Nauticam Fisheye Conversion Port shipping Mid January

[Guest]

2 hours ago, TimG said:

Yeah, sounds fabulous but hard to justify if you do a couple of dive trips a year. Rental would be nice!

I connected to Nauticam website. The price has gone from £5,700 I was given mid December by the UK distributor and I posted in the first post to...£5,708

Due to the extra £8 I think I will have to give it a miss...

 

I check my sources I am sorry someone got a bit hopeful but this is the price of the item.

 

If you start from absolute scratch and have nothing this could still be interesting if you are not interested in the narrow end and assuming the image quality is there it is an all for one that replaces fisheye, other water contact optics and all related ports and adapters in one shot.

 

However if you already own those items than the switching costs are very high.

 

I should obtain a test unit by the end of January that I will take to the pool however I may be required to not to disclose the results so I will have to keep those considerations for myself

[TimG]

1 hour ago, Interceptor121 said:

Due to the extra £8 I think I will have to give it a miss...

 

 

🤣

[Davide DB]

1 hour ago, Interceptor121 said:

Due to the extra £8 I think I will have to give it a miss...

 

The classic straw that breaks the camel's back!

 

[TimG]

It's the "Boil The Frog" Theory.

 

If Nauticam pushed it to £5715, what's the betting Massimo would pay the £15?

 

Massimo???

[Guest]

1 minute ago, TimG said:

It's the "Boil The Frog" Theory.

 

If Nauticam pushed it to £5715, what's the betting Massimo would pay the £15?

 

Massimo???

Well I need to check my piggy bank!

 

We need to see the number of lenses this is compatible with

 

Maybe it became way big to accept larger optics and one could make it smaller and cheaper? 

 

[ChipBPhoto]

9 hours ago, TimG said:

Yeah, sounds fabulous but hard to justify if you do a couple of dive trips a year. Rental would be nice!

Exactly @TimG!  I’ve worked on manufacturing teams my entire career.  I fully appreciate the costs involved with developing and producing new technology.  I also am very familiar with setting new prices that seem very high at first, but eventually become more accepted based on product benefits and the initial shock wearing off.  The end of 2024 will tell us a great deal about both the real product benefits and overall public acceptance.  At the end of the day, net sales vs. projections is what really counts to the company.  It also has a huge determination as to what the company produces next for both retail consumers and beyond. 

Edited January 13 by ChipBPhoto

[Guest]

On 1/13/2024 at 2:45 PM, ChipBPhoto said:

Exactly @TimG!  I’ve worked on manufacturing teams my entire career.  I fully appreciate the costs involved with developing and producing new technology.  I also am very familiar with setting new prices that seem very high at first, but eventually become more accepted based on product benefits and the initial shock wearing off.  The end of 2024 will tell us a great deal about both the real product benefits and overall public acceptance.  At the end of the day, net sales vs. projections is what really counts to the company.  It also has a huge determination as to what the company produces next for both retail consumers and beyond. 

This is not a mass production. I don’t know how many WACPs for example there are around but I would expect this product sales to less than 100 this year and that number seems already big

I don’t think the price will drop either Nauticam items only go up

if you build your system from scratch this product may be interesting however I doubt many people start their format at £10k plus camera costs

we shall see

[Davide DB]

If you are curious to see FCP in person, mounted on Alex's A7R5 Nauticam housing...

 

The link should point @9:39 already

 

 

[Phil Rudin]

Chip is Correct about the R&D costs being reflected in the retail cost at release. 

 

This is apparent when you look at the cost of the Nauticam housings for Hasselblad and PhaseOne Medium format cameras both in access of $11,000.00 US and both made in very limited quantities. These housings and the FCP are "If you build it, he/she will come" type products and I expect they will come.  

[Alex_Mustard]

I know that there is a global limit on the amount of large optical glass elements that can be made. When the WACP-1 was released 6-7 years ago Nauticam had significant waiting lists because of the lack of supply of quality glass elements.

