All Activity

I have thought about this. For sure it could be done, and the total dry weight would be less than joining two separate components. Including an n### -> n*** adapter in the port ring would also be possible. Once the core parts are accurately modeled, remixing, mixing, matching are not super challenging. I have a lot of confidence in the distinct Float Rings with over a year and at least 100 dives on these parts. In the last month I've completed about 20-25 dives on a 40mm Extension Ring with zero problems. Combining should be safe, and even if the float part failed, the thicker walled Port part would remain intact. The downside would be cost of replacing the whole unit. Not a problem for a DIYer, but could be a concern for a consumer. Probably what would be more practical would be to make an entire printed Macro Port, glass inserted, and then integrating flotation into that single unit. I'll be attempting a Curved Glass macro port soon. Building in floatation might be a no-brainer if successful. On the other hand, if the extension ring is mounting a Dome port, then integrated flotation would be much more useful. It would be similar to how the WWL-1 ports have either integrated or foam floats added to the assembly. Lots of good ideas to kick around! I first want to get N100 models and possibly N85 parts designed and tested next. If there is any interest in people testing or eventually buying floats, port rings, or entire ports, I would consider candidate combinations that would be popular.

There's no lenses listed working with the WWL-C from Canon apart from the little 24-50, if EF lenses nothing at all, the 28-70/80 kit lenses are said to not work with the WWL-1B, so seems unlikely this lens would work with either of the WWL. I expect it should do pretty well behind a 180mm dome though.

3:2 is the standard dimension for full frame stills so any lens OK for stills should be fine with video, after all we aren't viewing 100% crops of the corners when watching the video, our attention is on what the subject is doing.

Hello and welcome, hope you enjoy the forums. On the topic of compact, if you really want to be compact I'd suggest asking if you really need a full frame sensor. There are of course reasons for going full frame, which might be publication demands, low light performance for fast moving subjects or you want it and are prepared to deal with the downsides. Many people on here are advocates for smaller sensors as you can generally use them with smaller domes and particularly in m43 the lenses are smaller lighter and cheaper. I use m43 with an OM-1 and have an adapted Canon 8-15 which goes from a full 180° diagonal to the equivalent of a 28mm rectilinear lens, effectively a 15mm fisheye and a 14-28mm lens combined - in full frame equivalent terms. With the 8-15 and an APS-C or m43 system you could seriously look at using the Zen 4" dome which is tiny and very streamlined. Of course an 8-15 fisheye is neither cheap or light, it's a havy brick which contributes to bouyancy. Of course if a 180° diagonal fisheye is enough (and you were using that previously the tiny 8mm panasonic fisheye only weighs a few hundred grams and works perfectly with the 4"dome in m43. Now the downside of going compact is that buoyancy drops away and the housing can become quite negative. My OM-1 with the Canon 8-15 and 140mm dome is nearly 1.8kg negative and I use two really large float arms to get it closer to neutral which if course adds back drag. This of course is an extreme case as the Canon 8-15 is quite heavy. You could sit the housing on a foam block to get some buoyancy, it would be something like 30x20x3 cm so quite a good size. I'm assuming you would be shooting natural light and not dealing with strobe arms? This of course is an extreme case as the Canon 8-15 is quite heavy. The upside is that in aluminium housings, depending on which model you compare you could save enough $ on hardware costs to pay for a good portion of a dive trip to warmer waters. It's all a trade off.

Since we're discussing extension rings: could we do integrated floatation on them? I've wondered about using N120 ports with N100 to N120 adapter plus custom extensions rather than the N100 ports usually used on my Sony as a means of adding floation.

Even with the detect turned off at least on my Sony they won't let you run both the screen showing settings along with the EVF showing picture, unless you manually toggle between them. It's too bad to not have a way to use that feature since I would like it I think.

First of all: All underwater scooters are subject to torque effect. According to the law of action and reaction, as the propeller spins in a certain direction, an equal and opposite force is generated that causes the vehicle body to rotate on its axis in the opposite direction. In technical models like Suex, this rotation is compensated for by positioning internal weights asymmetrically or by using directional fins to straighten the water flow. This allows the scooter to remain stable during use, preventing strain on the diver's arms. When the motor is running the strategically placed internal weights counteract the torque and naturally stabilize the scooter with the control handle at the 12 o'clock position. So, if you mount your neutrally buoyant camera aligned with the handle the DPV will automatically rotate to keep the camera at the top as soon as you engage the motor. While stationary the camera mass might cause it to roll to the bottom but during motion the torque compensation does the balancing work for you and requires zero effort to keep the setup upright. TL;DR Just make the camera rig neutrally buoyant and put it aligned with the scooter handle. You will see that even when stationary the effort to keep it at 12 o'clock is basically zero. Ciao

You see a dog bone, I am seeing something a little different! 🙄

The WWL-C is actually great, but would not work well for salmon as you are never deep enough to flood and remove all the bubbles from the wet mate optics. And 8-15mm in the 140mm dome is my choice for snorkeling or shallow work. I've been shooting it with a TC recently and it is very good.

