Jump to content

fruehaufsteher2

Members
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    Germany

Everything posted by fruehaufsteher2

  1. OK, understood. I had already bought the item two months ago and it would have made me unhappy if it had been unnecessary.
  2. But in addition that means that the focusing gear for the 90/2,8 isn't needed?
  3. Last year I decided to go big - switching from the tiny RX100 to FF (FullFormat). In my case, it was the A7IV as the best value for money. But having made the decision on the camera model is only one step - lens, housing and port is much more difficult. But with the support of the nice guys here and the old forum, I am now the happy owner of a sleek combination that is tailored to my needs. But how do you know what you need? This article might help. The most common type of camera used by underwater photographers is one that is inserted with lens into a housing and has either a flat (flat port) or curved (dome port) front glass at the port. Even in the days of analogue photography with the Nikonos system, for example, water contact lenses were developed that explicitly take into account the refraction of light at the water-to-glass contact surface. This reduces distortions that would otherwise occur when light hits the port at an angle and cause blurring at the edges. Nauticam has therefore developed some different types of water contact optics that evolved and serve different purposes. FCP (Fisheye Conversion Port) and WACP (Wide Angle Conversion Port) are "dry" optics designed to turn a mid-range zoom lens on the camera into a wide-angle zoom when the combination is taken under the surface. WWL (Wet Wide Lens) is the older version, somewhat less compact and made of more components, wet lens, but otherwise very similar to WACP. EMWL (Extended Macro Wide Lens) takes a different approach: different underwater lenses are placed in front of a macro lens and a flat port in order to be able to adjust on different subjects - from macro to large fish. First and newest: FCP Picture courtesly provided by Alex Mustard A dry lens that is attached directly to the housing with the appropriate (depending on the camera and lens) port extensions. In concrete terms, you can imagine the FCP as an ultra-wide-angle lens for underwater use. A lens such as the Sony 28-60, Canon 24-50 or Nikon 24-50 is attached to the camera and the FCP is mounted on the housing. This achieves a maximum field of view of 175° - a real fisheye. In the zoom position, the field of view is still 85°, i.e. still quite wide-angle, comparable to a 24mm lens over water. Next WACP: Still new, especially the WACP-C The WACP ports with the endings -C for compact, -1 for the "normal" variant and -2 for the maximum variant are not quite as extreme. Also "dry" optics - see above. They are intended to cover a field of view of approx. 70°-130° - i.e. comparable to a lens with a normal focal length (approx. 30mm) to a slight fisheye wide angle (11mm). On the camera, the WACP-C and WACP-1 require similar lenses as for the FCP (for example Sony 28-60, Canon 24-50 or Nikon 24-50), but the largest variant requires a wider-angle lens such as 14-30mm to achieve the same field of view. These water contact lenses are quite bulky and heavy (WACP-C: 2.3kg, WACP-1: 3.9kg, WACP-2: 7.0kg) and offer better sharpness than dome ports, especially at the edges, but above all they provide a wide zoom range under water and focus even directly at the glass. The WACP-C, although labelled as a compact version, also fits some of the full-frame cameras and is the most suitable solution for me personally. WWL-1(B): AFAIK the two WWL ports (WWL-1 and the newer WWL-1B) are the predecessors of the WACP ports. The area of use is the same as with WACP: field of view approx. 70-130°, i.e. wide normal focal length to slightly ultra-wide angle/fisheye when using zoom lenses with a focal length range of approx. 25-60mm. The difference to the WACP solutions is the technical design. With WWL, you have a compact plan port on the housing and the WWL is mounted wet, i.e. with water between the front glass of the port and the WWL lens. Advantage over the WACP solutions: lighter overall, and you can remove the WWL under water and then have a lightweight telephoto lens (...no one ever does...). Disadvantage: The telephoto lens is rarely needed and air bubbles between the port and the WWL can be annoying. EMWL: One size matters fits all The EMWL wants to be and can be an "all in one": The basic here is that an 90 mm macro lens is mounted on the camera and the corresponding port with flat glass at the front (flat port) is mounted on the underwater housing. A close-up lens (e.g. SMC-1) for magnification or the EMWL can be used on a flip port. The EMWL consists of two or three elements: The focusing unit, which is available in variants for Nikon, Canon and Sony, is located directly in front of the macro port An optional extension piece (relay lens) then follows, which turns the image upside down and brings the front glass closer to the subject The actual lens, which is available in 160°, 130°, 100° and 60° angle of view versions, is located at the top. The 130° lens is particularly popular and is ideal for CFWA, but also for large fish or panoramic images. In contrast to FCP and WACP, the EMWL is a wet lens, so there is water between the port glass and the focussing unit, but also between the relay lens and the objective lens. Image