Hi mates,

For 13 years i use the combo 8-15 with 100m dome (Aquatica) and now 140mm on Nauticam (complete switch to Nauticam with Canon R7 as Aquatica support in Europe is !$#@$).

However, i wanna more flex during science missions - mean to have wide and macro at the same time.

Thus am thinking to move to WWL II and CMC on the handy 18-45 Canon lens.

Has anybody experience on such switch?

I moved from SLR and assorted lenses to m4/3 with a kit zoom and wet lenses a few years back. It works well for a journalist approach to a dive site. One site, get the wide angle to set the scene, fish in the middle, then macro all in one dive, then swap back again when the whale shark shows up! Then on to the next site.

Wide angle is comparable to before the move. I find the main difference is on macro, where the CMC has to be close to the subject. A dedicated macro lens could achieve similar magnification from a little further away. In some situations that is a plus, and in some situations its a limitation. But its not a like-for-like comparison because I have never owned a dedicated macro lens for m4/3.

If choosing again today my ideal would be a primary lens 60 or 105 macro (full frame equivalent) and a wet lens to convert that to wide angle. I would loose the ability to zoom for convenience at the extremes. But the balance of my diving has changed. I used to do a lot more wreck diving. Now I do more macro diving. Without travelling with a full shed of camera kit most of us need to compromise somewhere.

6 hours ago, homodelphinius said:

Hi mates,

For 13 years i use the combo 8-15 with 100m dome (Aquatica) and now 140mm on Nauticam (complete switch to Nauticam with Canon R7 as Aquatica support in Europe is !$#@$).

However, i wanna more flex during science missions - mean to have wide and macro at the same time.

Thus am thinking to move to WWL II and CMC on the handy 18-45 Canon lens.

Has anybody experience on such switch?

There are various posts I recall about using the WWL in combo with a CMC. The biggest issue quoted is what to do with the big lump of a WWL when it's not mounted on the port, with some concern about the fact the lens has no way to attach a lanyard. I only recall one person saying they used the WWL/CMC combo and they thought it worked OK.

I would add that the quoted field of the the WWL is a 130deg diagonal lens, though the barrel distortion means that horizontal field which reflects what coverage you can achieve is about the same or very slightly wider than a 14mm rectilinear lens. The Horizontal field of a fisheye will be about 145 deg while the WWL will be around 105. You can go close to matching the WWL reach with the 8-15 plus 1.4x or even an adapted Tokina 10-17 but of course you can't add a CMC lens to that setup. You can focus up to the port glass and this allows you to image subjects down to about tennis ball size filling the frame reasonably well for CFWA type shots.

The CMC-1 will get you about 0.8x on the 18-45 and it only focuses between 44 and 81mm from the CMC glass, so it's not as easy to work with as a standard macro lens.

Whether it suits you likely depends somewhat which way you are leaning with the majority of the subjects you shoot. If it's mostly wide with the occasional macro or occasional wide with mainly variable sized macro. A macro lens with a wide wet lens would probably suit a wider range of macro sized subjects better than using a CMC with a kit zoom.

Hi @homodelphinius ,

Yes, I have extensive personal usage with both the 8-15/140 dome and the WWL.

In short, it's a trade off.

- 8-15/140: smaller package, but limited zoom capabilities. Focus is ultra-wide with 180 degree FoV. Solid for CFWA reefscapes and wrecks. The 8-15 is a sharp lens, fast focus, and very forgiving as to the exact focus point due to the nature of such a wide lens.

- The WWL is a much more versatile option that covers wide (not super-wide) to medium zoom range. At the wide end it is 130 degree FoV. There are a few times I miss having a wider option for expansive scenes, but those are very rare compared to the benefit of having a true working zoom option. The WWL is a water correcting lens which allows focusing to basically have the subject touching the glass dome. I have successfully photoed near macro level images of flamingo tongues with ease. Adding the CMC provides a super macro option, but with an extremely short usable focus range. Basically you would be able to photo fairly wide reefscapes, CFWA scenes, near macro, and then with the CMC super macro all in one dive.

- Both the WWL and the CMC attach to the port via an adapter. You can purchase a similar adapter designed as a holder mounted to your housing or on a float arm to hold the lens you are not using at that time. Realistically, most everyone uses the WWL with a rare swap out to the CMC when an appropriate subject is found. It is a bit of pain to swap frequently which means it needs to be something really worth the effort to make the underwater swap, but it is there should you need it. A true macro lens with the CMC added would be best for a macro oriented dive.

While I dive 95% of the time with my WWL, I do occasionally still use the 8-15 if I am diving specially for ultra-wide scenes. The rest of my dives are with a dedicated macro setup.

There will be plenty that prefer a more traditional dome port and standard wide lens solution. There are benefits to each. It is important to focus on what your specific needs and desires are for your photography. Me personally, I like the zoom ability in a more compact design afforded with the WWL, especially considering the image sharpness delivered.

Hope this help!

chip