 

The FCP is a no-brainer optic. But the price will probably mean supply can keep reasonable pace with demand.

 

Just my speculation.  

[Alex_Mustard]

Regarding the FoV, I got a message from Nauticam to say that they calculated FoVs in the software that they used in the lens design. These +/- 3 degrees according to Nauticam:

 

28mm ~ 170º

35mm ~ 122º

50mm ~ 87º

60mm ~ 74º

70mm ~ 62º

 

Alex

Edited January 17 by Alex_Mustard

[Chris Ross]

44 minutes ago, Alex_Mustard said:

Regarding the FoV, I got a message from Nauticam to say that they calculated FoVs in the software that they used in the lens design. These +/- 3 degrees according to Nauticam:

 

28mm ~ 170º

35mm ~ 122º

50mm ~ 87º

60mm ~ 74º

70mm ~ 62º

 

Alex

If it's 74° diagonal at 60mm it's very close to an equisolid fisheye projection.  This is apparently the projection used on the Panasonic m43 8mm fisheye and the Nikkor 10.5 mm and also the Canon, Nikon, Sony and Sigma 15/16mm fisheye lenses.  so should be very close to the look of many fisheye lenses at it's widest setting..

[fruehaufsteher2]

20 hours ago, Davide DB said:

If you are curious to see FCP in person, mounted on Alex's A7R5 Nauticam housing...

 

That video is absolutely worth viewing in whole. Thanks!

[Brandon Cole]

Thank you for that FOV information, Alex

 

[Architeuthis]

5 hours ago, Alex_Mustard said:

Regarding the FoV, I got a message from Nauticam to say that they calculated FoVs in the software that they used in the lens design. These +/- 3 degrees according to Nauticam:

 

28mm ~ 170º

35mm ~ 122º

50mm ~ 87º

60mm ~ 74º

70mm ~ 62º

 

Alex

Great information, thanks!

Here the relation focal length/AOV is shown graphical (WWL/WACP values are taken from the WACP-C port chart):

This shows that the new FCP practically repaces the WWL/WACP as it offers very similar AOVs zoomed in to 60mm or 70mm, but it offers 170° instead of 130° at 28mm...

Edited January 17 by Architeuthis

[scipionems]

FCP is very interesting even if very very expensive....

But I wonder if I will be able to use it with my Nikon D850 and the Nikkor 28-70mm lens into my Nuticam Housing...

I wonder if I will be able to use the 35mm Nauticam extension ring N120 to N100 that I was using with my WACP-C (that I have already sold hoping to purchase the FCP...). 🤔

 

 

[brightnight]

I would be terrified to dive with a lens this expensive, looks like a beauty though.

[TimG]

10 minutes ago, brightnight said:

I would be terrified to dive with a lens this expensive, looks like a beauty though.

 

Have you tried adding up the cost of all the gear you take underwater!? I wouldn't drive my car underwater.... (well, I hope not anyway....) and my camera setup cost more. 🤣

[Guest]

15 hours ago, Architeuthis said:

Great information, thanks!

Here the relation focal length/AOV is shown graphical (WWL/WACP values are taken from the WACP-C port chart):

This shows that the new FCP practically repaces the WWL/WACP as it offers very similar AOVs zoomed in to 60mm or 70mm, but it offers 170° instead of 130° at 28mm...

This doesn’t make much sense to me

[fruehaufsteher2]

38 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

This doesn’t make much sense to me

Why? According to Nauticam WACPC 70-130, FCP 85-170 with 28-60

[Architeuthis]

On 1/18/2024 at 9:19 AM, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Why? According to Nauticam WACPC 70-130, FCP 85-170 with 28-60

 

According to the WACP-C port chart and Alex's post above the difference at the long end is even smaller (5° difference at 60mm and 3° difference at 70mm):

 

28-60mm:

WACP-C: 130° - 69°

FCP: 170° - 74°

 

28-70mm:

WACP-C: 130° - 59°

FCP: 170° - 62°

 

Consider an error marge of +/- 3% for the FCP specifications and the AOV at the long end is very comparable, if not almost identical. The difference is mostly at the wide end (for >2x the cost and approx. 1kg more one gets 170° instead of 130° at the wide end)...

