2 hours ago, Chris Ross said:

Yes that's the idea, but don't assume your USB plug will pass through, you would need to test it! Originally developed for electric sync cables. I know Nauticam needed to make a new adapter to get the the right-angle USB plug to pass through their M24-M16 adapter.

Thanks for the response. It looks like the Nauticam M16 USB bulkheads are hard-wired at the bulkhead end, and have a right-angle plug for the camera-end. The Kraken equivalent comes with two internal wires, one right angle, one straight...but both plug straight into the inside end of the bulkhead. So if a straight USB-C will pass through the Nauticam offset extension, it should fly.

2 hours ago, rlmalisz said:

Thanks for the response. It looks like the Nauticam M16 USB bulkheads are hard-wired at the bulkhead end, and have a right-angle plug for the camera-end. The Kraken equivalent comes with two internal wires, one right angle, one straight...but both plug straight into the inside end of the bulkhead. So if a straight USB-C will pass through the Nauticam offset extension, it should fly.

Should have a lot better chance of working and price is nicer as well, seems like it comes with two different cables? If you get one it would be nice to report back on charging times and data transfer rates.

48 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

Should have a lot better chance of working and price is nicer as well, seems like it comes with two different cables? If you get one it would be nice to report back on charging times and data transfer rates.

It also comes with the M24 bushing adapter included...which Nauticam charges another chunk of change for. My SO got one for her birthday, has it installed, hasn't used it yet otherwise. May be a while before we know exactly how it performs, but it's supposed to be a PD cable, so I'd be pretty surprised if it's any slower than the Nauti.

3 hours ago, rlmalisz said:

It also comes with the M24 bushing adapter included...which Nauticam charges another chunk of change for. My SO got one for her birthday, has it installed, hasn't used it yet otherwise. May be a while before we know exactly how it performs, but it's supposed to be a PD cable, so I'd be pretty surprised if it's any slower than the Nauti.

I'm thinking it could be faster, The Nauticam one is slower than my card reader, I got 28 MB/sec, while I routinely get 150 MB/sec with the card reader and 75 MB/sec reading from the camera without bulkhead.

Kraken is with same/similar slow cable. They are coming with new version beginning of next year with better cable.

Thats what i was told by one retailer.

Theres also something from Dive and See, pricey but usb 3.2 see here

Fotocore seems to have come out with their own also see here

With the Fotocore one, you could add the M16 vacuum valve?

Edited November 25, 2025Nov 25 by Sokrates
Added Fotocore

8 hours ago, Chris Ross said:

I'm thinking it could be faster, The Nauticam one is slower than my card reader, I got 28 MB/sec, while I routinely get 150 MB/sec with the card reader and 75 MB/sec reading from the camera without bulkhead.

We'll see. Since the Kraken cable is discrete, can probably hunt down something higher speed and try that. Short USB cables tend to run pricey. Her initial use case is to charge the (thirsty) Z8 battery between dives, PRN. Data download is a bonus feature.

I'm excited to write about an R50 option that I've discovered.

Back in March 2025 I wrote about the only real limitation I've found with the Nauticam R50 housing. In Nauticam's design the port is integral to the housing. The design intends 18-45 Canon lens to be the only option for optics. This is not a big limitation because the WWL-1 and CMC can be added and together they give you an almost perfect range of options. But I wanted a bit more.

I like to shoot jawfish, and a 90mm equivalent lens seems to work well. The Canon 18-45, however, only creates a 72mm perspective. As designed other lenses will not fit in housing ... but now I've found one. The lens I've found is the Sigma 56mm / f1.4. There is one compromise; you must remove the lens gear that is built into the housing. Once this is done the Sigma lens fits perfectly into the housing.

Yes, you'll loose the zoom, but you will have the kind of arrangement most of us have shot for years: the 18-45 set for wide angle, and the 56 when you want telephoto, or perhaps macro (haven't tried this yet).

If you make this change you will be temporarily removing the two guides that hold the gear in place. Be sure to put them back once the gear is out because the upper guide is needed for the pop up flash to work properly. It does not block the lens placement.

If someone has a 3D printer and some time I think a redesign of the gear or guides might result in an arrangement that accommodates the 18-45 zoom feature, and the 56 lens, without compromise.

Gary

5 hours ago, Proteus said:

I'm excited to write about an R50 option that I've discovered.

Back in March 2025 I wrote about the only real limitation I've found with the Nauticam R50 housing. In Nauticam's design the port is integral to the housing. The design intends 18-45 Canon lens to be the only option for optics. This is not a big limitation because the WWL-1 and CMC can be added and together they give you an almost perfect range of options. But I wanted a bit more.

