All Activity

Hi @Terri - congrats on your new Canon 8-15 and Metabones V. This will work perfectly with your Sony a7rV. I own an a1 in a Nauticam housing with this exact lens / adapter combo. Which specific Zen dome do you have? It does make a difference. The Zen 100 is not the best choice for a high res FF body due to the ultra small dome size. There is also a version made specifically for the Tokina 10-17 which is different than the one made for the Canon 8-15, again neither are recommended for the high res systems. The N100-N120 adapter with the zoom knob and Nauticam c815-z gear is how you will zoom the lens. Add an N120 30mm Extension for the 8-15 and Metabones for proper mounting. If you later add a 1.4x TC an additional N120 20mm is needed either as a 20mm added to the 30mm or using a separate 50mm Extension. I use the Nauticam 140 dome port with my Canon 8-15. It is a full hemispherical dome which is what is best for the fisheye lenses and the smallest size that will provide good corners for high res FF systems. Teleconverters also work with this dome whereas they cause a horrible "smearing" in the corners when attempting to use it with the Zen 100 designed for the 8-15.

Question what is the mounting format ? Marelux or ????

sold

Nobody like to use this beaty?

Regarding TC, they are not needed. Its about your preference what kind reach you need for you lens. For the Dome, i think you old dome will work just fine, all Zen domes (100/170/230) are listed on the port chart for the 8-15. Extensions might be bit trial and error to find the perfect one. Theres info in this thread. Also few other threads also found on the forum. I guess that 20 or 30 extension is enough without TC. But as the Canon 8-15 with Metabones is not officially supported by Nauticam, you have to rely on other users who have this for info. So your setup would look something like this Housing->N100/N120 adapter->N120 extension->Dome OR Housing->N100 extension->N100/N120 adapter->Dome

When DR is a foremost criterion for selection of a camera, the Sony A7V and Sony A7RVI offer indeed improved DR and are ahead of other camera models (they use a new technology of A/D conversion of the photoelectrons at the sensor): https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5%20Mark%20II,Sony%20ILCE-1M2,Sony%20ILCE-7M5,Sony%20ILCE-7RM6 At the linked camera review site you can have a look by yourself, how the increased DR translates to better shadow improvement ("exposure latitude"; a photo of a test chard is made and in postprocessing the exposure is increased by 6 EVs to make the noise in the shadows visible): www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=sony_a7rvi&attr144_1=sony_a7v&attr144_2=canon_eosr5ii&attr144_3=sony_a1ii&attr146_0=100_6&attr146_1=100_6&attr146_2=100_6&attr146_3=100_6&attr177_0=off&attr177_1=off&attr177_2=efc&attr177_3=off&normalization=compare&widget=1011&x=0.14411875835858645&y=0.550063089572198 => It is, however, important to add that this increased DR of approx. 1 f-stop compared to older camera models (e.g. Canon R5II or Sony A1II) applies only to low ISO values (approx. in the ISO 100-400 range) and at ISO values above 600 the improvement is gone...

why do you use the commlite instead of the original Canon RF adapter?

You are not the only one here :) im also using a R5 in Nauticam housing.

I have used the 28 f2 on my Sony a7iii before I knew what I was really doing and got fantastic results. Shooting in Norway with orcas you need better dynamic range. I’m telling you from 3 years of doing it that my canon has struggled to find autofocus with 15-35 2.8 RF lens on my canon R5 and R5mii. ISO performance on the R5mii is not its bright spot too imo. Also using old slow lenses on my wacp doesn’t give me the quality I should be getting on my $$$$ expensive setups. With that said I believe Sony has superior dynamic range and from what I’ve seen people get in Norway with their Sony setups is superior to what I can get. Maybe I’m doing something wrong but my R5mii struggled to focus in low light/low contrast scenarios. Even in Hawaii in blue water my auto iso setup wants to go straight to the top of the range while my friends Sony will stay low. Am I metering wrong? Maybe but idk how to fix that. I’d Ike to think my R5mii is better in every way then the Sony a1 but I’m still struggling to get the best I can out of it and I’m frustrated which is why I’m looking at the Sony. Thank you for the write up. I currently have the wacp1 and 2 and I don’t necessarily like the 28-70 kit lens. It seems to be way too slow. I also don’t think the 24-50 is okay but the new 20-50 seems interesting to me. I believe the focuses internally, which means it should work really well at all ranges behind the WACP and would give me a smaller setup when I’m dealing with sharks so that’s a bonus. I just wish someone tested it prior to me spending the money lol. I know I can raise ISO but the Sony handles noise way better so I’m still leaning towards that and the size becomes way smaller as well. The canon mount is definitely better and video specs superior so I’d like to stay just sucks spending a ton of money on a trip to see Orcas and being very limited to what I can capture compared to friends setups. Thank you for all this info. I got the wacp-2 and agree the size is crazy and I freedive 99% of the time for my photography. I still think Sony has superior dynamic range and low light capabilities but I probably have something wrong in my menu/settings. I use BBF But I feel I miss focus a lot or it struggles to pick up a subject. Maybe I’ll make another post and see if I can find a canon expert who can help me make sure I’m dialed in.