By using the 28-70mm with FCP one can even get a more narrow AOV (62°) compared to WACP-C with 28-60mm (69°) at the long end...

 

At the moment, however, the FCP is not for me: I have a brand new WACP-C here and am waiting for the 28-60mm to bring it UW...😋

 

 

Wolfgang

 

Edited January 19 by Architeuthis

[fruehaufsteher2]

23 minutes ago, Architeuthis said:

At the moment, however, the FCP is not for me: I have a brand new WACP-C here and am waiting for the 28-60mm to bring it UW...

😋

Well, the FCP looks very desirable to me too. On the other hand, the WACP-C is already quite large and heavy, and the FCP adds another 1kg to that. The ultra-wide angle (i.e. >130°) is (hopefully) not needed all that often anyway. Hopefully...

[Architeuthis]

1 hour ago, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Well, the FCP looks very desirable to me too. On the other hand, the WACP-C is already quite large and heavy, and the FCP adds another 1kg to that. The ultra-wide angle (i.e. >130°) is (hopefully) not needed all that often anyway. Hopefully...

 

I, personally, am a big fan of the "ultra-wide" angle, I like even the circular fisheye. For this purpose (UWA and circular), I currently use Canon 8-15mm with adapter and 140mm domeport. I still have to become familiar with the WACP-C (first longer occasion with many dives will be diving in the Carribean in March; I guess the WACP-C will be ideal for the carribean reef sharks...😊), but it might well be that later, when I am familiar with both WACP-C and Canon fisheye, I will use the Canon fisheye lens more often than the WACP-C...

 

MAYBE, at a later stage, I will exchange the WACP-C for an FCP. But even if it will be possible to cover the entire range, from circular fisheye up to moderate zoomed-in WA, with FCP and two lenses, as Alex indicated in a previous post (28-60mm and ???), there will remain the need for the Canon fisheye in a domeport for split shots. There is plenty of time to see how the FCP story develops and decide later, presumably I will decide that I do not need a FCP...

 

 

Wolfgang

Edited January 19 by Architeuthis

[Guest]

On 1/19/2024 at 3:29 AM, Architeuthis said:

 

According to the WACP-C port chart and Alex's post above the difference at the long end is even smaller (5° difference at 60mm and 3° difference at 70mm):

 

28-60mm:

WACP-C: 130° - 69°

FCP: 170° - 74°

 

28-70mm:

WACP-C: 130° - 59°

FCP: 170° - 62°

 

Consider an error marge of +/- 3% for the FCP specifications and the AOV at the long end is very comparable, if not almost identical. The difference is mostly at the wide end (for >2x the cost and approx. 1kg more one gets 170° instead of 130° at the wide end)...

By using the 28-70mm with FCP one can even get a more narrow AOV (62°) compared to WACP-C with 28-60mm (69°) at the long end...

 

At the moment, however, the FCP is not for me: I have a brand new WACP-C here and am waiting for the 28-60mm to bring it UW...😋

 

 

Wolfgang

 

Alex data is not scientific we need to wait for Nauticam data

Assuming a demagnification coefficient different between the two whose ratio is constant if the lens has equisolid projection the ratio of field of view is the same of ratio of focal lens in radians

Hence the FCP should be closer to 90 degrees than it is to 70 degrees with the 28-60mm

 

There will still be a place for the other optics 

[fruehaufsteher2]

GASGASGAS! 
 

…maybe someone wants to buy a WACP-C? 
 

one of three currently existing FCPs (outside the factory) 

 

More to follow on a separate thread (Boot Düsseldorf)