Nauticam's port chart is extremely limited on the use of the 140mm dome for Sony n100 a7s/r full frame series.

Has anyone had any experience with native Sony lenses using the 140mm dome that they can provide first-hand commentary on.

No speculation please, just actual experience.

TIA

It's not a native Sony lens but the Laowa 10mm dome was tested and discussed extensively including using it in a 140mm dome some time back, here's a thread mainly testing Canon lenses and some of them including the 10mm laowa in the 140mm dome.

This was tested as Canon mount MF lens but they make it in a Sony mount in AF. In the absence of any experience on Sony native rectilinear in the 140mm dome this may give some idea on what you might expect, in general terms 140mm is regarded as too small a dome for most rectilinear lenses and I don't recall seeing much discussion on the topic here.

Some more detail on the 10mm laowa here, quite an extensive thread:

Scrolling down is some information on Sony lenses that work well in the 180mm dome.

The Laowa seems to be a special case working as well as it dies in the 140mm dome, it is generally thought that the very short minimum focus distance helps the lens perform better than other rectilinear lenses. Without doubt the best performer in a 140mm dome is going to be the Canon 8-15. Fisheyes play better with dome ports and can work very well in quite small ports.

Hi @foetusmachine - to you get the info you want, it would be helpful if you would share specific lenses or purposes (wide angle, CFWA, macro, etc.) for which you are seeking.

In addition to the Laowa 10mm Chris shared, I frequently use the Nauticam 140 with the Canon EF 8-15 with the MC-11 adaptor with my Sony a1, and Sony a7rIV previously. While not native Sony glass, this system works extremely well with the 140 dome for both wide angle and CFWA. It also works well with the Kenko 1.4x TC without significant loss of corner sharpness. In short, this is the most frequent combination and use case for the 140 dome due to the full hemispherical design.

Hope this helps,

chip

Edited 17 hours ago17 hr by ChipBPhoto

As Chip has pointed out several lenses both rectilinear and fisheye work better in a 140mm full or near full hemisphere domes compared to larger non-fisheye domes like the 170/180mm verity. Also Chris has eluded to the physics of virtual image in a dome port where the larger the dome port the further the virtual image is from the lens. So the closer a lens focuses the smaller the port it will focus in. For the 140mm fisheye dome my experience been that lenses that have a minimum focus distance of around 16cm or less work best.

These are a few I have tested in the Marelux 140mm fisheye dome port. This is my favorite 140mm fisheye dome simply because the sun shade bayonets on and off making it easy to use underwater.

Rectilinear lenses include,

Laowa 10mm F/2.8 AOV 130.4 degrees, Minimum focus distance 12cm, Retail $799.00

Laowa 12mm F/2.8 AOV 122 degrees, MFD 14cm, Retail $699.00

Viltrox 14mm F/4 Air, AOV 112 degrees, MFD 13cm, Retail $199.00 (High IQ for cost and better corners than the Sony 14mm F/1.8 at MFD of 25cm and the Rokinon 14mm F/2.8 MFD of 20cm)

Sony FE 16mm F/1.8 G, AOV 107 degrees, MFD 15mm, Retail $898.00

Sony FE 20mm F/1.8 and 24mm F/2.8 G lenses both focus to 18cm but at 94 and 84 degrees they will still work

Fisheye lenses include

Canon EF 8-15mm F/4L, AOV 180 to 175 degrees, MFD 15cm, Retail $1299.00 plus Sigma or Metabones for Sony lens converter, Nikon made an 8-15 much like the Canon but harder to fine in the used market and the Nikon to Sony converters don't work as well as those for Canon.

Sigma 15mm F/2.8 EX fisheye for Canon EF, works with the same converters as the Canon fisheye zoom, AOV 180 degrees, MFD 15cm, used market.

strHori 6mm F/2.8 circular fisheye, 220 degree AOV, MFD 8cm, Retail $299.00, This is an all MANUAL lens which I set to F/11 with focus pre-set for max DOF from about eight inches to beyond visibility.

This port also works with macro lenses in the 50mm to 150mm range adding back original AOV, increasing corner sharpness and reducing CA.

16 hours ago, Chris Ross said:

The Laowa seems to be a special case working as well as it dies in the 140mm dome, it is generally thought that the very short minimum focus distance helps the lens perform better than other rectilinear lenses.

The Laowa 10 is a poor performer behind the 140 dome, assuming we are talking sharpness across the frame, and uncropped images.

I use a simple 3 point system to estimate sharpness across the frame. The centre is always sharp (assuming the lens can be properly focused) regardless of dome alignment or diameter.

The question to be asked is: 'how big is that central sharp section?' not 'how sharp are the corners?'

So I examine the centre at 100% and estimate the maximum diameter of the central sharp section.

Score: 1= 12mm diameter, 2=24mm and 3=36mm.

The figures are obviously approximate, but the fall-off in sharpness is actually quite easy to judge, assuming there are parts of the subject that should be in focus across the frame.

I had high hopes for my Laowa 10, but its best score was 1 at f/11, using the 140 and total of 45mm extension, which gives a theoretical misalignment of -5mm (a minus indicates too much extension by that amount). The dome shade also vignetted moderately and would need to be removed. Now 12mm sharpness could be OK in some circumstances, but it's marginal.

The 180 dome can't be used (vignettes too much), so I repeated the tests with my 8.5" dome. Best score was between 2 and 3 at f/11 with a total of 55mm extension and a theoretical misalignment of 4mm (meaning I needed another 4mm).

But that's after removing the shade, and the port itself still vignetted a little.

So I sold the lens. It is unusable for my purposes, but may suit others.

I think the reason for its poor performance is its flat image plane (it is marketed as 'zero distortion' like some other Laowa WA lenses). Frankly I will avoid these for underwater use from now on.

I second the comments on the Canon 8-15 with the 140. It works fine. But I long for the day when there is a useable E mount fisheye option! With AF of course...

2 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

This port also works with macro lenses in the 50mm to 150mm range adding back original AOV, increasing corner sharpness and reducing CA.

The 50 works very well behind the 140. Corners go from 1 at f/18 with a flat port, to 3+ (basically the entire frame) at f/8 with the 140.

If you try to use the 90 or 100 with the 140, misalignment will be bad, due to the physical size of the lens and the location of the EP being far behind the front of the lens.

Anyway I couldn't get the 90 to work, even with a larger radius 6" WA dome. Results were awful due to misfocusing. I think the problem here is that the EP is way back, and moves considerably as you focus closer.

The 100 works a bit better (and the EP hardly moves), but best alignment with the 140 is theoretical -17, with total 80mm extension.

It focused in water in a tub, but I didn't dive test it; opting instead to dive it with the 180 dome.

There was quite a lot of misfocusing using AFC with tracking (my preference); plus a 180 dome is a bit clumsy for macro, so I won't pursue this option. Out of curiosity, I may still test it with the 140, despite the misalignment; and perhaps AFS is worth a shot.

Other WA lenses (FF) I have tested with the 140 and work well (sharpness 2-3 at f/11) are the Sigma 17 and Sony 16-25. There are a variety of APS-C lenses which also work very well with the 140.