I'd get the DPV to stop rolling on its own. Possibly look at buoyancy up top and some weight on the bottom.

The 8-15 and 140mm seems like the most sense to me, especially since you have the lens and can add a TC. I do some casual river snorkeling in the PNW but haven't been able to shoot a salmon spawn yet.

I used open gate 4:3 several times with my GH5 and WWL. It works and it gives you some extra features in post, i.e. In macro static shot you can add a fake panning or just reframe. If available, I suggest to add the 16:9 reference frame on the display.

I am right there with you on all this. I do like the one 4.5" double ender for caring the great. It fits well in my hand. If I have a longer carry, I put a 5mm neoprene handle cover over it. I take the cover off on the boat. I haven't seen the double ender confuse crews so far. I also secure my gear to myself, especially for shore entry and exit. The coiled lanyard comes off the parking loop and clips to my crotch strap d-ring. The double ender then gets clipped to one of these dog bone tri-glides. I move another free double ender from a chest D-ring to do the same thing on the other side. The dog bone tri-glides keep the gear higher so it doesn't bounce on sensitive areas while walking on shore. Once in the water, I store the double enders in my chest d-rings. Obviously, I can also attach the gear while swimming at either one or both shoulders, if needed.

Hi Jiibby, Welcome aboard. We hope you like the forum Ciao

While I have no experience with it, the recent release of a diversity of cameras that can shoot full frame open gate (3:2 form) has made me wonder how this would work underwater. It would seem that by extending the corners (aka shooting in 3:2 vs 16:9) it would really make corner sharpness much worse and we would have to shoot at smaller apertures and further push our lenses and cameras (and ISO). I'd love to hear people's experiences with this in real life, or thoughts.

The 15-30 has a MFD of 0.28 and works well behind a dome so it should be good on the 180 or 230mm. No idea on the 140mm. I'll bet its front element is too large to work well with the WWL-1B, that later of which is really designed for small front elements. This may be a nice lens for video (behind a dome and for certain shots), or stills if it works with an wet-mate or dry-mate adapter (WACP,WWL-1, Marelux Aquista) for a solution (with limited to 28mm and greater zoom...) I'm looking forward to seeing some real world examples underwater!

I'm interested in this lens for use in the 230mm (primary) and 140mm dome (travel). I wonder if it will require a closeup diopter filter to focus on the inside of the dome, or if it can focus stand-a-lone.

Hi mate i just had a thought when in the housing you need the face detect sensor turned off as will only let you use the EV as the back door on housing makes it think your eye is looking though the Ev Have fun diving

Well, I bought it in January, I guess the things haven't changed so much. Anyway I paid it with PayPal so if I had any issue I was covered. You won't have problems with that adapter, the dome fits perfectly in the Sea&Sea housings, I have an old Sea&Sea housing for Canon 40D and I first fitted the dome in that housing, no issues at all.

I'm an fisheries scientist based on the West Coast USA. Traditionally, I have focused my underwater work in rivers of the Pacific Northwest, but recently been shooting pelagics during grad school in California. Soon, I'll be moving to Alaska and I'm looking to upgrade my setup for my new R5II. For the past 5 years, I have shot with an R6, 8-15 F4, ikelite housing, and 8" dome. As I switch to an aluminum housing for the R5II, I'm prioritizing compact size to reduce drag in river shooting. Any tips here? I was recommended the WWL-C + RF 24-50, but read dismal reviews here. Now, I have shifted towards the Marelux housing and 140mm dome with my 8-15. I'd entertain a wet lens setup, if the size and IQ are competitive to the 8-15 fisheye & 140mm dome. Any ideas are appreciated!

Here is a video of one of the GPO's on this trip that was grooming and cleaning its suckers. It's pretty crazy! Nikon Z8 w/8-15mm Fisheye lens + 1.4TC, f8@1/30s iso800, Pair of Retra Maxi strobes with 4500k filters in 6000 lumen video mode

I will work on that, including the extension ring.

Canon just announce Canon RF 20-50 F4L https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-officially-announces-the-rf-20-50mm-f-4l-is-usm-pz/. With MFD of 0.24m, do you think this lens will work with WWL-1B? Or it should work better with 140mm or 180mm dome? I'm looking for a compact rectilinear wide-angle setup for Marelux housing. Thanks in advance for your opinion.

Oops, I meant to say N100 125 (plus perhaps the ER 30 for those adding the teleconverter. It would be for the Sony 100 macro.

I have the Kenko 1.4x Teleplus DG Pro 300. Bought it in 2011 originally to use with the Tokina 11-17fe.