Last minute sanity check before i switch systems

[vkalia]

Folk, after a long time, I am thinking of changing my camera system (this will only be the 3rd model i will be using underwater in 20 years of u/w photography:  Canon 20D initially, then an Olympus OMD camera for the past 6 years).      

 

I had asked earlier about Canon vs Sony for Nauticam, and got some really useful info, which i dont plan to get everyone to repeat.    

 

In the end, have decided on a Marelux housing.   I may yet keep my Oly setup as a backup or for compact travel.

 

The plan is to get a housing for my R7.   Reasons for doing so:

- I already use the R7 for wildlife

- The Tokina 10-17 lens is my perfect u/w lens, as I enjoy wide angle photography the most.   From my tests, i should be able to live with the AF speed on it for my shooting

- i have some legacy EF lenses that I can use with this setup, atleast for now (EF 100mm macro, mainly, manually focused if need be - i have a 17-40 as well, but i dont see that as being very useful underwater)

 

I’ll be carrying over my Supe D-Pro and Inon strobes with this system (they give me all the power i need).

 

Is there any reason to consider a Sony A6700 instead of the R7?      I can use the same Tokina with it, with an adapter and buying another macro lens isnt the end of the world.      The A6700 has better video (a small benefit, given that i occasionally will be shooting content for marketing/social media for my dive center) and possibly slightly better tracking AF, but for the typical speeds at which fish move, i dont think the different is noticeable.    I can’t think of any, but just running a sanity check to make sure i am not missing anything.

 

Also, what do you guys using the R7 use as a general “swimabout lens”?   For me, that used to be a 1:1 Sigma EF 50mm macro, but that has horrendous AF with the R7, and is a no-go.    Wondering what else is there.

 

I’ve been out of the gear loop for a very long time, as you may be able to tell.

 

TIA!

 

 

Edited yesterday at 06:57 PM by vkalia

[TimG]

I love to see sanity check and new (underwater camera) system in the same sentence.  Ha!

 

How sane are we to spend so much cash and take all this sensitive gear in salt water?

 

Good luck on that final decision making, visalia. Just confirm to us all that you remain sane at the end of the process; and what pills you took. I'd like to order some. 🙈

 

 

[Giancarlo M.]

For over a year now I have been using the Canon R7 for photography, mainly Macro and Balckwater.
For Macros I recommend the Canon EF-S 60 macro in addition to the 100 you already have. For BW I recommend the Canon EF-S 35 macro
AF is very performant if you have equally fast optics. 

The Tokina 10-17 is not bad, but the Canon 8-15 is another quality and you can also consider in the future the RF-S 18-45 combination with the Nauticam WWL-1 lens.

You will have a lot of fun with the R7 underwater, I think it is currently one of the best buys as an ML for underwater photography.

 

[ChipBPhoto]

3 hours ago, Giancarlo M. said:

RF-S 18-45 combination with the Nauticam WWL-1 lens

Hi @vkalia  I’ll 2nd this option.  In my opinion, it’s the best general use lens providing a wide zoom range, very sharp images, and the ability to do almost macro-like super close focus.  
 

I’d vote to stick with the R7 you already own.  There are no real advantages the Sony a6700 would provide over it.  The Canon colors are legendary, including in video.  If your current shutter count gets too high, simply pick up either a Canon refurb R7 or a lightly used one and keep going!  I did this with my first Canon DSLR and got a very long life from the rig.
 

Enjoy!

 

Edited 23 hours ago by ChipBPhoto

[humu9679]

@vkalia I like your thinking. I've always liked the idea of streamlining things, and if you use one system above water, and can make that work unter wasser, bravo! That said, I have twinges of regret moving away from Olympus. Great small system, and super for long telephoto wildlife. I'm with Sony now, but it's like a third spouse - fast, tight and lovely - but never like the first love that forever haunts you. Oh, Canon FD, how I miss thee.

