9 hours ago, horvendile said:

Again, thanks!

Turns out S&S doesn't have a zoom ring for 24-50. I guess I could see if my existing zoom ring would fit, though I'll have to wait a week. But without zooom ring, S&S is no longer an option. And yes it would theoretically be possible to 3D-print one but in practice, probably not really. And I'm given to understand that you want to be well placed with your lens för WWL-C. "It's probably about 20 mm" sounds shaky.

I do have a 20 mm extension, which could maybe see me over for using my existing macro port(s) on an Isotta housing. It's worth considering.

Also, I did find a Saga adapter to use S&S ports on Nauticam housing, but if the flange distance is larger on Nauticam than S&S it doesn't help much.

However. I did put one Nauticam WA package and one Isotta WA package together in a spreadsheet. Final prices will depend on the euro - SEK exchange rate, I've used 11.5 SEK for a euro now. Then I get

Nauticam: 89000 SEK

Isotta: 84000 SEK

Not much of a difference really. Mind you, that's with Inon 45 degree viewfinder, I don't know how much superior Nauticam's own is. It costs three times as much.

A macro port for nauticam would set me back about 5500 SEK more.

So yes, Nauticam is a bit more expensive than Isotta but not a big difference, and then I have a Swedish retailer. I'd say the omens indicate a Nauticam solution - either that, or do nothing and stay put. Well, I won't have to decide today. And I could investigare Isotta a bit more.

what basis are you using for that comparison? You should be able to use all your existing ports and extensions on Isotta, perhaps not on Nauticam. Is that quote for a full set of ports for both options?

The difficulty in explaining is hopping between two options . If you want to use the 24-50 on your current S&S housing is option 1. Option two is to go to a Z8 system either Nauticam or Isotta. .

Option 1 just email Isotta and ask them if they can confirm the correct port to use with the 24-50 on your S&S housing. You would need to print a zoom gear and there are a few places that will do this you could try:

https://www.deepshots.co.uk/collections/gears-for-olympus-and-panasonic?grid_list=grid-view&filter.v.price.gte=&filter.v.price.lte=

https://eocean.eu/en/16-custom-design-machining

F.I.T 3D printed zoom gear and focus gear of various styles

[Instructions] Zoom ring/focus ring customized production If you have any questions, please contact [email protected]

Option 2 if you went with a new housing , again email Isotta and ask what is needed to use your existing domes/extensions with a new Z8 housing. You can buy all you need for the 24-50 off the shelf. I believe you should be able to keep all of your existing domes.

For the Nauticam option to make reusing your domes feasible you would need to source Nauticam lug rings for each S&S dome assuming they are removable, they used to be available but now discontinued. You would need to know the length of the Saga adapter if you wanted to go that way.

Well, starting with the comparison. I think it might be easiest to just upload a screenshot of the spreadsheet! I wrote it for myself but I think it should be possible to understand for English speakers too.

The Nauticam section is with prices from Swedish shop exposureunderwater. The Isotta section is with prices from uwcamerastore, except for a few things that may be bought from Sweden. In this screenshot I used 11.5 as exchange rate € - SEK. The flip adapter x2 may have to be swapped out but it's the same price in both sections.

So, this is my calculation for a setup with only the WWL-C. (Continued below the screenshot)

For macro I expect to be able to use my current port with Isotta. If I go Nauticam I expect I need a new port, which is the macro port 80. The focus gear I consider optional. It would be nice but I don't have one now.

Question is how useful it would be to be able to use my current WA ports. I expect the WWL-C to replace my need for the 14-30 and 24-70. However, if I want to continue using the fisheye there would be an advantage in being able to use current ports.

And, as for the low-budget option of continuing to use my S&S housing - I've sent a question about the flange distance. I've also asked about 3D-printed zoom rings. It's worth investigating.

6 hours ago, horvendile said:

Well, starting with the comparison. I think it might be easiest to just upload a screenshot of the spreadsheet! I wrote it for myself but I think it should be possible to understand for English speakers too.

The Nauticam section is with prices from Swedish shop exposureunderwater. The Isotta section is with prices from uwcamerastore, except for a few things that may be bought from Sweden. In this screenshot I used 11.5 as exchange rate € - SEK. The flip adapter x2 may have to be swapped out but it's the same price in both sections.

So, this is my calculation for a setup with only the WWL-C. (Continued below the screenshot)

For macro I expect to be able to use my current port with Isotta. If I go Nauticam I expect I need a new port, which is the macro port 80. The focus gear I consider optional. It would be nice but I don't have one now.

Question is how useful it would be to be able to use my current WA ports. I expect the WWL-C to replace my need for the 14-30 and 24-70. However, if I want to continue using the fisheye there would be an advantage in being able to use current ports.

