Nauticam Wet-Mate Dome Port 38013?

[Nemrod]

Sorry to bother folks with what is probably my misunderstanding. I bought this lens for use with my Nauticam NA6400 and the kit lens 16-50mm. I normally shoot the WWL-1 or the CMC1/2. I thought this Wet-Mate dome was intended to use on the naked port to restore UW angle and reduce pincushion distortion when zoomed wide. However, I just received the lens and installed to the port and the lens vignettes badly until zoomed in to 23mm. 

 

Did I misunderstand the purpose of this lens or was it intended for compact cameras? The description of the lens does not specify that it is for compacts?

 

I like my WWL-1 and use it often but wanted a lighter option for fun fish pics, diver photos and general use to swap with my CMC macro lenses. Anyone know what si up with this lens and if there is an alternative for my proposed purpose to the 38013? I may need to return it I suppose.

 

Thanks for any help,

James

Edited February 13 by Nemrod

[Chris Ross]

Just to clarify did you try it in air and you haven't gotten it wet yet?  Can't say for certain but this may change when UW.  But before you get it wet try talking to your vendor to see what they say, there isn't much out there about this lens.

 

The purpose you state is what the lens is intended for and it should work on your lens as designed I would think.

[Nemrod]

27 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

Just to clarify did you try it in air and you haven't gotten it wet yet?  Can't say for certain but this may change when UW.  But before you get it wet try talking to your vendor to see what they say, there isn't much out there about this lens.

 

The purpose you state is what the lens is intended for and it should work on your lens as designed I would think.

 

Thanks. You are correct. I have only installed the lens dry. I will call my vendor tomorrow. This lens is fairly new and does not sho up in any of the charts for compatibility and from the description I may have assumed too much. I would not get the lens wet in the case I need to return without further info from the vendor which is a reputable business I have used for many years and value.

 

It is possible that once the port space is flooded that the vignetting would be decreased. I can live with a little bit on the widest end for my use but still, I would have thought in lieu of inclusion in port charts that Nauticam would have given some general compatibility statement. I am mounting it via the Nauticam bayonet system. Perhaps if mounted direct to the port threads it would vignette less certainly but I do not want to have to remove the port bayonet system that works just fine with the CMC lenses and the WWL-1. 

 

I will provide the vendor conclusion as soon as I speak with them.

Edited February 13 by Nemrod

[Chris Ross]

Yes, the lens only gives a relatively small increase in field and you don't to be using some of that increase up. 16mm becomes something like 21mm in a flat port, so if you have to zoom into 23mm you are worse off.  Let's see what the vendor says. 

[humu9679]

2 hours ago, Nemrod said:

 

Thanks. You are correct. I have only installed the lens dry. I will call my vendor tomorrow. This lens is fairly new and does not sho up in any of the charts for compatibility and from the description I may have assumed too much. I would not get the lens wet in the case I need to return without further info from the vendor which is a reputable business I have used for many years and value.

 

It is possible that once the port space is flooded that the vignetting would be decreased. I can live with a little bit on the widest end for my use but still, I would have thought in lieu of inclusion in port charts that Nauticam would have given some general compatibility statement. I am mounting it via the Nauticam bayonet system. Perhaps if mounted direct to the port threads it would vignette less certainly but I do not want to have to remove the port bayonet system that works just fine with the CMC lenses and the WWL-1. 

 

I will provide the vendor conclusion as soon as I speak with them.

 

It will likely vignette much less not using the bayonet mount. I tried using an air lens for the same reasons you state, but the bad news is that you're stuck with a semi-wide view. There is no zoom-through capability with the 16-50mm.

 

Craig

[Nemrod]

Okay, just to bring this to an end. I spoke with the vendor and they will of course take the lens back. Per my discussion with them this lens is intended only for compact cameras and will not work with an APS-C sensor camera. Not the vendors fault and I should have done more homework but really, nothing in the description of the lens or any information I could find would have told me that it was designed only for small sensor compacts. I guess we know now.

