ChipBPhoto

The WWL-1 does not appear to be compatible with Canon RF lenses according to the Nauticam N120 RF chart. However, the RF 24-50, released Feb 2023, provides an option. It seems to match with both the WACP-C and WWL-C, which is a big win. (Per 6/23 chart link below) I personally haven’t tried it, but I would assume the WWL-C performs similarly to the WWL-1, which I know well. Initially, it was designed to be the WWL for compact lenses, but the physics work for the RF 24-50. As a bonus, it’s smaller than the WWL-1. Keep in mind the more simple, cheaper lenses often work better in the wet optics systems. The WWL and WACP does the heavy lifting of correcting and sharpening specifically for water. Personally, I like the versatility of the WWL / WACP. Aside from true macro, it covers 90%+ of what I want to photo. Even though I may dive with a specific subject in mind, I can photo most anything I may encounter. I’ve even come back with some nice closeup detail images of Flamingo Tongues. With that said, everyone has their own priorities and rig they like. In the end, it is up to you which way, or a different way, you want to go. Hope this helps! https://www.nauticam.com/pages/n120-canon-r-mount-port-chart

Thanks @Davide DB and @fruehaufsteher2 for sharing! Great recap!

Hi @Isaac Szabo Thanks for sharing your experience and example with the EF-S 60. I have the Sony 90 for my a1; other than the slow focus speed, I enjoy it. I’ve been considering a shorter macro lens and have heard the same stories of even slower focus from the Sony 50 macro. The Canon 60/Metabones sounds interesting, especially if the focus is as fast and accurate as it was on my old Canon APS-C rig. Question - what port are you using for this combination?

Congrats - sounds like a great system! Would enjoy hearing your thoughts after the test drive.

Hi @Landvogt1893 Great question. I have owned/used the WWL-1 with my Sony 28-60 for several years. I suspect the WWL-C would have a relatively similar image quality. I too find it to be a terrific system; far batter than a traditional dome. About a year ago I picked up a WACP-C. After about 50 dives with it I feel the image quality between the two is extremely close. The WACP-C does edge it out by a hair if you compare the exact same image side by side, but you have to look closely. With that said, there are some differences that may or may not be relevant. The WACP-C allows about a stop of extra sharpness. I find the WWL is sharp edge to edge at f/11, with f/8 being mostly acceptable sharpness on the edges. The WACP-C is edge to edge sharp at f/9 (or f/8), with f/5.6 being possible. (Your mileage may vary based on the edge detail and personal expectations). The WWL requires it to be “burped” after entry to ensure no water bubbles form between the port and WWL that can disrupt focus. The WACP does not as it is a port. I call it a “jump and go” system, which especially useful if you need to make a quick entry and do not want to run the risk of missing the needed burp. The WWL is a little lighter and perhaps easier for travel due to being 2 pieces. The WACP is slightly heavier and a tad more negative requiring just a little more buoyancy. And then there’s the cost difference. This may or may not be a consideration. For me, I live in South Florida where I do mostly local diving. As such I use the WACP-C most often because travel size and weight are not a concern. If I were traveling more I would most likely stay with the WWL as the quality is so close, and I had already invested in it. I hope this gives you some useful info to consider. I know there are others who have shared similar experiences. It all comes down to your personal priorities. Best of luck in your decision!

A rare FCP unicorn spotting in the wild! Yes, buy it! 🤔😂

Do it…do it…spend the money! (I’ve been told I’m a bad influence on others’ bank accounts) As a fellow hive member, I have personally lived everything you are saying. I too am obsessed with size and weight. Frankly, I’m not interested in having the biggest rig on the boat. Quite the opposite, in fact! With that said, I wound up with a Sony a7rIV in 2020, then briefly an a7rV, and now a1 with all the pretty attachments. Something clearly went very, very wrong with the plan. 😂 A couple thoughts…. In the real world, I am a Canon photog. I have an R5 and love it! I’ve also used the Canon R7. It’s a terrific little camera. So why did I end up with the Sony? Three reasons - 1) the Sony body is smaller than the Canon R5, which means the housing is physically smaller, 2) the Nauticam water contact lenses did not have a good Canon lens solution at the time, and 3) I wanted a FF. Through my experience, if you are going to a new Sony FF, the a7rV is fantastic! The only reason I went to the a1 was I got a good deal on it and I like the 1/400 flash sync option. The a7rV and a1 have substantially better focus, menus, and WB abilities than previous models. If you already have a WACP-C, I’d vote to keep it. I started with the WWL-1B in 2020 and then last year got a WACP-C. The WWL is easier to pack as it is the port and separate optic. The image quality is pretty close to the same. The downside is the requirement to “burp” the lens to eliminate any water bubbles between the port and WWL from your entry can be a pain. For that reason I’m most likely keeping my WACP-C. Aside from the occasional desire to photo a large wreck up close, I basically leave the WACP-C as my go-to solution. It is perfect for CFWA to fish portraits. I am also shocked at how close it can focus. I love the versatility! I also considered the a6600 (now a6700) before I bought the a7rIV for size, price, and keeping the Tokina 10-17 fisheye. It is a fantastic lens for APS-C systems! Super small, affordable, and sharp for that type of a system. This would also be a good go-to for the a6700. The a7Cii looks very interesting, but as it’s a FF camera there is not a lot of size reduction due to the size of the FF lenses and ports. In this case, I’d stick with the a7rV idea. After all that rambling, the a7rV with the WACP-C would be a great FF rig. If you are considering a newer APS-C rig, I have a buddy who may be interested in selling his a6600 system. Drop me a DM if you are interested. BTW - I always take my own “bucket” on the boat to separate mine from the others. When I travel, this has been a good solution as it is foldable and can double as a rinse bin afterwards. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B09F733B2M/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_image_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 It’ll be interesting to see which way you end up….

