All Activity

I think that AI got it right (this time). It seems to me that Sea&Sea and Isotta are totally compatible, but there are also different port sizes and this has to be taken into account also (but again - it is important to check with manufactureres/dealers before investing a single cent)... I found two dealers that praise this cross-compatibility in their advertisements (maybe ask these dealers in addition for specific camera/manufacturer/port combinations?): Backscatter states that "Many Port Options Isotta housings use a simple port system, which is identical to Sea & Sea's method. The good news here is that Sea & Sea brand ports are fully compatible, so if you have any in your arsenal they will carry right over. You could also run a Nauticam port as long as it has a Sea & Sea style bayonet mount on it, so right out of the box you have tripled your port options. Isotta also makes a full suite of domes and flat ports, along with extension rings so that you can dial in just about any lens combo you would want for underwater imaging. There are two port sizes, one for DSLR and full frame mirrorless cameras, and another for micro 4/3 cameras." https://www.backscatter.com/reviews/post/Introducing-Isotta-Underwater-Camera-Housings Underwatercamerastore states "7. Wide Range of Port Options Isotta uses a simple and effective port system compatible with Sea & Sea ports, meaning photographers can easily transition to Isotta without needing to invest in entirely new port setups. Additionally, Nauticam ports with a Sea & Sea-style bayonet mount are also compatible, providing even more flexibility. Isotta also manufactures a full range of domes, flat ports, and extension rings, ensuring compatibility with nearly any lens combination. Isotta Underwater Housings | Premium Red Aluminum Protect...Discover Isotta underwater housings, featuring premium red anodized aluminum for superior camera protection. Perfect for deep diving, these housings offer...

Related to the subject in general: Has anyone tested the Nikon 24-50 with the SMC-1? nauticam lists CMC-1 as a functioning option. Thing is, I already have an SMC-1, and I thought it would be neat being able to use that on a 24-50 setup. I'm not expecting it to be a complete macro solution, but possibly useful? On the other hand, that would make most sense with SMC-1 and WWL-C mounted on a dual flip holder, and I recall someone saying that becomes too front heavy.

Thanks. I was confused. This takes some of the advantages going the Isotta route away. I would still be able to use my S&S wide-angle ports, which all have at least 20 mm of extension on my S&S housing, but the whole point of switching brands would be using WWL-C for most WA shooting. I would NOT be able to use my macro ports, which are monolithic. I have also started making a spreadsheet comparing costs for Isotta and Nauticam, and if I discount the need for new ports (admittedly a big if), Nauticam doesn't seem that much more expenisve.

You need to double and triple check AI. Gets it wrong consistently.

Thanks, I think I'll stay away. He's asking for roughly $150 USD, which is a bit much given the issue....

Nice shot, caught a good pose. I would suggest pulling in the white point followed by a light S curve to boost contrast a little.

Buried in the datasheet is the maximum discharge current of 2A, which seems a little low, a test of regular eneloops I found was measuring 5, 6, 7 up to 10A. This high discharge current is needed for fast recycle times on UW strobes. The recycle time for strobes is set by the internal resistance of the cells, so these would recycle slower than eneloops. The labelled capacity seems high but likely a work of fiction.

Very fine treads like that are a problem they can be difficult to start even when not damaged. Yes the aluminium is soft but if you are also screwing a soft aluminium adapter in to try and fix not much happens and there is a risk of cross threading and doing more damage. The correct way to try to fix this is using a thread file with the correct pitch of 0.75mm. You carefully place the teeth in an undamaged section and carefully move it around the circumference. It is meant to lift and straighten the teeth of the thread. It may be difficult to do with the glass in place though. The down side of fixing is you scrape off any anodising and it might be more prone to corrosion and seizing than a new thread. How much does the vendor want for it? with a damaged thread it should be close to free?😅

This sentence shows where AI got it wrong, it saying that as they share the same bayonet the housing flange distance must be the same, this is completely incorrect as that flange distance is totally different from the how the port is locked in place. You can see this with Nauticam when they first bought out RF and Z housings for Canon/Nikon, They both use N120 ports but the RF and Z housings have the flange distance longer by the thickness of the EF-RF and F-Z adapters specifically to allow the same zoom gear and extensions to be used when using adapted lenses when you upgrade housings. Doing a little research it lifted this comment from a comment on a post on Waterpixels. It didn't realise there is more to the problem than just being able to mount the domes/extensions. There seems to be some scatter in the port charts with S&S either 10 or 20mm less than what Isotta suggests with Z mount lenses. So I agree best to check with Isotta. In general I see a lot of the google AI summaries when searching for references related to topics raised here, for technical issues I see lots of problems, often conflating two or more topics to came to a false conclusion. AI can be great for example to develop a summary from a meeting transcript or similar tasks organising words, but the results need to be checked very carefully on technical topics. They are large language models which predict which words follow the previous and responses are highly tuned to the exact syntax used when asking a question. I glance at the results in the AI section and go into the actual results to find my answers.