And, as for the low-budget option of continuing to use my S&S housing - I've sent a question about the flange distance. I've also asked about 3D-printed zoom rings. It's worth investigating.

Good analysis, I would suggest don't count on using your current fisheye dome with Nauticam, unless you can find a lug ring in stock somewhere. You seem to have a macroport in both systems? Or is that the port for the 24-50

On the WWL C it goes from slightly wider than your 14-30 to about 35-40mm equivalent while your 24-70 gets to 70mm of course. Whether it's a complete substitute depends upon whether you use the 40-70mm range on your 24-70 much. Other than that it is effectively a complete substitute for the 14-30 and big dome- unless of course you are a dedicated wreck diver and want trust rectilinear rendering for your wreck shots. As you mentioned there is some fisheye distortion in the WWL-C.

I's also suggest asking about using the WWL-C on a flip as it only attaches by the Nauticam bayonet fitting. It's quite a hefty piece (though nowhere near as big a 9"dome) and I've only seen one post where they said they took it off and swapped it for diopter and even then they removed it and stored it in a pocket. which changes buoyancy of the rig. I expect using it on a flip is going to be an issue due to its size.

As far as whether the WWL-C substitutes for a fisheye, it depends on what you are shooting, the FE is the choice for reef scenics for me at least. A left field option might be adding a Kenko 1.4x which requires 20mm more extension and that gets you out to the field of a 16mm rectilinear based on horizontal field of view.

I’ve taken the wwl-c off under water and shot the 24-50 @50, holding the wwl in hand. Not directly optimal but it worked occasionally. It’s more or less neutral uw thanks to a buoyancy collar. Much smaller than a dome. Very easy. Could stuff it in a pocket or, I’d imagine, use some kind of flip. Haven’t seen or heard about anyone doing it. Seem feasible tho.

WWL-C covers a lot of WA/CFWA needs. You can lens correct afterwards if you want it straighter. Otoh it’s sharper than a FF WA zoom behind a dome (can’t fix that afterwards). But it’s not a full fisheye. So if you want to be able to do splits or need the full 180 degrees, add a dome or adaptation of your existing S&S dome to your budget to use the 8-15. I belive there actually are adapters made by Nauticam for S&S ports, again—talk to Magnus at exposure underwater.

Surprisingly close race on the money, I’d have thought a Nauticam z8-rig would be noticeably more expensive than an isota ditto. Well, well…

Edited July 20Jul 20 by Christian K

All right, so here's a general update on the things I remember that I found out today!

Isotta says that yes you can use S&S ports on Isotta housings, but not the other way around, on account of the double o-rings on Isotta ports. I don't know, maybe it's possible to remove one o-ring and then it would work, and then again maybe not. If Isotta is right it can't be done, then that rules out the cheap option of continuing with my S&S housing, provided I want the WWL-C

Sea & Sea intended to make a solution for 24-50 and WWL-C but hasn't had resources to do that yet. (Ok this I learned earlier than today.) Given that what needs to be done is more or less

a) figure out the length from lens mount to the front glass in Nauticam's solution, in order to make the very simple port

b) figure out the diameter of the 24-50, in order to make the zoom gear

I kind of despair about S&S. Also, their homepage looks like something from 1998 and is not well maintained. I get the impression that S&S is not that interested in making underwater housings and ports.

What S&S is interested in making is strobes. This got me into the jungle of TTL flash triggers, because yes, I do think TTL works fairly well. I thought that as long as you had a TTL trigger for your camera brand you were all set. Ha. Ha. Ha. Oh no. To the credit of S&S, they do list which triggers work with their strobes. This is important; I have YS-D1 now and may upgrade in the future but maybe not right now. Apparently the UW Technics TTL triggers work well with Nikon and newer S&S strobes. Nauticam's own trigger, however, is currently under evaluation. Ok, whew, good find Dan, I thought Nauticam's trigger would be the safe option. Now to take a look at UW technics trigger... hang on... comparing the user manuals of the Nauticam trigger and the UW Technics trigger, it's obvious that it is the effing SAME TRIGGER. In their version of the manual, Nauticam has removed references to UW Technics. But it's absolutely the same. My god, this is driving me crazy.

Viewfinders! If I go the Nauticam route, which right now seems like the wise choice (that or do nothing), there's an Inon 45 degrees viewfinder (I like that) for about 5000 SEK, or a Nauticam similar viewfinder for about 17000 SEK. That's a whopping difference. How much image quality difference is there in practice? Do I pay thrice the price for a modest or a dramatic increase in visibility? No one knows. At times like these I wish the uw photography world were larger, like the computer nerd world, where you can always find a test of the most obscure parts.