Sounds great - best of luck with your new setup! You will be able to use it for many years, even if you upgrade your Sony body in the future. As a thought, since you already have the WWL, you may not really have a need for the TC on the 8-15. I’ve seen good success using the WWL (or WAPC-C, basically the same thing) for photos such as dolphins, sharks, etc. The WWL will most likely give you sharper images at wider apertures if you do not need the full 180 degrees of the Canon. Big animals like whales could benefit from the fisheye, but would most likely not need the TC. The water contact lenses such as the WWL have been a real game changer! Since I started using it, it’s on my rig over 90% of the time unless I’m doing something really big like close range on a wreck. Again, it all depends on your personal needs and taste. Enjoy!

In my personal experience and usage, my Sigma MC-11 does not lock up with my Canon 8-15, even in burst mode or quick repetitive shutter action. It similarly works with the TC and has been widely used by people I know. Others choose the Metabones option, which is also fine. Enjoy!

Time to select the right hammer? 🤔 Seriously, sorry to hear. Very frustrating!

Hi @JB_Cazajous I use a Sony FF with a WWL and had the same question. (I was also very excited about the FCP). As you read below please keep in mind I too needed to stay within a reasonable price for all, but wanted to get the best possible quality for what I could afford as I plan to keep it for quite some time. I have found the Canon 8-15 with the Sigma MC-11 adapter to be an exceptional option. The Canon “L” glass is a bit pricy, but legendary for its quality and sharpness. There are plenty of good quality 8-15s available on the used market at an acceptable price. I also tried the Metabones V adapter, but found the MC-11 was not only cheaper, but easier to use and works very well with a super fast / accurate focus in a slightly smaller package. This also allows the circular 8mm fisheye image, if you get the zoom gear. When used sparingly it adds a cool effect to your dive photo options. You can also add a 1.4x teleconverter to this lens for a little extra reach with the wide view. As far as domes, I chose the Nauticam 140mm. It is small, easy to maneuver uw, and sharp. Be sure to get the model with the removable shade if you want to be able to do the circular images. With this lens/port solution I can basically focus right on a starfish arm and have an amazing CFWA image. Zen also makes a 100mm dome designed for the Canon 8-15. I used a similar one with my APS-C system, but per Alex Mustard he found the 140 dome was the smallest size with acceptable corners for a FF system. A larger dome such as 170, 180, or 230 will allow the option of split images, but there is the size and cost to consider. I personally was more interested in smaller dive and transport size than doing the occasional split, but others have different priorities. With that said, technically you can do a split with the 140 dome, but it will be challenging. You will need to be in still water for the best chance. Remember any dome option will begin with the N100-N120 port adapter. From there you can use any N120 dome or port on your Sony system once you have the appropriate extension. For the Canon solution I outlined above you will need: - Nauticam N100-N120 adapter - 30mm extension (120) - 140 Dome (N120) - If you add a 1.4x teleconverter, add a 20mm extension I also agree the Nikon 13mm conversion is now a very solid option, and is even smaller. This was not openly available when I bought my setup. You will find many options by those claiming to have the “best solution.” The best solution for you is what fits your personal needs. Enjoy!