[Chris Ross]

The 10-17's main benefit is flexibility, sure you can get a bit better image quality, but the 8-15 is a much bigger lens.   I suspect being a Canon mount lens it will work better on the EF-RF adapter compared to Sony-Canon metabones adapter.  If you go with this setup you can always upgrade to Canon 8-15 with just an extension tube and zoom gear.  It has a limit switch so that it zooms from 10-15 mm only for APS-C.

 

As for the WWL, it is certainly versatile but it's not a fisheye, you would still want a fisheye of some sort if you are a wide angle person.  You don't get the extreme central barrel distortion so much on the WWL compared to what you get with a fisheye.

 

If you were using the Sigma 50mm previously. look at the Canon EF-S 60mm lens you would need to get one second hand, but it was extremely popular and should focus OK on an RF-EF adapter.

 

When I upgraded recently I went with the OM-1 Very happy with that and I have the Canon 8-15 with Metabones adapter and it makes a very versatile wide angle solution it covers an 8mm fisheye plus the full range of a 7-14 lens so has more reach than the 10-17 does on APS-C.  From what I have seen from test sites it's very close in image quality to the APS-C sensors.

[bvanant]

Chris: What port are you using for the 8-15.

Bill

[Chris Ross]

16 minutes ago, bvanant said:

Chris: What port are you using for the 8-15.

Bill

I'm using the Nauticam N120 140mm port with the recommended 34.7mm N85-N120 and the 35mm extension ring.

[bvanant]

Thanks

Bill

[vkalia]

Thanks, folk.    Good to see that i havent missed anything.

 

@Giancarlo M. @Chris Ross thanks for the EF-S 60mm recommendation.   I will pick that up as my “swim about” lens.

 

I was originally thinking of the WWL-1 as well but have read a lot of reviews about needing to stop it down to f11 to get acceptable sharpness and stuff.      The extra flexibility will be nice but it isn’t essential - in many way, sticking to one type of photography on a dive helps me stay a bit more focused (no pun intended) with my shooting.

 

I dont think i will get the new rig before my Feb trip to Maldives but i certainly hope to have it for Tubbataha in April.    🙂

 

Cheers!

 

PS:  I will likely sell my current Oly camera, the housing, the 7-14 and the matching port.   But i may pick up a newer MFT camera and Nauticam housing, to have a second smaller/compact camera system.     But that’s down the line.

[ChipBPhoto]

9 hours ago, vkalia said:

I was originally thinking of the WWL-1 as well but have read a lot of reviews about needing to stop it down to f11 to get acceptable sharpness and stuff.

 

It would be beneficial to qualify and clairify this a bit.  Those that talk of finding f/11 the right aperture are mostly 1) using a FF (not APS-C) body and 2) referring to extreme corner edge sharpness, not general overall sharpness.  The center of the frame will be very sharp at f/8 or more open, even on a FF high MP camera.  If you are photoing an animal in blue water you can open the aperture wider.  If you are photoing a very detailed reefscape and sharp extreme edge corners are critical, then f/8-11 would be best.  Keep in mind APS-C sensors, like your R7, are generally much more forgiving than high MP FF systems.  There is no hard rule as it all depends on different subjects, objectives, and the conditions you are in.

 

Yes, the Canon EF-S 60 works very well with the RF-EF adapter.  That will give you a 96mm FF equivalent, similar to Canon 100 on a FF, which is a great macro choice.

 

Perhaps I missed something, but in the opening you mentioned you mostly like wide angle.  Specifically that the Tokina 10-17 is the perfect uw lens.  Keep in mind the Canon 60 will be a narrow solution, not wide.  

 

The important thing is that you settle on a solution that you feel best fits your needs.  Congrats and enjoy!

 

(....as background, I have used the WWL as my primary solution for over 5 years and logged 800+ dives with it.  I also use the Canon 8-15 w/ a 140 dome.  Prior to that, I used the Tokina 10-17 w/ Zen mini dome and Canon EF-S 60 on Canon APS-Cs for 11 years.)