I have sent some questions to Nauticam too, but that was earlier today and it's totally fine they haven't replied alreay.

Phew!

I'd not spend the money on an Inon viewfinder, the Nauticam units are far better. You can use the older DSLR style on most mirror less with just a little corner distortion.

7 hours ago, horvendile said:

All right, so here's a general update on the things I remember that I found out today!

Isotta says that yes you can use S&S ports on Isotta housings, but not the other way around, on account of the double o-rings on Isotta ports. I don't know, maybe it's possible to remove one o-ring and then it would work, and then again maybe not. If Isotta is right it can't be done, then that rules out the cheap option of continuing with my S&S housing, provided I want the WWL-C

Sea & Sea intended to make a solution for 24-50 and WWL-C but hasn't had resources to do that yet. (Ok this I learned earlier than today.) Given that what needs to be done is more or less

a) figure out the length from lens mount to the front glass in Nauticam's solution, in order to make the very simple port

b) figure out the diameter of the 24-50, in order to make the zoom gear

I kind of despair about S&S. Also, their homepage looks like something from 1998 and is not well maintained. I get the impression that S&S is not that interested in making underwater housings and ports.

What S&S is interested in making is strobes. This got me into the jungle of TTL flash triggers, because yes, I do think TTL works fairly well. I thought that as long as you had a TTL trigger for your camera brand you were all set. Ha. Ha. Ha. Oh no. To the credit of S&S, they do list which triggers work with their strobes. This is important; I have YS-D1 now and may upgrade in the future but maybe not right now. Apparently the UW Technics TTL triggers work well with Nikon and newer S&S strobes. Nauticam's own trigger, however, is currently under evaluation. Ok, whew, good find Dan, I thought Nauticam's trigger would be the safe option. Now to take a look at UW technics trigger... hang on... comparing the user manuals of the Nauticam trigger and the UW Technics trigger, it's obvious that it is the effing SAME TRIGGER. In their version of the manual, Nauticam has removed references to UW Technics. But it's absolutely the same. My god, this is driving me crazy.

Viewfinders! If I go the Nauticam route, which right now seems like the wise choice (that or do nothing), there's an Inon 45 degrees viewfinder (I like that) for about 5000 SEK, or a Nauticam similar viewfinder for about 17000 SEK. That's a whopping difference. How much image quality difference is there in practice? Do I pay thrice the price for a modest or a dramatic increase in visibility? No one knows. At times like these I wish the uw photography world were larger, like the computer nerd world, where you can always find a test of the most obscure parts.

I have sent some questions to Nauticam too, but that was earlier today and it's totally fine they haven't replied alreay.

Phew!

Interesting that you can't use Isotta on S&S. I see S&S has a Macro port 15:

https://www.seaandsea.jp/product/port/macroport.html

It seems this might be short enough to work with the 24-50 which is reported to be 75mm long in working position. If you could borrow a 24-50 you could try it out with your extension rings. to see how far it projects beyond the edge of the ring. Typically the dimension of a port is from the flange of the port to the inside of the glass. All they would need to do is make an extension ring of the right length it seems and looking at other lenses it seems it might be a 25mm extension ring.

I would add that in terms of viewfinders, the Nauticam are superior, the new models were designed to deal with larger viewfinders used on mirrorless cameras which require a a greater angle of view to work well. I have the original Nauticam 45° and the corners are blurry on my OM-1 viewfinder. Not clear if you have an INON currently, if you do performance is probably similar on Z7 vs Z8. You can get adapters to use Nauticam viewfinders on Isotta housings.

New update! I'm now investigating the Nauticam path exclusively.

One thing not entirely clear is the choice of viewfinder (pun not really intended but I can also just run with it). Nauticam's modern 40 degrees 0.8:1 or the 32 degrees 1:1 seem to be the best choices, but not really sure which one of them. Since Nauticam says they developed the 0.8:1 with certain EVF:s in mind, they should be able to tell me whether the Z8 is one EVF which would benefit. I hope they will also tell me of differences between exit pupil and eye relief. I don't know how else I would choose between them. I have no way of testing before ordering.

On using S&S ports on Nauticam, Nauticam says that "The port mount to lens mount spacing in NA-Z8 is 66 mm". I just measured on my S&S housing, and down to a mm or so it's the same. At least if you count from the outer part of the port mount.

That should mean that I could EITHER get a Nauticam N120 Bayonet ring for Sea & Sea ports - one of these I suppose https://www.uwcamerastore.com/nauticam-n120bayonet-ring-for-sea-sea-ports-30203

for each port I want to keep and it should work on the Nauticam housing.
OR one adapter for all ports, such as
https://sagadive.com/en/product/aro-de-extension-adaptador-seasea-nauticam/
The latter would add 20 mm, so any port currently requiring 20 mm or more of extension should be fine.
Of those two alternatives, when looking at my current ports, changing the mount of the port seems better. The first alternative, I mean.

