Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hyp

MWL-1 or Kraken/Weefine KRL-09s on MFT

Recommended Posts

I'm curious about the performance of macro to wide lenses on MFT. Most of my diving is typical holiday diving where you never really know what you're going to see and there is rarely an opportunity to repeat dives. On dives where I have absolutely no idea what I will encounter I currently use the Olympus 12-50mm lens in the special Nauticam port with a a Saga +10 on a flip adapter. This gives me reasonable macro but the wide end is pretty disappointing, both in terms of IQ and in terms of being wide enough.

I've contemplated getting the MWL-1 or KRL-09s to solve that problem, by having a dedicated macro lens that will also give me a 150° close to fisheye view. I also enjoy wide angle macro so this might be the perfect fit. However, most reviews I have found and most sample images were shot on full frame. Both Nauticam and Kraken emphasize that the lens needs stopping down to F16 on FF, but it is not clear how this translates to crop sensors. On land, the DoF on FF f16 would match f8 on MFT. Generally I'd be fine stopping down to f11, after that I would run into trouble with my small S&S YS-02 strobes. F8 would be preferable.

I will keep my Fisheye and rectilinear WA, so please let's not make this into a specialised lens vs Jack of All trades discussion. I know I will get superior IQ with my Panasonic Fisheye (although I'm not so sure about the wideangle) and I will also lose the ability to do split shots and I will keep bringing those lenses when I know what awaits me. The question is, how much worse is it really for general wide angle shots? 

So I'm looking for people who have shot one or even both of the mentioned lenses on MFT. How is corner sharpness when stopped down to f11 and f8? How sharp is it in the center and corners compared to the Panasonic Fisheye (I use the 4.33" acryllic dome). Sample images would be much appreciated, especially high resolution images.

If anyone has used both (in this case even just on FF) I would also be interested if the Nauticam lens is really that much better at 1k€/$ price difference. The glas dome compared to acryllic is a pro, but it also needs an additional float collar, so if they are on par in terms of IQ I can't see myself investing in the Nauticam lens.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a question that has been asked before and I have never seen a positive answer, there's only a handful of reviews of the MWL on full frame and they seem to state that f16 really is necessary on full frame.  The review by Jack Connick is here:

Review: Nauticam MWL-1 Conversion Lens by Jack Connick :: Wetpixel.com

If you could download the sample shots to view at full res you could see where the image quality degrades.

I would think that if the issue is corner sharpness due to depth of field needed to bring a virtual image into focus the the rules about f16 on FF being equivalent to f8 on m43 would mean you could shoot f8 and get equivalently good results on your m43 setup.  But if f16 is needed for overall sharpness that is another issue.

You might want to see if you can manage to download the full res images from the download links in the review - I tried and it asked for a password and I gave up.  It might give you some insight - or you could PM Jack and ask if he has experience on smaller formats with the MWL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Would you say that if the center stays sharp in the FF reviews even at wider apertures, that we can conclude that it is a DoF issue that requires f16 on FF? This review of the KRL-09s by bluewaterphoto shows that for that lens at least the lens seems to stay pretty sharp in the plane of focus in the center. I've not seen a comparison review of both lenses done by anyone.

Edited by hyp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might - or to be more precise that would be one possible explanation.  Lack of reviews period, let alone comparisons is an ongoing problem for wet lenses apart from the the more popular variety like the WWL.  

You could consider the UWL -100 or the newer UWL-95 with a dome which give similar fields of view.  Sample images of decent size for the UWL -100 + dome are available here:  The Ultimate Wet Lens Sample Post | Mozaik UW (housingcamera.com)

The pics are good size at 1920 x 1080 and have EXIF data intact so you can check where they are zoomed to and the aperture, you want to look at the sample taken with the Sony APS-C - your m43 will have better corners than the sample shown.  The dome gets you 140 deg field of view.

Don't know much about the Kraken lens but is a big lump of a thing to carry around UW until you decide to attach it - it's 125mm x 135mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes it very attractive to me is it’s attachment to a macro lens and that both of them are expressly advertised as working on a flip adapter. I’ll probably give the Kraken a shot if my wallet allows before my next trip. I’ll report if it ever comes to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had the Kraken flight a few months. I used it for 2 days / 5 dives this week up in Gods Pocket. I can post some images comparing it to my Sigma 15mm FE this weekend. All shot on the D850.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be great. Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As promised here are a set of photos taken with the Kraken KRL-09 / 60mm / Nikon D850 setup. For contrast a couple of photos with the Sigma15mm in a 170mm dome.

All of these photos were taken last week up in Gods Pocket Resort, British Columbia.

Kraken Photos:

1424114820_GodsPocketOctober032022-167.thumb.jpg.59e10cdad9af532a77046a245b402653.jpg

1343444171_GodsPocketOctober042022-227.thumb.jpg.eda08cf0f5a276289dbbe4fcc7a6bace.jpg

 

1047080856_GodsPocketOctober042022-290.thumb.jpg.fefa83fbb67d7c9d8945f71ec9e03451.jpg

Sigma Photos:

1131116184_GodsPocketOctober052022-419.thumb.jpg.4d50ccb7700fda068ea97da40b0ec420.jpg

1258272498_GodsPocketOctober052022-68.thumb.jpg.e201a0a7a417049b662e01d3c1f35eb6.jpg

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you! Looks pretty good to me. The first shot is really really cool. Corner sharpness looks acceptable to me on the second shot and I do like the out of focus divers. Definitely a different look. What apertures did you use for these images?

Share this post


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

Thank you! Looks pretty good to me. The first shot is really really cool. Corner sharpness looks acceptable to me on the second shot and I do like the out of focus divers. Definitely a different look. What apertures did you use for these images?

The first two images are on Instagram with all the details. I will be posting more from this trip in the next several days.

Most shots were f11-f13.

https://www.instagram.com/david_hicks_wild_images/

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...