 

Thanks,

James

[humu9679]

39 minutes ago, Nemrod said:

Not the vendors fault and I should have done more homework but really, nothing in the description of the lens or any information I could find would have told me that it was designed only for small sensor compacts. I guess we know now.

 

Yup, nobody's fault except our own. I figure it was worth a try, especially because I value that 24mm equivalent perspective. I'm not sure if it's sensor size versus close focusing ability - probably a function of both. This is very likely elementary physics for some of our members. Just a head scratcher for me. Eh, @dhaas does this work on the 1" compacts?

[Nemrod]

I have been speaking to David. He has a lot of unique ideas 😍. Per the vendor, the lens should work with one inch sensor compacts. I did not dwell on that question as I have an APS-C.

 

But, what we really need, at least this ---> we<--- is a wet mate air lens for larger sensor cameras that simply restores the air FOV of the camera lens for in water use and reduces edge distortion and pincushion. Not a big ultra wide angle lens like my superb $WWL-1$ or similar. Something much smaller and lighter when the mission really only wants a normal lens perspective and FOV. Oh well, still looking.

Edited February 13 by Nemrod

[humu9679]

4 hours ago, Nemrod said:

But, what we really need, at least this ---> we<--- is a wet mate air lens for larger sensor cameras that simply restores the air FOV of the camera lens for in water use and reduces edge distortion and pincushion.

 

Sounds very much like a dome at this point! 😉

[Barmaglot]

On 2/13/2025 at 8:17 PM, Nemrod said:

But, what we really need, at least this ---> we<--- is a wet mate air lens for larger sensor cameras that simply restores the air FOV of the camera lens for in water use and reduces edge distortion and pincushion.

I have used a SeaFrogs wet dome with a Sony a6300 and 16-50mm lens, including on a magnetic quick-detach adapter, without vignetting or any other issues.

[humu9679]

6 hours ago, Barmaglot said:

I have used a SeaFrogs wet dome with a Sony a6300 and 16-50mm lens, including on a magnetic quick-detach adapter, without vignetting or any other issues.

And you were able to zoom through to 50mm? I found that it worked fine at 16mm but would allow for use at 50mm.

[Barmaglot]

6 minutes ago, humu9679 said:

And you were able to zoom through to 50mm? I found that it worked fine at 16mm but would allow for use at 50mm.

It's been quite a few years since I sold that setup, but I don't recall having any issues zooming through it.

 

Note that they have two versions of this wet dome - 4-inch and 6-inch. The latter is about $100 more expensive and sold at fewer locations. Using the dry version of the 4-inch dome, my 16-50mm couldn't focus at longer FLs, but with a 6-inch dome there were no issues. If you absolutely want zoom-through capability, then the 6-inch wet dome should be a safer choice - as I said, I don't recall having issues with zoom-through capability, but it's been quite a long time now, and EXIF data doesn't show when I had it attached and when I didn't.

[humu9679]

8 hours ago, Barmaglot said:

It's been quite a few years since I sold that setup, but I don't recall having any issues zooming through it.

 

Note that they have two versions of this wet dome - 4-inch and 6-inch. The latter is about $100 more expensive and sold at fewer locations. Using the dry version of the 4-inch dome, my 16-50mm couldn't focus at longer FLs, but with a 6-inch dome there were no issues. If you absolutely want zoom-through capability, then the 6-inch wet dome should be a safer choice - as I said, I don't recall having issues with zoom-through capability, but it's been quite a long time now, and EXIF data doesn't show when I had it attached and when I didn't.

 

Thank you. I keep trying combinations that will make my kit less cumbersome. Maybe one day Google Masks will feature a full frame sensor, edge-sharp fisheye to 100mm macro and strobes firing from our fingertips. Oh, and no tanks of compressed air.

[Nemrod]

The SeaFros dome looks interesting and inexpensive. But I do not think it will thread into the Nauticam 67mm to bayonet adapter? The Nauticam adapter requires the lens rear element to protrude considerably. 

 

What I was wanting to do is to have the ability to go from CMC/SMC to the Wet mate lens. Thus the need for small size. I would park the unused lens in the dock which is attached to the bottom of my Nauticam housing.

