Nikolausz

I absolutely agree with your analysis and I came to a similar conclusion. Due to the crop factor, we can forget the ILS version for wide angle (but the mission 1 pro will be interesting). I played a bit with the idea of building a compact macro system around the ILS version, but honestly, it makes more sense to spend the same money on an MFT camera with a properly communicating macro lens with AF. Not to mention that according some rumours, the new Sony RX100 camera with 1 inch sensor is around the corner. Probably a safer bet to build an underwater camera system around it.

I'm really sorry. It was a really great source of information. I spent lots of time browsing uwpmag issues. I will miss it

They're actually cheaper than I expected

Maybe there will be electronic contacts on the final model, otherwise it's just a missed opportunity.

Many people pointed out on another forum that there are no electronic contacts to the lens (on the prototype), which means that most of the MFT lenses cannot be used.

I can imagine that it would be possible to build an excellent compact macro system around the mission Pro ILS, but it would probably require an external monitor.

I was toying with the same idea, but overall it's not that cheap. I was actually considering a cheap phone in an even cheaper case with DIY wifi connection (coax cable). However, I use Sony A6400 and the remote app (Imaging Edge) is just PITA to use. It would cause probably so much frustration underwater, that I decided not to try this route. Maybe somebody has a better experience.

I still think it was good to warm up this topic, because we know more about the Nauticam housing and maybe somebody already has some first hand experience.

I mainly focus on underwater videography but sometimes I could use some good quality still images. Couple of months ago I saw a video (see below) about using video files to make high resolution still images. I'm quite convinced:

It would be interesting to see a comparison with the original Invisible Dive Case Pro from Insta360. The price difference is huge (890 vs 140 Euro), so Nauticam case should offer something. It looks more durable and the dome ports are glass, but it also heavier (though more compact). For me a decisive factor would be image quality, especially handling stich lines and inner reflections. I'm not sure, if I would pay the extra cost of the Nauticam aluminium housing.

I've been using an Insta360 X2 camera for a while. During a recent trip I had the same dilemma to either use a GoPro (with AOI) or the 360 degree camera on the top of my mirrorless housing. Comparing the footage from both camera I can conclude that The GoPro has still a way better quality. However, I can still use few seconds of Insta sequences as interesting perspectives, but not too long sequences, because some optical errors (stiching problems) will be obvious. Another good use is to leave the 360 degree camera on a "tripod" in shallow water. For usable footage you need lots of light for the Insta cameras. New models are probably better. I wouldn't use it as a main camera but it can be a very useful tool. I use ot on a ball-head like below to attach to my main camera: Some examples for the videos with Insta360 X2 you can find in my short movie about Bali: 1:44 - 2:10; 2:41

Is there anybody a good printing solution for N85 focus gear for Sony 10-18mm f/4 (SEL1018) zoom on Sony a6400 (or similar A6xxx) in Nauticam housing (housing zoom knob). I'm totally noob for 3D printing but I have access to a printer and help.

They are colour corrected but not too much and not necessary final. However, complete removal of blue cast is not my aim. I don't like those clinically corrected videos, where the impression is that it's not recorded underwater. Long time ago I read an article about designing the Finding Nemo animated movie and they introduced underwater particles (backscatter) and vanished colours in far away subjects, just to be more realistic, underwater-like.

I used AWB on the Sony but I found that GoPro is better with fixed WB, so I tuned according to the video lamps, so I used 5000K, it makes wide footage more rich in blue. Maybe these subjects are not that colourful, but I see a subtle difference bringing out the colours well. This video below is a better examples for the colours of GoPro with external lights (more colourful subjects and available lights are less dominating).

It's interesting that you favoured GoPro footage. Have you watched it on phone or on a large monitor? I think it makes a big difference, but I agree that the difference is not that big and when the conditions are good for GoPro shooting with a large camera doesn't bring too much.