10mm Laowa full frame lens.

[Tobyone]

Laowa's upcoming 10 mm will have a FOV over(slightly) 130 degrees on a full frame. The lens is offered in auto focus with a Sony E-mount and Nikon z.  There is a manual focus version for the Canon RF and L mount. This is a rectilinear lens priced at $799 US. Chest Frost's review on YouTube : 

 

[cerich]

It truly looks like a pretty special lens. 

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-laowa-10mm-2-8-af-the-beginning-of-a-new-era/?fbclid=IwAR2pYdcHaDj1zGb97Xz-GoBuAgD82qrv2AWHxaEn9WYQi9kXCpWKghJkZy8

[Tobyone]

Check out Richard Wong review. 

Corners sharpen up at 8 and 11. Vignetting seems to be the main issue with this lens.

[Phil Rudin]

I now have this lens for testing and these are a few of my early observations.

 

#1 Because of the very close 12cm (4.72inches) minimum focus distance you can get by using this lens with a 180mm dome port if you are willing to put-up with some soft corners and if you are willing to remove the dome shade. The sweet spot for lens extension is in the 20-25mm range. I don't have a 25mm extension for Marelux at this time so all images are with the 20mm, in Nauticam terms this would be about the same as using the N100 to N120 35.5 port adapter with an N120 180mm port.

 

The first two images of the pool light are touching the dome to the light and then moving back six inches, both shot at F/13.

 

 

The pool steps are at about half a meter from the bottom step at F/8 and for comparison the Tamron E 28-75 F/2.8 G II at 28mm with WACP-1 at F/10. You can see that the 130 degree AOV between the two lenses looks about identical with the 10mm rectilinear having a very flat wall moving away from the steps and the WACP-1 having more of a fisheye look making the wells look angled rather than flat.  

 

Shell's window is also quite noticeable with the 10mm.

 

Edited March 18 by Phil Rudin

[Phil Rudin]

Shooting the 10mm with the 230mm dome begins to vignette with a 30mm extension so all of the remaining shots are with the 230mm and 20mm extension. I think 25mm may be ideal but don't have that combo and don't want to remove the shade on such a large dome. 

 

First images are the 230mm, 20mm extension at F/13 on the pool light and then back six inches.

 

Pool steps at one meter and half meter at F/13.

 

Splits on the glass at F/22 and at one meter.

 

Edited March 18 by Phil Rudin

[dentrock]

Thanks for the images Phil.

 

When you have a minute, could you let us know how the AF compares (speed etc) with some of the better performing lenses you have tested (eg. Sony 20 f1.8 etc)?

 

I'd also like to see how it performs with the Nauticam 140 FE dome, but not anticipating you will do that!

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

Shooting the 10mm with the 230mm dome begins to vignette with a 30mm extension so all of the remaining shots are with the 230mm and 20mm extension. I think 25mm may be ideal but don't have that combo and don't want to remove the shade on such a large dome. 

 

First images are the 230mm, 20mm extension at F/13 on the pool light and then back six inches.

 

Pool steps at one meter and half meter at F/13.

 

Splits on the glass at F/22 and at one meter.

 

20mm extension and 230mm dome looks appropriate 

topside part of split image quality looks not great

[hellhole]

its quite cool.. like the small footprint

 

when you taking it out into the wild!!!

[Phil Rudin]

On 3/18/2024 at 7:04 PM, dentrock said:

Thanks for the images Phil.

 

When you have a minute, could you let us know how the AF compares (speed etc) with some of the better performing lenses you have tested (eg. Sony 20 f1.8 etc)?

 

I'd also like to see how it performs with the Nauticam 140 FE dome, but not anticipating you will do that!