 

I have a dome port with fisheye lens, the WWL-1 and Inon H100 and those cover wide angle well for me. I also have the CMC macro lenses. What I do not have and apparently is not made is something small and light and dockable that covers the normal view angles of a 28-75mm (kit type) lenses. It is kind of strange in way that such a thing is not made.

 

Here is a photo of my NA6400 rig with the WWL-1 in the dock and CMC on the port:. To be clear, I was just playing around, no way I would swim around with the WWL-1 hanging on that dock, just much too big and too cumbersome to be practical. However something like the Wet Mate lens that started this thread that if designed for APS-C/FF cameras would be much more compact. Oh well 🙂.

 

Edited Monday at 03:26 PM by Nemrod

[Barmaglot]

13 hours ago, Nemrod said:

But I do not think it will thread into the Nauticam 67mm to bayonet adapter? The Nauticam adapter requires the lens rear element to protrude considerably. 

I don't know about Nauticam bayonet adapter, but I've used mine with magnetic rings - https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32935095899.html

[Chris Ross]

On 2/18/2025 at 12:22 AM, Nemrod said:

The SeaFros dome looks interesting and inexpensive. But I do not think it will thread into the Nauticam 67mm to bayonet adapter? The Nauticam adapter requires the lens rear element to protrude considerably. 

 

What I was wanting to do is to have the ability to go from CMC/SMC to the Wet mate lens. Thus the need for small size. I would park the unused lens in the dock which is attached to the bottom of my Nauticam housing.

 

I have a dome port with fisheye lens, the WWL-1 and Inon H100 and those cover wide angle well for me. I also have the CMC macro lenses. What I do not have and apparently is not made is something small and light and dockable that covers the normal view angles of a 28-75mm (kit type) lenses. It is kind of strange in way that such a thing is not made.

 

Here is a photo of my NA6400 rig with the WWL-1 in the dock and CMC on the port:. To be clear, I was just playing around, no way I would swim around with the WWL-1 hanging on that dock, just much too big and too cumbersome to be practical. However something like the Wet Mate lens that started this thread that if designed for APS-C/FF cameras would be much more compact. Oh well 🙂.

 

If you want to do this with something small, consider using something like the INON wet wide lens, which is quite a bit smaller, you'd have to work out if you could use the Nauticam bayonet to attach it to your system.  They seem to have reduced the range of cameras they support recently, but the old UWL-100 worked with Sony lenses. see this page:

 

💬1 - The Ultimate Wet Lens Sample Post | Mozaik UW

 

Scroll down to the sea fan pic here:

 

 

It's taken with the dome, which you don't need if you only want medium wide, but gives decent quality with the view of an 18-20mm lens in a smaller package.  The Quality without the dome should be similar.  The image is large and you can download it and the EXIf data is included so you see where the lens is zoomed to, taken with the same 16-50 lens.

[Nemrod]

Thanks. I have the old Inon UWL100 from previous cameras but it will not work with the APS-C size sensor. At least I have not gotten it to. However, I am aware the UWLH100 does work but Inon has I think discontinued this lens for some reason. I imagine I could find a used one. I like the Nauticam lens because it was inexpensive (well, not really). 

 

With dome the H100 is not much smaller than the WWL-1 but without the dome that is a good bit smaller and lighter. Inon lenses come in Type 1 and Type 2, I forget which is which but generally they can be converted from one to the other. The difference is how much the rear element protrudes. 

 

Here I am in the Bahamans with my old Ikelite and Oly 5050 and the Inon UWL with dome. I wish it would work with my Sony but it vignettes and the corners and periphery are horrid. I have tried with a 35 port and Rokinon 35mm prime, still no go.

[dhaas]

I just received from a friend the following lenses to test on my Nauticam NA-R50 housing bayonet to 67mm adapter:

 

* Inon UWL-100 (designed for 35mm compact focal length)

 

* Inon UWL-H100 (designed for 28mm compact focal length)

 

* Fantasea / AOI UWL-09f (polycarbonate dome designed for 28mm focal length)

 

My Canon R50 camera is a 24MP APS-C sensor and the Nauticam NA-R50 is a fixed port for using only the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM kit lens. 

