46 minutes ago, Chris Ross said:

Try again:

https://waterpixels.net/forums/topic/1438-testing-nauticam-n120-port-extension-for-140mm-and-180mm-domes-with-wide-angle-lenses/?&do=findComment&comment=13817

The links on the forum are not active everywhere in the box, you have to hover over the title, caught me out a few times, hopefully this link works, it's just to show minimal difference with a change in extension on a fisheye.

Thanks, this link works.
Actually, I was already reading the whole thread a few days ago (before I started this thread).

6 hours ago, waso said:

Actually, I was already reading the whole thread a few days ago (before I started this thread).

..and that should have brought you to the conclusion not to use WWL on Canon Naughtycam Systems and put a 3rd party dome on your shopping list.

Please report back WASO once you have some shots with what you bought.

4 hours ago, Adventurer said:

..and that should have brought you to the conclusion not to use WWL on Canon Naughtycam Systems and put a 3rd party dome on your shopping list.

Please report back WASO once you have some shots with what you bought.

Actually, the WWL was never on my shopping list.
Before I started this thread, I was almost sure to buy a WACP-C.🫢

After Christmas, I will first buy and modify the Commlite RF/EF adapter to determine how big the IQ difference is compared to the older Kenko and after that, I'll probably buy the 140mm FE Port.

6 hours ago, waso said:

Actually, the WWL was never on my shopping list.
Before I started this thread, I was almost sure to buy a WACP-C.🫢

Actually I also had a long period, where I thought, I might be missing out on something, not owning a WAPC-C or other Nauticam Water Contact Optic. They are just so heavily hyped and raved by various (officially not paid) talking heads on the internet.

The death sentence for WAPC-C was this very honest review by Interceptor121 :

Interceptor121 Photography & Video Workshops

Nauticam WACP-C vs WWL-1

I am conscious that a post like this is destined to create some stir, however it reflects over one month of testing of the two Nauticam water contact optics with my A1 and summarizes my conclusion …

Wrap Up

As you can see by yourself there is really nothing between the two optics and clearly the difference between the wet and dry version is simply in the ergonomics and of course the price. For me there is no reason to consider the WACP-C unless you have serious issues with a wet mount.

Edited December 16, 2025Dec 16 by Adventurer

Thanks for the link!

It will provide me with good entertainment for this evening. 😁

Is there a decision by now? I’ve also been searching for the right ultra-wide-angle solution for a long time.

At the moment I’m using a Canon R5 with the 15–35mm f/2.8 and an 8.5" acrylic dome. With the 70 mm extension, the acrylic dome always tends to float upwards, which really annoys me.

I’ve also tried the EF 8–15mm, both with and without the 1.4× Kenko teleconverter. However, I don’t always find the fisheye look to be the right fit.

I also tested the RF 24–50mm with the WWL-C. I actually found the image quality to be very good, and a friend of mine uses the same combination as well — mainly because of the lower weight and the versatility.

1 hour ago, Landvogt1893 said:

Is there a decision by now? I’ve also been searching for the right ultra-wide-angle solution for a long time.

At the moment I’m using a Canon R5 with the 15–35mm f/2.8 and an 8.5" acrylic dome. With the 70 mm extension, the acrylic dome always tends to float upwards, which really annoys me.

I’ve also tried the EF 8–15mm, both with and without the 1.4× Kenko teleconverter. However, I don’t always find the fisheye look to be the right fit.

I also tested the RF 24–50mm with the WWL-C. I actually found the image quality to be very good, and a friend of mine uses the same combination as well — mainly because of the lower weight and the versatility.

No decision yet.

Right now I'm busy selling off the remaining Seacam equipment and a few Nauticam items, ordering the Commlite adapter and then testing it in comparison with the Kenko on my 8-15.

Personally, I'm not interested in a rectilinear wide-angle lens behind the dome as the optical quality has simply been too poor in my experience.

If you have sample shots and 100% crops from the corners with your RF 24-50/WWL-C, it would be nice to have a look.