Nauticam support for Sony 16-25 f2.8 G and Laowa 10mm f2.8 AF lenses

[dentrock]

I have been told that Nauticam has no plans to support either of these lenses, although they did suggest some port options for the Sony 16-25 including the 180 dome with 60mm extension.

 

But we need a zoom gear for the Sony 16-25. It looks like the Nauticam zoom gear for the Sony 24-50 f2.8 G lens should fit, as these two lenses have very similar configuration and dimensions and apparently were developed as a complementary pair.

 

Is anyone out there using the 16-25 with a Nauticam housing, and if so, what are you using as a zoom gear?

 

[Phil Rudin]

I reviewed the Laowa 10mm F/2.8 AF lens in uwpmag.com issue #141 using the Sony A7R V in a Marelux MX-A7RV housing using the 230mm port and 20mm extension. The conversion for Nauticam should be the N120 230mm dome and N100 to N120 35.5 port adapter. I have not tested this combo but should be close.

 

The upside to Sony FE 16-25 F/2.8 G is the 18cm minimum focus distance, which is better than most of the other 16-35 offerings. The 180/60mm extension sounds about right for Nauticam. Seems odd they would support 24-50 and not 15-25 although 24-50 can be used with WACP-C. It appears the 24-50 gear should work.

 

 null

[dentrock]

I asked Nauticam if their zoom gear for the 24-50 would fit the 16-25, but they didn't reply.

 

After studying the dimensions and design of both lenses, I am 90% sure it will, and may spring for the 16-25 during the black friday shenanigans.

[Phil Rudin]

The big advantage of the 16-25mm over most of the Sony 16-35 lenses is the 18cm minimum focus distance v. most of the 16-35 lenses that are in the 25cm or greater range, Much better for use in a 180mm dome port. 

[dentrock]

3 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

The big advantage of the 16-25mm over most of the Sony 16-35 lenses is the 18cm minimum focus distance v. most of the 16-35 lenses that are in the 25cm or greater range, Much better for use in a 180mm dome port. 

Phil, have you tried the 16-25 in the 140 dome? Thoughts?

 

Always interested in the most travel-friendly options.

 

I'm finding the Laowa 10 very ordinary in the corners with the 140 (but good with the 8.5").

 

By the time you crop out the crappy bits in a 10/140 image, even at f16, you are back to 16mm equiv FOV or so.

[Phil Rudin]

Regarding the 16-25mm F/2.8 I have a custom gear and I have started with 55mm of Marelux extensions with Marelux 180mm dome. No results yet worth posting, only pool tests.

 

Regarding the Laowa 10mm the 140mm dome is not ideal but works in a pinch where corners would have been soft anyway.

[dentrock]

On 11/24/2024 at 7:42 AM, dentrock said:

I asked Nauticam if their zoom gear for the 24-50 would fit the 16-25, but they didn't reply.

 

After studying the dimensions and design of both lenses, I am 90% sure it will, and may spring for the 16-25 during the black friday shenanigans.

 I have the lens and I received the zoom gear for the 24-50 today. Item 37178. It fits the 16-25 nicely, subject to the usual Nauticam gear fitting issue of shuffling the little bits of rubber until you get a firm grip on the lens without trashing it.

 

Incidentally I checked the Marelux port chart for 5" Sony and neither the Sony 16-25 nor the Laowa 10 are listed.

 

That leaves only Ikelite and Aquatica supporting the Laowa 10, and possibly only Ikelite (which has, or used to have the most flexible lens gear system), potentially supporting the Sony 16-25.

 

Others using other systems can advise if they like.

 

I will dive test the 16-25 when weather permits, trying it first with the 140 (for travel), then the 180 domes.

 

I estimated the EP for the 16-25 at 80mm from the lens mounting flange (at 16); 3mm longer than the 20-70 at 20. I will therefore start with extensions working for the 20-70, noting that the minimum focus distance is shorter for the 16-25.