Nauticam has also advised against using flip adapters for the WWL-C. They don't think the flip adapters guarantee exact enough positioning of the wet lens. Well, what do I know. I guess it'll have to be a (double) bayonet holder on a strobe arm, then.

On viewfinders; you will want the 40deg version - SKU # 32214. But the older, less expensive, retired model will also work if you can find one used. The Z8 has an option to slightly shrink its EVF so the older viewfinders don't clip.

You don't need a flip adapter for the WWL-C, and in fact there is essentially zero reason to ever take it off under water. The 24-50mm zoom allows the WWL-C to shoot standard wide angle all the way to near macro. So don't bother with a flip or bracket to hold the thing underwater.

Be sure to check the used lens sites before purchasing the z24-50mm lens. It is usually available in excellent condition at about 1/2 retail cost. I've used KEH.Com to buy many of my lenses with great satisfaction.

1 minute ago, Dave_Hicks said:

On viewfinders; you will want the 40deg version - SKU # 32214. But the older, less expensive, retired model will also work if you can find one used. The Z8 has an option to slightly shrink its EVF so the older viewfinders don't clip.

You don't need a flip adapter for the WWL-C, and in fact there is essentially zero reason to ever take it off under water. The 24-50mm zoom allows the WWL-C to shoot standard wide angle all the way to near macro. So don't bother with a flip or bracket to hold the thing underwater.

Be sure to check the used lens sites before purchasing the z24-50mm lens. It is usually available in excellent condition at about 1/2 retail cost. I've used KEH.Com to buy many of my lenses with great satisfaction.

Why would I want the 40 deg version? Does the 32 deg (32213) not cover the whole EVF? In that case, I would totally agree.

The reason for taking the WWL-C off is to be able to shoot @ 50 mm through just the flat port, in case there are shy sharks semi-close by. That's a realistic scenario on my next trip. And secondarily, to be able to put a CMC-1 or similar there. Not as a complete macro solution, but nice to have the option.

I already have the 24-50 since several years. Bought it for topside use when I want a small and light casual zoom.

47 minutes ago, horvendile said:

Why would I want the 40 deg version? Does the 32 deg (32213) not cover the whole EVF? In that case, I would totally agree.

The reason for taking the WWL-C off is to be able to shoot @ 50 mm through just the flat port, in case there are shy sharks semi-close by. That's a realistic scenario on my next trip. And secondarily, to be able to put a CMC-1 or similar there. Not as a complete macro solution, but nice to have the option.

I already have the 24-50 since several years. Bought it for topside use when I want a small and light casual zoom.

I'm not sure why you asked the questions since you have all the answers. Just read the Nauticam web site.

1 hour ago, Dave_Hicks said:

I'm not sure why you asked the questions since you have all the answers. Just read the Nauticam web site.

Unless they are at some place at the website I have not found, the answers are not on the website. The information on viewfinders is muddy and technically incomplete. Oh, they say both are great and one of them is sometimes better for some cameras.

Ok.

Granted, they don't mention the Z8 among the cameras benefiting from the 0.8 but then again they don't always update the information on their site. They don't say anything about flip adapters for WWL-C. This is a very big purchase for me and I want to make as few guesses as possible.

Unfortunately, my experience is that product websites in the diving industry are at best enthusiastic - and then Nauticam's is one of the better. If I want more information then I can ask the manufacturer (and they forward the questions to the reseller, it appears, but he doesn't have the technical information), or I can ask here. Well, I'm doing both. And in the end I hope to make an informed decision.

Here is an old tread about the viewfinder issue (it seems both 0.8:1 and 1:1 work on Z8, but 0.8:1 is recommended; better ask there again):

5 hours ago, horvendile said:

Why would I want the 40 deg version? Does the 32 deg (32213) not cover the whole EVF? In that case, I would totally agree.

The reason for taking the WWL-C off is to be able to shoot @ 50 mm through just the flat port, in case there are shy sharks semi-close by. That's a realistic scenario on my next trip. And secondarily, to be able to put a CMC-1 or similar there. Not as a complete macro solution, but nice to have the option.

I already have the 24-50 since several years. Bought it for topside use when I want a small and light casual zoom.

Alex Mustard did a video on the the choice between 32 and 40° versions. You should be able to find it on the underwater photography show channel. The short version is Alex thought he would prefer the higher magnification 32° version but ended up liking the wider 40° version as it was easier to see all of the information, search for the video to see the details. As Dave says you could also look for an old version 45° viewfinder and use the EVF shrink function to save some money the corners might be a bit soft in that but it's usable.