quality is high in every direction but bubbles between the parts can be annoying and there have been issues about focus breathing. The main areas of application are thus: FCP: Fisheye wide-angle zoom, medium volume, compact WACP: Wide-angle zoom, medium to large volume depending on version WWL: Comparable to WACP, Lighter and slightly cheaper, but with technical disadvantages EMWL: fixed focal lengths that can be changed under water, somehow bulky, objectionable appearance To show the differences in size and appearance here a pic from Alex Mustard, showing (left to right) FCP (prototype), WACP-C, WACP-2, WACP-1 (Thanks, Alex!) Cost (€)? You have already camera, housing and lens. And focus gear. And port extension. And arms, flashes and so on. Just the port: Rough estimates FCP: EDIT Jan 14th: Now on Nauticam website €6.482,00 (incl. VAT) WACP-C: €2.9k WACP-1: €4.5k WACP-2: €8.2k WWL-1b: €1.9k (with flatport) EMWL: €8.5k (with flatport, 60°, 100°, 130° optics, rely, focusing unit, flip-holder, SMC-1) If I made errors or incorrectness anybody please feel free to add or correct
  4. Ah, now I got it - that's what you meant by "There is a workaround to apply a special O-ring (and contact the lens underwater. ". OK, seems to be interesting! Thanks a lot!
  5. Hi Nikolausz, Thanks for your help! Actually both INON and AOI seem not to support splitshots, but could provide narrower focusing and better image quality. The Telesin port has a diameter of 6" (18cm) - what seems to be the lowest size for splits. But maybe worth a try.
  6. Ah, understood - "3-way" wasn't clear to me. Isn't that very short?
  7. A stick is hepful - i found the one from Insta surprisingly good https://store.insta360.com/product/invisible_selfie_stick_tripod
  8. Three from the last two months. Note the nurseshark upper left that looks like a …. In German it‘s „Molch“
  9. I just wanted to add that if you do only pictures (or at least mainly pictures) the „cheapest“ option is one of the larger iPads with USB-C and the iPad Lightroom edition. Nearly only missing histograms this LR comes at only 22.-€/year while the apple display units are quite good in brightness and color. Data transfer directly via USB-C from my Sony camera is done in seconds and avoids putting in and out of the SD-cards. nothing for the pros but for me. Low amount of weight low complexity. I also charge the camera via USB.
  10. „If I die my biggest fear is that my wife sells all my gear for the price I told her I paid“ @TimG lost your bet. She edited my spelling mistakes. 🫣
  11. …. Really great house reef but lousy conditions. Rain and storm. No time to adjust anything, will have to wait for the next holiday.
  12. My wife bought the Hero12 black and a really cheap (40.-) Domeport from „telesin“, rated down to 15m. Feels little plastic. https://www.telesin-store.com/dome-port-c0027 What makes me totally unhappy is that she took pictures that really look nice. Really. Is there a stable solution also? Meaning small dome for GoPro that will survive more than 5-10 dives and more than 15m?
  13. But always remember: GAS is limited by WAF (Women Acceptance Factor) Isotta has a high WAF, Ikelite is really low, and SeaFrogs is below zero. Nauticam and Marelux are always acceptable, like Mercedes. I don‘t want to talk about the EMWL. If you ever have seen a diver holding a housing with EMWL+ optics sitting on a Zodiac you know why…
  14. Happy to see that Waterpixels is such a great success. Just from this week
  15. I used the RX100VA in Isotta with the UWL95C from INON. There‘s less distance to FF than one might think. Battery life just for one dive, AF capability of course below the actual A7 Generation But sometimes I am not sure whether my pics are really better with the big camera
  16. I only know the UWT - at first it looked a bit "neutral" - no housing. Only the electronic parts. But it fits perfectly in the Nauticam housing an works as a no-brainer. Just does what it's supposed to do.
  17. I like the smart closing mechanism of the Isotta housings. If such a case is necessary I‘d go for Isotta which is rated 200m and price tag is 540.- Of course it hasn‘t the additional screen but for the wide angled action cam you hardly need it.
  18. All your input is extremely helpful. I'll give them a try, but I'll stay with one single flash. Thank you so much!
  19. Hi Floris, you named it. Your proposal is what I'd do on land but in the water this could be too difficult. First thing I'll try will be putting the flash more in left upper corner. I'll give feedback.
  20. With these pics: justifiable purchase. What kind of light did you use?
  21. What makes the Camera so special is the ability of capturing very fast action. In my opinion the A9 III could be a huge improvement for high speed sports, birds in flight or other fast moving subjects. But below the surface there's hardly any subject that cannot be caught with the A7R V - and here you have much more potential when cropping. While the specs look extremely interesting it might not be the best choice under water.
  22. Nice, only a little blueish. Was there really a week without mantas?? We've been there in August and had anything between 30 and 200 Mantas. Not to mention the nearly everyday whalesharks. "oceanfanaticsreethibeach" on insta were a good source of information.
  23. I'll do! Hopefully Fulidhoo has a nice house reef... 😜

Important Information

Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.