ChipBPhoto

This is most excellent news! I was thinking it would fit. Good to know. The 30mm macro may also fit? He doesn’t have the special gear needed to flip the macro switch mid-dive and I’m not a fan of $800+ to add it. I prefer to dive/photo with purpose rather than a do-everything approach.

UPDATE: Thanks to fellow member @RickMo , my buddy has settled on a previously enjoyed E-M1ii in a Nauticam housing. He is super excited to begin his journey of spending all his disposable income, and then some, in this underwater addiction. 😁 Thank you to all for the fantastic comments and suggestions! The global users on their forum are such an incredible wealth of knowledge and experience. And a huge thank you to our wonderful mods such as @Chris Ross and @Davide DB for their first-hand knowledge in the m4/3 world! Happy New Year and much diving in 2026!!

Thanks for the good info @Klaus . The smaller the equipment, the more delicate they can be. A little care goes a long way. In other words, just because there is a bigger hammer, don't use. :-)

Thanks @Chris Ross - It's amazing how small the Zen mini dome is, especially compared to the 8-15. Good call on the Pany 8mm having a bit of a CA. Nice galleries! Love seeing the coral walls.

@Davide DB Nice! And a great pic of you in uw action. The size is the big winner of the day for sure!

Funny you mention the mini dome, I saw an N85 Zen 100 dome today. It’s crazy small! And with the 8mm f/3.5 lens no extension is needed. Seems like a solid option.

Great suggestion @Grantmac - thanks! What lens do you like / use the most?

Excellent - thanks @MatthewSullivan , really appreciate it!! Added bonus - I know you are a very fair, realistic reviewer as well!

I have a buddy considering entering uw photography. He wants a cost effective system, small body with interchangeable lens. I am strongly considering the m4/3 options, specifically the OM-D E-M5 mark III vs OM-D E-M10 IV as recommendations. The least expensive option is the OM-D E-M10 IV including the AOI poly housing for ~$1600 USD. Questions: Seems the E-M5 III has faster focus, but is it a major difference? E-M5 III also requires a more expensive housing. If properly cared for, are there any downsides to the AOI housing? How is the image quality of 14-42 EZ lens and the AOI wet mount wide lens? I appreciate any feedback on these specific models and the AOI housing. @Chris Ross I know you have extensive knowledge in the m4/3 world. Many thanks! chip **Please note - I have extensive experience with Sony and Canon models. I own and use the Sony a1, Sony a6700, and Canon R5 as well as others in the past. I also owned the E-M1 and loved it for a variety of reasons. In my experience the m4/3 seems to be a solid option for his specific needs, but appreciate current info and user experience on the points above.

Hi, @Susa - I have the a1 which I upgraded to from the a7rIV. The auto focus is extremely fast and very 'sticky' to the subject. Above the waves I do a fair amount of airshows which involves many of the same techniques, challenges, and performance needs as bird photography. While in the 'photo pit' at various shows there are a fair number of a1 users as well as a7rV. Even though there are some minimal differences, both deliver exceptional results. I have seen this in both my own images as well as those I have met. While I have not yet run across the a7V (not 'r') as it is so new, the specs and tech on which it is built are very solid. The lens also makes a tremendous difference in high-action photography. The Sony 200-600 is the go-to for bird and airshow enthusiasts. With that said, I met someone who brought a Sony 300 f/4. Yes, there was a significant difference in the image quality. But then again, he traveled the country doing the airshows and had mastered the techniques that warranted that level of investment. As @Davide DB points out, the a1 is the 'best of the best.' The question really comes down to will you get an appreciative benefit for the last ~10% of a performance gain for the over double the price difference? Regarding video, please also keep in mind that filming in high res on a mirrorless will cause the cameras to run hot, in some cases extremely hot. 4K 120p, as an example, puts an incredible demand on the body and generates a lot of heat. 8K is even more taxing. Many who do a large amount of high res video will often add an external recorder to move the heat from the memory card writing away from the body. This adds an entirely different financial aspect to the equation and not one I am suggesting. Adding proper quality video lighting adds yet another dimension. With this said, doing the occasional 1 min or less video clips along with mainly still photography should be fine. I just want to share an aspect many do not mention when discussing 4K or higher video specs. Without trying to sound cliche, once one reaches this level of equipment, it's not the gear, but rather the user that makes the difference. Regardless of your decision, once you master the strengths and limitations of the system you choose, you will have the ability to deliver consistent, quality results. Enjoy, chip

@Davide DB That is true wisdom and some of the best advice for us all. Nothing beats the experience gained and the memories made from using the gear in which we invested so much. Truth is, there are really no “bad” cameras these days, especially the ones being discussed.

I personally owned the SMC-1 for years and now own the SMC-3. Honestly, they are very similar in 'real life' usage. To me, the biggest improvement is the SMC-3 is smaller and lighter. As far as image quality, they are both exceptional, once you get the hang of the very short working distance. Yes, the SMC-3 has a slightly larger working distance, but nothing that is worthy of selling an existing SMC-1 and purchasing the SMC-3. It just makes it a little more usable in the everyday usage. The SMC-1 is discontinued and removed from the Nauticam charts because they are basically the same thing designed for the same task with similar specs. Think of the SMC-3 as a 'v2' of the original SMC-1. Hope this helps, chip

For some, the 4K120 video crop could be a consideration; thanks for sharing. It is not a big consideration for me, but could be for those who are more video-focused.

For uw usage, I don’t really see a downside to the a7rV or any huge upside to the a1 over it. I do use the a1 for high speed action above the waves such as air shows, etc. It really shines there, although the new ai focus on the a7rV is also pretty amazing. Both are exceptional; no wrong choices here.

Hi @homodelphinius , Yes, I have extensive personal usage with both the 8-15/140 dome and the WWL. In short, it's a trade off. - 8-15/140: smaller package, but limited zoom capabilities. Focus is ultra-wide with 180 degree FoV. Solid for CFWA reefscapes and wrecks. The 8-15 is a sharp lens, fast focus, and very forgiving as to the exact focus point due to the nature of such a wide lens. - The WWL is a much more versatile option that covers wide (not super-wide) to medium zoom range. At the wide end it is 130 degree FoV. There are a few times I miss having a wider option for expansive scenes, but those are very rare compared to the benefit of having a true working zoom option. The WWL is a water correcting lens which allows focusing to basically have the subject touching the glass dome. I have successfully photoed near macro level images of flamingo tongues with ease. Adding the CMC provides a super macro option, but with an extremely short usable focus range. Basically you would be able to photo fairly wide reefscapes, CFWA scenes, near macro, and then with the CMC super macro all in one dive. - Both the WWL and the CMC attach to the port via an adapter. You can purchase a similar adapter designed as a holder mounted to your housing or on a float arm to hold the lens you are not using at that time. Realistically, most everyone uses the WWL with a rare swap out to the CMC when an appropriate subject is found. It is a bit of pain to swap frequently which means it needs to be something really worth the effort to make the underwater swap, but it is there should you need it. A true macro lens with the CMC added would be best for a macro oriented dive. While I dive 95% of the time with my WWL, I do occasionally still use the 8-15 if I am diving specially for ultra-wide scenes. The rest of my dives are with a dedicated macro setup. There will be plenty that prefer a more traditional dome port and standard wide lens solution. There are benefits to each. It is important to focus on what your specific needs and desires are for your photography. Me personally, I like the zoom ability in a more compact design afforded with the WWL, especially considering the image sharpness delivered. Hope this help! chip