Yes - I was actually wondering if it might not be possible to rethread it with a spacer ring or filter mount. The issue is the vendor says nothing can be screwed on, and I'm not sure how much force he used when trying.

I have access to a chamber which can do 100m, but it's in Victoria BC.

Well, there will be the dive case so I will get the X6 then. 👍

Thanks, I see that it might work but Saga is mostly not communicating right now. Interesting that the Bluewater description talks about 67 mm thread on the port which her port doesn't have. BVA

The head that Lauren showed is actually insert molded and can't be fixed. Dave's connectors will work as will the Inon Bushings or the angled connectors from Howshot. Bill

GONE. No longer available.

Cool. Yes I do have waterproof caps for sealing both ends of the extensions.

GONE. No longer available.

Looks dodgy. One thought though. Some of my diopters included a M67 "spacer" ring. Perhaps something like that could be screwed on with some necessary force and then left in place to mount other items on the good spacer threads? Perhaps someone has an unused spacer they could donate? Example: https://reefphoto.com/products/nauticam-m67-spacer-ring-for-smc-cmc

Hello all, I've come across a Nauticam flat port 45 with a damaged M67 thread - it doesn't look great, the thread seems quite crushed and mounting anything is not an option, which is a deal breaker. However I thought I'd ask for your opinion - since this is aluminium and quite soft, does it look like there might be an option to rethread it? The pictures are not the clearest, but all I have for now. thanks!

Tamron seem to be producing a lot of interesting lenses I have the 11-20 2.8 apsc lens which is pretty sharp and much cheaper

There was a tread about his distance, maybe you can get the required information from there: Furthermore, the Google AI says that Isotta and Sea&Sea are "cross-compatible", since they have the same distance - but this MUST be confirmed by Isotta, Sea&Sea or owners here, before building on this: "How big is the difference in flange distance between Isotta, Sea & Sea and nauticam housings for underwater use of FF cameras? In underwater photography housings, the "housing flange distance"—the mechanical measurement from the camera’s actual lens mount to the front opening of the housing where lens ports or extension rings attach—varies considerably across brands. [1, 2] Isotta and Sea & Sea share an identical native port mount design, meaning their housing flange distances are effectively the same, while Nauticam stands apart with a significantly longer flange distance on its standard full-frame (N120) housings. [1, 2] The Flange Distance Comparison When comparing housings designed for Full-Frame (FF) mirrorless cameras (such as Sony E-mount, Canon RF, or Nikon Z), the approximate mechanical distances from camera mount to housing port opening are: Isotta (B120 Mount): ~38 mm Sea & Sea (Custom Bayonet): ~38 mm (Native cross-compatibility with Isotta) Nauticam (N120 Mount): ~60 mm (ranging between 58.8 mm and 66 mm depending on the specific camera model’s native body depth) [1, 2, 3] The difference in housing flange distance between Nauticam and Isotta / Sea & Sea is roughly 22 mm. [1] Why This Difference Matters Because Nauticam positions its housing port opening roughly 22 mm further forward, it changes how lenses align inside the port system: [1, 2] Port & Extension Ring Lengths: If you cross-adapt a port between these brands, you cannot use the same extension ring sizes. A lens setup that requires a 40 mm extension ring on an Isotta/Sea & Sea housing will typically require a much shorter extension ring (or no ring at all) on a Nauticam housing to keep the lens elements perfectly aligned with the dome port's optical center. [1, 2] Native Cross-Compatibility: Because Isotta and Sea & Sea share the exact same physical bayonet system and flange depth, their native ports, extension rings, and dome ports can be swapped directly between housings without any adaptation. [] Using Nauticam Ports on Isotta/Sea & Sea: You can use Nauticam N120 ports on Isotta or Sea & Sea housings by swapping out the port's rear lug plate for a Sea & Sea style lug plate. Because the Isotta/Sea & Sea housing is shallower (~38 mm) than the Nauticam (~60 mm), the adapted Nauticam port will sit closer to the camera. To compensate, Isotta offers specific adapter rings (like the H18 and H26 B120-to-N120 adapters) which physically space the Nauticam port forward by 18 mm to 26 mm to perfectly recreate the correct optical distance. [1, 2, 4, 5] If you are trying to calculate a specific configuration, what camera body and lens model are you planning to use? I can help you look up the precise extension ring math or official port charts for your setup. [1]"