To answer Dentrock's questions the AF is excellent similar to shooting with the adapted Canon 8-15mm or any of the wide Sony lenses. Regarding using the 140mm port, #1 the shade needs to be removed to use an extension otherwise you will get sever vignetting. #2 I tried extensions out to 40mm, the attached photos are 140 dome and 40mm extension. With the Marelux 40mm on some images I got slight vignetting in two corners but not always. A Nauticam equivalent might be N100 to N120 35.5 plus a 20mm extension, however because the N120 diameter is about 7mm less that the Marelux it would be more likely to vignette. Perhaps a 10 or 15mm could be a better choice.

 

I used the Laowa 10mm F/2.8 AF with the Sony A7R V, keep in mind it also comes in AF for Nikon Z users.

 

I have been having serious issues with an air leak into the filter system for my pool and it is filled with micro bubbles currently. You can plainly see in the photos that it is creating issues for trying to test lenses at the moment. selfies shot with two Apollo III strobes mounted directly to the housing grips much like I often do with a fisheye lens. Also notice in the second image how straight the tiles are at the intersection in the corner of the pool. An obvious difference with the 10mm rectilinear over what you would see with a fisheye or wet wide lens with the same AOV. With the 140mm dome you need to shoot at or above F/13 if you expect to reduce the falloff in the corners. For some the corners will be a deal breaker with anything but a large fisheye type port. Because the 140mm and 230mm ports are fisheye ports while the 180mm's are not my choice would be to go with the 140mm for CFWA type situations, the 230mm for wide shots and for splits the 230 or 12  inch port like the Matty Smith ports preferably at F/22.

 

I would also add that as you can see in the equipment photo Laowa has a white Logo and other info engraved on the front of the lens. I have tested with the 230, 180 and 140mm domes without a single reflection of the engravings off the port glass. All shots in overhead sunlight in less than four feet of water. A credit to the dome coatings being used by Marelux.   

 

The pool light is at F/16 and you can see the vignette in two corners. The corners are actually no worse than some of the same AOV wet wide lenses I have tried.

 

Selfies are at ISO 320mm, F/22 and 1/320th sec in HSS mode on the strobes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20 by Phil Rudin

[hellhole]

Can u show the side profile of the set up? 

[dentrock]

Phil, many thanks for the detailed info! Will give it some serious thought.

Still a nice pool you have there...!

[dentrock]

PS: I just noticed you have no arms! A man after my own heart, esp for macro and cfwa. It amuses me to see photos of photographers in action often with huge strobe arms folded in.

 

Good to see you have a whistle for safety in the pool too...

 

Thanks again for the details.

[Phil Rudin]

16 hours ago, hellhole said:

Can u show the side profile of the set up? 

I have switched to 35mm of extension from the 40mm in the first shot.

 

[Lewis88]

On 3/20/2024 at 11:21 PM, dentrock said:

PS: I just noticed you have no arms! A man after my own heart, esp for macro and cfwa. It amuses me to see photos of photographers in action often with huge strobe arms folded in.

 

 

Do you ONLY shoot CFWA on a dive? What if there's something a little further away you want to shoot and need to throw the strobes out a bit? 

 

I also like having the arms when shooting macro so I can get the strobes into different lighting positions. 

[Phil Rudin]

Yas I do use arms for most configurations but in the pool this configuration (no arms) works just fine and since I have gone without arms for years I can assure you much wider scenes can be taken.

 

To shoot this lens on wider subjects like wrecks for instance I would not likely be using this dome but would opt for the 230mm port and arms. 

[hellhole]

i am probably gonna get one of these ... hehe...

 

i have the 37305 Nauticam N100 to N120 40mm Port Adaptor.. that i use for my 16-35 sony lens on the 180m dome.

 

i think that should be suffice? or i need to add the 20mm extension? i might have one...

 

 

Edited April 9 by hellhole

[Phil Rudin]

8 hours ago, hellhole said:

i am probably gonna get one of these ... hehe...

 

i have the 37305 Nauticam N100 to N120 40mm Port Adaptor.. that i use for my 16-35 sony lens on the 180m dome.