Here you are @brightnight…. Use smartphone as monitor - Video Gear and Technique - Wetpixel Underwater Photography Forums 2.pdf

You too??? 😂😂😂 I just bought a wide lens and basic tray for my GoPro 9. There are days that’s all I want to carry. 😎

To @Barmaglot very good point, no, a system neither needs to be the most expensive or the newest. Not at all, in fact. Bottom line, it’s just a tool to make a photo or video. We can go to a hardware store and see a wall of different types and brands of hammers. Does one work better than the other? Perhaps, depending on the specific task, but they are all hammers. With that said, some of my favorite images were made with a Canon G11 compact flash camera and $200 Canon plastic housing. I then used my Canon T2i APS-C DSLR for 11 years and made some very nice images. Ironically, cameras today like the TG6/7 and even GoPros can get certain images better than my current much larger rig due to their size. We are incredibly fortunate to have so many choices in so many price ranges at our disposal. At the end of the day, it’s all about making a memory and the challenge of creating art under the waves. I absolutely agree that new tech does provide some tremendous benefits like much faster focus, less noise, and larger file sizes with which to work. Back to the hammer analogy, it all depends on the type of task and personal budget to find the right tool.

No clue at all! 😂😂😂

Good call on the Rocket Blower. This is what I use: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07RKYWBD2/ref=ox_sc_saved_title_1?smid=A2KE1MJRDTDO9P&th=1

I completely relate to your question and concern. I bought a Canon T2i and Nauticam housing in 2010. I used it for stills for 11 years because 1) it worked well, 2) was super small, and 3) didn’t want to spend the big money for a new housing. When the Nauticam WACP and WWL optics came out, it was time to upgrade. I’ve personally used the Sony a7Riii, a7Riv, a7Rv, and now have an a1. If you’re going to upgrade in the Sony world, I would highly recommend going to the a7Rv over an older model. The focus system and new menu system introduced in the a7Rv / a1 is a true game changer over the Riv! It will easily last you for years to come and is definitely worth the jump. Put your browser in private mode and clear your cache after you peruse the ads to cover the incriminating shopping evidence. The Auditor General will never know 😂

Completely agree with everything said above. I would absolutely advise against trying to service the housing oneself. It would be like owning a Ferrari and doing your own engine services. There are a lot of tiny parts due to the intricate internal design. In addition to soaking and articulating buttons in fresh water, Reef Photo gave me the tip to blow out the excess water from under the buttons when drying to keep residue from building up underneath. I use an electric blower normally used to clean out computers. ($30-50 on Amazon) I was shocked how much blows out! Making sure the housing is dried with a soft cloth will keep it from leaving milky water spots on the finish. I log roughly 200+ dives per year with mine. If you take the time to clean it you will rarely, if ever, need to send it in for service. Enjoy!

Congrats @homodelphinius on your new rig! Without trying to sound like a cliche, it really does depend how well you clean and dry your housing and extensions after use. I had my 1st Nauticam housing for 11 years with 200+ dives a year. I went over 9 years before it was serviced. And yes, it looked brand new when I got it back! Even the white lettering was repainted. 😳 I have never serviced an extension ring other than replacing the main o-ring. (85, 100, or 120) All parts are extremely well made and durable which is why I chose them. With that said, I am also quite meticulous about soaking the rig each night after use, articulating the buttons and knobs while in the warm water, and then thoroughly drying it. I found an electric air blower to quickly blow out the water from under the buttons/levers, which in turn keeps them free from build-up. I do this even when I am on a repetitive day dive trip. I am most likely the extreme in this area compared to most, but it has paid off for me over the years. Definitely an investment to purchase, but well worth it!

Exactly @TimG! I’ve worked on manufacturing teams my entire career. I fully appreciate the costs involved with developing and producing new technology. I also am very familiar with setting new prices that seem very high at first, but eventually become more accepted based on product benefits and the initial shock wearing off. The end of 2024 will tell us a great deal about both the real product benefits and overall public acceptance. At the end of the day, net sales vs. projections is what really counts to the company. It also has a huge determination as to what the company produces next for both retail consumers and beyond.

I’m sure it’s amazing, but at $7,000 that puts it in a very unique and limited group who can afford it and/or are willing to pay for it. Unfortunately that’s not me at this time. We will see what the future holds or if there is a smaller, more affordable version that may come out down the road. (I.e. WWL series)

Hi John, Alex Mustard put together a couple videos on settings he uses. (Note: the a1 and a7RV have the same menus.) It is broken into 2 videos. I found these very helpful in general, including capturing small subjects. I am sure others will have specific feedback as well. One of the biggest adjustments I have done with mine is setting custom buttons and custom menus. It really helps in the real world to quickly make the setting changes as needed on the fly. Enjoy your new rig! chip

This is very interesting and opens up new possibilities. On land I am a Canon photog. The 14-35 is a fantastic lens and one I use often. Who knows, I may even bring my R5 under the waves.

Very excited to learn more and try it! Seems this will dramatically expand the cross lens and brand functionality.

Based on the photo @Alex_Mustard posted, it appears the lens hood could be removable for 180ish fisheye images? (White dots on both the body and hood) I am curious as to the overall size for travel. (Rough diameter and height using a basic ruler or tape measure)