Hi all thx again for responses. I am now a proud owner if a second hand Canon 8-15 and a Metabones Mkv adapter. I know v little about using teleconverters. Are they needed? I have the 100 to 120 Nauticam adapter but now need to know what port to put this all under? I have a Zen glass port from my old Sony system and a Nauticam acrylic dome for Sony A7rv. Do I need a Canon 120 port. Looked at port chart not very clear. Any help I would be v grateful

I have both, and it sounds like you want the Atoms. They are very nice, compact, and still powerful when you need them to be. They don't have video lights like the HF-1s but have most of the other features. Battery life is not quite as good either, but it's enough for at least two dives and several hundred photos.

G'day all, I'm looking to upgrade from a pair of Kraken KR-S05's to something a bit nicer... Both the Hybrid and the Atom are on my potential list. Has anyone shot with both that could comment on the lower power abilities of either? I'm mostly concerned that the hybrids even at low power may contain more punch then I really want for smaller fish portrait style pics or macro work. Thanks in advance, Al

Not yet, I wanted to go this past weekend, but unfortunately I had obligations. I think I can try next weekend.

If you're doing photography, this is a good place to start, especially if you're new to Panasonic camera: https://youtu.be/VeUwbzj2i6U?si=lg1pemaN6bAObKKM I only shoot video, but I'm torn between the Canon V1 and the L10 at the moment mainly because the L10 Nauticam system gets expensive.

"I think, the marelux 180 glass dome or their 210 acrylic will not add much volume or load and dramatically improve lens performance." @Adventurer I'm considering the 180mm. I haven't had great luck with larger acrylic domes, as the ones I've used require weight to keep them from nosing up. "I assume the freshly introduced Marelux Aquista 135D - which is Marelux‘s take on Nauticam‘s WACP lineup - will give you the highest image quality with that lens," @Adventurer . For me, the improvement in image quality would need to be significant to justify the cost and heavier weight (for shore diving) of the Aquista 135D. A little out of my budget for testing purposes. I'm interested to see the results though, once someone is able to test and report back.

Thanks! As I already wrote above, I had forgotten several times that I don't get the one-stop smaller aperture displayed and therefore accidentally stopped down by one stop too much.

I like the crab shot. But did you really have to go for F22 ? Wouldn’t F16 Have been sufficient ? And I am asking myself if F22 is the EXIF Aperture in the file or manually computed by you ( F16 * 1.4x converter = F22 ) ?

Thanks Evan!

The camera system and the optics are two different items and should be treated separately... #1.: Regarding the camera, Canon R5II and Sony A1 have very similar DR, at base ISO as well as at elevated ISO, e.g. see here: https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5%20Mark%20II,Sony%20ILCE-1M2 There is no improvement to expect in practice, when switching from Canon to Sony, but noise can be treated very effectively today with AI routines, e.g. in LRc. The Sony A1, as you say, is a little bit smaller compared to Canon, also with housing (the smallest FF camera with housing is the Sony A7cII (or A7CR); this may be the way to go when one intends to reduce size/weight of camera&housing). When it comes to metering and AF, I expect similar results with both cameras when the complicated menues are set to the right parameters (I only can say from own experience for Sony A7R5, which I have; metering and AF are excellent, but the menue is complicated and confusing. I needed some trial and error to get the rig configured to my needs. I also assigned several custom buttons to switch between different AF modes/areas UW (I think there is still room for improvement if I just understood the manual/menue better)) #2.: Regarding the optics, the WACP-2 is optically the best, but a monster (when zooming a little out, vignetting should not be a problem any more, provided the rigth extension is used). I only saw it once in my life and immediately knew WACP-2 is not for me. The difference in camera/housing is almost neglectible compared to the difference in size/weigth of the optics, when WACP-2 and e.g. a 140mm domeport with fisheye lens are compared... I have WACP-C with the Sony 28-60mm (many use this combo, are highly satisfied and there are similar configurations available for Canon), which is substantially smaller and lighter compared to WACP-2 (note that also the WACP-1 is clearly bigger/heavier compared to WACP-C). I do not think that for UW use f/2.8 is a big advantage compared to f/4-5.6 as one (normally) does not go below f/7 (at most f/5.6)to have sharp images also away from the center... I, personally, prefer the Canon 8-15mm, as it provides 180° diagonal compared to 130°, wich is the maximum for the WACP-C combo... The Canon 8-15mm fisheye in 140mm domeport provides not only 180° diagonal, but is also small and clever. When used with TCs, it can be used at more narrow angles of view. I only can say what combinations of 8-15mm/TCs work for Sony, but here are people posting here who use the Canon fisheye with TCs (see e.g. the post of user "WASO" in this tread here: https://waterpixels.net/forums/topic/3095-nauticamcanon-wa-questions/page/3/#comment-26191) Alternatively one could acquire Nauticams FCP, but I doubt this solutions does any better compared to fisheye lens with TC... All the best, Wolfgang