 

Like my buddy Nemrod I'm looking for possible medium wider solutions if not using the very wonderful bit large and heavier (and $$$$) Nauticam WWL-B or WWL-C.

 

Doing some dry tests today with all 3 then will try to get into a pool soon. If none are worth the size / weight / travel hassle of just shooting my housing with the built in flat port won't be as disappointing as many surmise it will be. 

 

Stay tuned!

 

David Haas

 

[Nemrod]

David my belief system is that the UWL-H100 will work but that the UWL-100 will not :(. Here is my NA6400 fitted with the UWL-100, Port 35 and 35mm lens. The lens front element is very close to the port glass. Unfortunately for me since I all ready own it, the old UWL-100 just did not work (yet, not entirely given up). As large as the Nauticam WWL-1 is, underwater it handles well and I have no difficulty poking it into tight spots. The reason I was fooling with the UWL-100 was I had thought as has been suggested to remove the dome for a more compact semi-wide angle range lens.

 

 

[Barmaglot]

46 minutes ago, dhaas said:

* Fantasea / AOI UWL-09f (polycarbonate dome designed for 28mm focal length)

Can't speak for the others, but this shouldn't cause any issues - it works for me with a Sony 16-50mm kit lens, although, expectedly, I have to zoom to 19mm to remove vignetting.

[dhaas]

Both my friend's UWL-100 and UWL-H100 have no additional dome. 

 

The UWL-100 front element is larger diameter front element yet the stubbier UWL-H100 feels heavier (!!!!!!) The UWL-H100 rear element also doesn't end up as flush with the Nauticam bayonet / 67mm adapter.

 

Either Inon UWL-100 / H100 lens is shorter that a WWL choice. How much vignetting at 18mm wide focal length of my Canon kit lens is the first consideration plus how much one needs to zoom in to eliminate it.

I've always cropped any pic anyway and mild dark corners I really don't care to waste precious underwater time zooming to some exact focal length. Just crop it.......

 

The crap old Sea and Sea .6X lens actually had very minimal vignetting but the corners shooting close in my last pool dive weren't anything to rave about. But it did work and was much lighter and smaller than my buddy's WWL-B.

 

I have a sneaking feeling after all this screwing around I'll just shoot my kit lens through the port and and add whatever cheap WA lens is available. Mainly because I'm weight OCD about packing and diving.

 

We'll see!
 

DH

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 03:15 PM by dhaas

[Nemrod]

The Inon lenses typically are Type 1 or Type 2. It is possible to get the rings through DiverVision (?) to convert them. This conversion moves the rear element fore and aft in relation to the port:

[dhaas]

All these lenses had Type 2 rear mounts. Not sure if the Type 1 Inon would make the rear element too close to the housings front port glass as water in between is required.

 

Results in no particular order shooting dry. Full wide, then zooming a tad to eliminate vignetting, then zoom in to 45mm on my Canon 18-45mm lens all with WA lens attached.

 

Both the UWL-H100 and UWL-100 vignette require zoom but not much to eliminate vignetting. Corners not impressive even at f8 on any of them. This isn't surprising as these lenses were designed for compact cameras with smaller sensors up to the 1" popular models.

 

The Fantasea / AOI UWL-09f lens barrel is too fat to fit in the Nauticam 67mm / bayonet adapter on my fixed port kit lens housing. So that's out but for those wiht interchangeable port housings and a skinny 67mm threaded from it might work.

 

Surprisingly the cheap Sea and Sea .6X lens almost looks the same center sharpness but again corners are crap no matter what f-stop 😞

 

Your results may vary but I'm inclined to not use any of these choices.                                                                                           The Nauticam WWL-B or WWL-C seem to be the best for overall wide to medium kit lens shooting and the price justifies their performance!

 

DH

 

 

Edited Wednesday at 04:42 PM by dhaas