don't want fisheye, and using any wide angle zoom in a 170 or 18o dome invoIves some serious compromises, so I  seriously considered getting a WACP-1 last year, going so far as to buy a clean used lens compatible with the WACP, and putting the wacp in my online "shopping cart" several times.  After experimenting with how I would transport it safely and what its weight would do to my carry on allowance, I concluded that I just would not be happy trying to transport a 200mm wide, 10lb lens.  I also totaled up the weight of camera, housing, arms, strobes and wacp  and realized it would be unpleasant carrying that to and from boats or down to the shoreline, and that I would be "that guy" to the boat crews who hand it down to me and take back for each dive.

I abandoned the idea.  However, the new WACP-C is only 170mm, about the same diameter as the dome I now have, and it only weighs about a pound more than the dome.  I can fit it in my carry-on bags.   As far as the 130 degree angle of view, you can get some sense from a chart here https://www.nikonians.org/reviews/fov-tables  and here https://www.scubapix.com/blog/wacp-wide-angle-conversion-port-explained/

Short answer, though is that a 14mm lens in a dome is about 115 degrees, so 130 is wider.  I will need to let someone with a better grasp of geometry provide more detail on comparing diagonal field of view.  The wacp port chart shows that you can use the 24-70, and a Nikkor 28-75 but not throughout their entire zoom range, and you can also use a Sony lens with an adapter.  I don't know much about lenses for the Z cameras, so cannot add more on that.

 

Edited by Draq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...