 

i think that should be suffice? or i need to add the 20mm extension? i might have one...

 

 

The position of the camera inside the housing is different between Marelux and Nauticam so the N100 to N120 35.5 port adapter is about equal to a 20mm extension on a Marelux housing. So for Nauticam about 15mm extra extension could be required, however this is speculation without testing. Your 40mm port adapter may require an extra 10mm of extension. You may want to contact Nauticam and ask if they have calculated extension support for the Laowa 10mm.

 

Second if you look at the Nauticam web site you will see that the 140mm and 230mm ports are listed as "fisheye" while the 180mm is not. From my tests with 230, 180 and 140mm ports it appears the two fisheye ports work best so the 180 has no advantage over the 140mm port. Also be aware that with the 140mm port you will need to remove the port shade to prevent vignetting.

 

Photo with the 140mm port allows for very close focus and very notacable straight lines emphasizing the rectilinear design.

 

 

Edited April 9 by Phil Rudin

[hellhole]

hm... i try using the sony 14mm as a guide and see if that makes sense

sony 14mm is listed as 3.26(D) x 4.11” (L) (83(D) x 104.4mm(L))

 

Base on the nauticam port chat, N100 t0 N120 adapter, then N120 30 extension, then the dome port in this case the 230mm dome

 

laowa 10 mm dimention Ø3.23” x 2.97”/ Ø82 x 72.8mm. Its about 30mm shorter that the sony 14mm, maybe an N120 extension is not needed????

 

 

[Phil Rudin]

I am shooting the Laowa 10mm this with the 230 dome and 20mm extension on the Marelux housing. My guess for Nauticam with Sony FF would be the N100to N120 35.5 and 230 dome. I think I could go to 25mm but 30mm vignettes a bit. Marelux does not have a 25mm at this time and the 20mm is working well. 
 

 

[hellhole]

thanks for your reply... 

 

i guess its best that i can get lens and check it out..

 

i am still not sure if i should get the 230mm dome.. its hugh! 🙂

[Phil Rudin]

The TIPA 2024 awards were announced today in the US and among the winners for best camera equipment of the year is Laowa's 10mm F/2.8 rectilinear full frame AF lens. Laowa announced this as an architectural, astro, landscape and portrait lens but it is also a fantastic underwater photography lens with an AOV of 130 degrees. 
Attached are just a few photos from last weeks trip to the North Florida Springs. The 10mm is paired with the Sony A7R V in a Marelux housing with the Marelux 230mm dome port and two Marelux Apollo III strobes. Shot from ISO 400 to 640, most at F/13 and from 1/100th to 1/160th sec. Thanks to Nicole Alarid for her terrific job modeling.  

 

Edited April 22 by Phil Rudin

[Sarthur1]

4 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

The 10mm is paired with the Sony A7R V in a Marelux housing with the Marelux 230mm dome port

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do you this lens will work with the more compact domes?

Like 4.5" or 6"?

[Phil Rudin]

If you look back up this page you will see I have used it with the Marelux 140mm dome port with the shade removed. 

[Adventurer]

Dear @Phil Rudin thanks for sharing the images. I am exited about this lens and I am pondering with the idea to use it with a Canon R System. Your first pool shots looked very promising but the renderings from the recent North Florida Springs test dive seem to suffer from strong corner stretching making the LAOWA zero D feature somewhat useless. It might be a pure dome positioning and size issue though.

 

To get things right, do you mind to measure/find the entrance pupil (npp) of your LAOWA ? It‘s so new, that there is no data about this lens on optical bench hub yet. So you would serve the community a big deed by topside triangulating it.

[Phil Rudin]

I have two ports, the 140 used for the pool shots without a shade and the 230mm used for the springs shots with 20mm of extension. A 30mm vignettes and I don't have a 25mm to try. Also no profiles have been added to the Lightroom program used on the photos. I will leave the NPP math to others because in the real world the amount of changes I can make is limited to the equipment I have in house.