I like to shoot jawfish, and a 90mm equivalent lens seems to work well. The Canon 18-45, however, only creates a 72mm perspective. As designed other lenses will not fit in housing ... but now I've found one. The lens I've found is the Sigma 56mm / f1.4. There is one compromise; you must remove the lens gear that is built into the housing. Once this is done the Sigma lens fits perfectly into the housing.

Yes, you'll loose the zoom, but you will have the kind of arrangement most of us have shot for years: the 18-45 set for wide angle, and the 56 when you want telephoto, or perhaps macro (haven't tried this yet).

If you make this change you will be temporarily removing the two guides that hold the gear in place. Be sure to put them back once the gear is out because the upper guide is needed for the pop up flash to work properly. It does not block the lens placement.

If someone has a 3D printer and some time I think a redesign of the gear or guides might result in an arrangement that accommodates the 18-45 zoom feature, and the 56 lens, without compromise.

Gary

Does the R50 housing have an arrangement like other Nauticam housings where you can pull the gear control out and twist and lock it in a retracted position?

16 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

Does the R50 housing have an arrangement like other Nauticam housings where you can pull the gear control out and twist and lock it in a retracted position?

The NA-R50 uses a (rubber) sleeve that is integral to the fixed port to grip the lens as the camera slides into the housing and port.

Specs on the Sigma 56mm f1.4 lens says it focusses to 1.6' which isn't that close.....

56mm X 1.6X Canon R50 APS-C crop factor gets a focal length equivalent of 89.6mm.

Then 1.25X shooting through flat port gets approximate focal length of 112mm.....

I guess depending on subject size will this be that different than the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens when zoomed out to max focal length?

Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens at 45mm X 1.6X = 72mm.

Then flat port magnification of 1.25X = 90mm......

MAYBE you'll be able to shoot your intended jawfish from a little farther away if that's your intended purpose (????)

Just wondering........ When all is said and done is dismantling the NA-R50 zoom gear / rubber sleeve feature (which works fabulously) will it be worth it?

Just curious and please share insights how this worked out :)

David Haas

I’m still experimenting with this, but here’s a bit more.

I mounted the lens in the housing and, as written this works perfectly. Then I set up on my kitchen table (albeit, in air not water) and was able to focus reliably at 14 inches.

So absent the water effects noted above, and I agree they will exist, I have a fairly close focus. I don’t know how many jawfish fans are out there but I think most would agree that they will never let you get that close. Maybe I’ll end up OK because the increased minimum focus distance will only extend to where I’d likely shoot anyway.

But I had another idea and will try this also. There is room left over in the front between the lens and port. There’s enough room to put a 12mm extension tube on the lens. I’ve never used extension tubes but I know they move the minimum focus in while increasing magnification. So the plan is to try that too.

I imagine I’ll end up at the local pool before I have any decent conclusions, but there’s enough promise here that I want to chase this around a bit. If anyone else gets interested please write what you find … and feel free to point out my errors too. It’s all about learning …

Extra note: it’s really easy, and not damaging, to remove the gear … just 4 screws. So there’s no permanent harm in the experiment and I won’t regret having the 56mm lens should it end up as something I only use on land!

Gary

Adding a bit more for perspective.

My favorite lens on my "big gun" Sony A7RV setup was the Canon 105 mm. As one would, I was using the appropriate Nauticam flat port and this should have had the same 1.25 magnification. So, it seems, I was always preferring an effective 132 mm perspective. Maybe I'll just be restoring my de facto "go to" configuration.

To be clear, and to help other folks, my interest is not macro. I think the CMC is the right answer for tiny slow moving critters. My interest is fish portraits. My goal is to get enough "reach" that I can get close up pictures of animals that don't want you near them.

Gary

Gary,

If trying to fill your frame from say 6" - 2' with tighter fish faces or whatever I'm not sure your approach will yield what you want. Here's some more thoughts to consider.....

The narrower your lens sees (50-60-105mm) if you want more in focus than just and eyeball and maybe nostrils of a fish you'll be stopping down to a higher f-stop......

This means either more flash power and / or higher ISO depending on your desired image and how much you want in focus With critters parallel to your shooting angle you can't away with maybe f5.6 -8. Any angle of parallel and you'll need f11 or ???? unless you only want some isolated focus.

I'm also surprised you haven't tried the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lit lens behind just your NA-R50 housing's flat port to shoot fish face. It's pretty long focal length equivalent already......

Just some ideas and keep us informed if your extension tube experiment yields your desired results.....

David Haas

PS - Here's some shots from "back in the day" on an APS-C Canon camera and a lowly EF-S 18-55mm IS kit lens......Likely shot behind a pretty well matched 6" dome port....Pretty versatile in my book :)