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by ChipBPhoto

[Griffer]

As an R7 user ,the 10-17 is a very sharp lens i stopped using the WWL finding it a bit soft compared to the 10-17mm.

Another added bonus is the camera sync's with the flash at 1/ 400 and no black line across the bottom of your photographs try it and find out ,i had no problems with Inon z240 and Retra pro     

 

Photograph settings iso 400  f/18   1/400sec  

Enjoy playing with the R7

 

 

 

 

 

[dhaas]

Being a long time Canon APS-C shooter (before using only a 1" sensor compact G7X II the last 9 years) I'll add another option for wide angle shooting.

 

The very capable and underrated Canon RF-S 10-18mm lens isn't fast but focuses astoundingly well!  Being an RF-S lens and a rectilinear versus the long legacy Tokina 10-17mm it is a worthy option.

 

Ikelite posted a recent video and article where a capable shooter put the Canon RF-S 10-18mm and Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye through the paces side by side. 

 

https://www.ikelite.com/blogs/reviews/wide-angle-showdown-canon-rf-s-10-18mm-vs-tokina-10-17mm-underwater

 

I actually just pulled the trigger on my own Christmas present, a Canon R50 and 18-45mm RF-S "kit" lens from Canon Refurbished (same 1 year warranty as a "new" one.)    I'll test it with my buddy's Canon RF-S 10-18mm in a pool then likely buy one for my own wide angle shooting.  

 

Being more a wide angle / medium fish shooter these days means no need for a dedicated macro lens for me. It also keeps me to one dome port making travel easier.

 

Since you have a Marelux housing for your Canon R7 already I'd investigate fixed DRY wide angle lens and dome. The WWL-B / WWL-C or whatever combination can work very well also but will have some curvature.

 

My friend Phil Rudin and I had a long discussion a few months back on dry lens / dome choices versus Nauticam sharp wet lenses. There's advantages to zooming a fairly low cost kit lens (Canon, Sony or Nikon, etc.) in your housing with a full focus WET lens.  But there's also a movement I think (Phil can chime in) to fixed lens in a dome of various sizes like the popular Laowa 10mm Rectilinear lens which is an incredible value too.

 

I occasionally go back 20 years on my computer(s) and am happy with many wide angle pictures I made with fixed Canon and sigma 15mm lenses, Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye (I never owed a Full Fram dSLR) plus rectilinear Canon 10-22mm or Canon 10-18mm EF-S lenses. I even shot 90% with a smaller 6" Ikelite dome port (!!!!) 

 

In summary I'd advise you check out the low cost Canon RF-S 10-18mm lens as a wide angle shooting option 🙂

 

David Haas

 

Here's another friend's Nauticam NA-R50 for the Canon R50. It is a fixed port housing and a he bought a WWL-B lens I played with last summer. Quite capable even with my silly small strobe mounted in the cold shoe and  I'm not sure which housing I may go with yet for my own Canon R50 as the only other choice is a Seafrogs housing. But my other Canon R50 friend has used his on 3 trips so far and it's kept his Canon R50 high and dry PLUS has interchangeable dome and flat ports available.

 

 

 

 

[Pooley]

As a Sony user and Sony lover - in your shoes I'd house the R7!

 

It's a great camera, the 60mm I used to have back in my Canon days was a great lens, and my old canon 100L was superb as well. 

 

I now use a WWL-1B and that is superb and versatile - the only reason to stick with the Tokina (budget notwithstanding) is if you really need the full fisheye field of view.

 

I've shot big animals with the WWL-1B and not been disappointed at all. I even did 2 trips to Tiger beach in the same year, once with the Nikon 8-15 with a D500 (yes I've tried too many systems)   then with the A1 and WWL and I preferred the latter (although the D500 was also excellent) but if you're into reef scenes then you might want the fisheye. If its fish I'd prefer the WWL. 

 

Mike