JohnD

I never took off the macro lens in Dumaguete, even for Apo island, although perhaps if water clarity had been better, I might have switched to a wide angle for there. Have not been to Puerto Galera, but going in a few months. I will be interested to hear your experience. From what I have heard/read, I anticipate mostly macro there also but some reef areas warranting wide angle. Perhaps your dive op can let you know the intended destinations far enough in advance of the dive that you could choose... If weight and space permit, probably worth having the wide lens with you, just in case, and for Verde island, if going there.

It has been a while, but I have used the Oly 8mm with the DP100 and a 30mm ER. I believe it is listed on the Zen port chart. The Nauticam 140 dome gives better corner results. But I have not used either of those for quite a few years.

Good point. I have lived in the Nauticam ecosystem for so long, I sometimes forget about how things work with other options.

I am very fond of using a fisheye for CFWA, and especially a zoom fisheye, although it is a bit complicated on the micro four thirds system at present. Although I recently tried to go back to M43, I didn't particularly enjoy the experience after having used a Nikon for several years, and have gone back to Nikon. But, during my brief recent affair with the M43, I did find that using a Lumix 12-32 lens and a WWL-C worked well and was fairly compact, which to me, is the raison d'être for that system underwater. Granted, it is not the same as a fisheye, but offers something close, is compact and offers zooming without the port adapter and zoom ring complications associated with using the Canon lens on M43. Just a thought.....

I have used both the Panasonic and Oly 8mm lenses in the Zen 100 and Nauticam 140 domes. The 140 might allow you to open up slightly and maintain corners, but the 100mm is more true to the M43 size benefits and is fine.

Curious about weight and what the "most compact" size reduction amounts to. Could be a great macro travel strobe for those of us who are trying to cut size and weight for traveling and are Retra fans.

Yes Do a Google search for these four words: Adam Hanlon Wetpixel Thief. I, and I am sure others, have no desire to revisit the whole thing here.

I know it has been discussed before, but just as an additional data point, despite being a very careful sort, I did finally get some water spots on a flat port. I used Carpro CeriGlass Glass Polish from Amazon on a microfiber cloth and it took about 2 minutes to get the glass completely clean and then I rinsed/soaked it well to remove all the chemical. The spots had not been very bad, but had resisted all the usual glass cleaning methods. I also had some powder I was going to make into a paste and use if the liquid stuff did not work, but did not need it.

Added: I suppose it is to be expected, but FWIW, that TC works fine for autofocus, 3D autofocus and aperture readout for the Z5II as well as the Z8.

Has anyone tried shooting a Z8 with the UWT trigger at 1/250?

I assume that will eventually be added to firmware update on other models. I have no interest in the Z5IIC.

Thank you for the article, Walt. Nicely done, by the way. Pretty much confirms my expectations. Jyuny1, the 105 and MFO-3 is long, but I have not found that to be a problem, and I use it extensively on daytime macro dives to have that "2 lenses in 1" benefit. Interestingly, Alex Mustard has expressed a preference for using a 90 or 100 on blackwater, but I found that focal length difficult to use in that setting and pretty much left the MFO-3 in place on previous blackwater dives. If I lived near dive sites and could dive more often I would experiment more, but with the cost and time constraints of being a long way from dive locations, I have to rely a lot on others' experiments and experience when I get curious.

I have done a few blackwater dives and really enjoy them. I will be spending a couple weeks in the Philippines early next year and am looking forward to doing several more. Most recently I have been using the Nikkor Z105 on a Z8, with the MFO-3. I recently re-watched an interview with Mike Bartick from a year ago, in which he enthused over the AF-S 60mm on a Z8 for blackwater. I have been tempted to give that a try, since I already have the lens, but it means taking not only the lens but an FTZ and I will be taking the 105 and MFO-3 either way. Not a big deal, but I am always dealing with weight and size limits on the airlines. I am guessing no one has really done any comparison between the 60 and the 105/MFO-3 on a mirrorless body, but if so, I would be interested in hearing about it. My guess is that there is no benefit to the 60mm in this situation. If I can meet weight and size limits, I might just take both lenses and experiment, but as I said, I would enjoy hearing about others' experience.

As I look more at the photo from the nauticam website that I posted, I think I see now that the objective lens is right at the front of the lens, and what I thought was a recessed lens is just due to the limited reflection off the front glass. Sorry for my error.

I could be mistaken, but it appears to me the MFO-3ii now has some sort of built-in lens shade/protector

It may work with the Megadap 21 on Nikon full frame as a fixed 14mm FE and/or zoom on Nikon DX. Not sure it would be preferable over the Nikon 8-15 with FTZ, though. In any case, nice to see additional lenses of potential underwater interest.

FWIW, I have the 11032 and have had no issues with a Z8 and pro max and maxi strobes. I would imagine that whatever the issue, UWT will make it right. I had a problem with my first 11032 and sent it in for examination/repair and a new was sent to me.

Thanks Phil, not surer how I missed the details on the Marelux page. I was mostly curious about minimum focus rather than maximum, and obviously cannot get much shorter than 0. Hopefully someone can share some experiences with the lens.

I would also love to see some comparisons or tests. I am not saying that as some sort of challenge or dispute. I have found the MFO to be very useful, and if the MV60 does it better, even without being better to the point of "crushing" the MFO, I want one. I would also be curious about working distance and magnification comparison, especially working distance. I just looked and cannot find those on the Marelux website.

I sometimes put a ND on the front, so the threaded portion of the overpriced Nauticam piece is perfect for that.

👍 By the way, as soon as I can get around to it, I will post a brief review on the forum of my testing of the Flexibuoy.

Phil: Well, that all makes sense and was the question that no one seemed able to answer. In one of your shots you show an SMC mounted on the Marelux flip and sitting nearby is the spacer ring. I take it the NA lenses work correctly on the flip without a spacer? I was intrigued by the hydraulic aspect and that's what got me looking at this and interested in getting one.

I recently saw that Marelux has introduced their own double flip holder with a novel feature, for wet lenses. I am/was interested in this, and specifically, whether the Nauticam threaded spacer ring would be necessary to use Nauticam lenses like the MFO and SMC with the holder and if so, whether the standard spacer ring would work on the holder (it does not, for example, fit on an AOI or Saga holder; they require a different spacer). I contacted Marelux and half-expected them to say they had not tested Nauticam products on their flip holder, which would be understandable. Instead, they just responded to me with a link to the website product page and a note that I was "welcome to check." Perhaps mentioning I wanted to use Nauticam products on their holder was a mistake. I then spoke to a Nauticam dealer I deal with often, in case they had any info and of course, was told they had no idea about the Marelux product, which I pretty much expected. So I reached out to a Marelux dealer who also sells Nauticam, and asked about it. I was told the Marelux double flip holder only works with the Marelux brand wet lenses, which seemed odd, since all these products have a 67mm thread, but whatever. So I thought I would ask here in case anyone, perhaps Phil Rudin, could confirm what I was told or provide other info, mostly just out of curiosity at this point.

I love the mfo-3 on my 105 or on the olympus 60mm. Nauticam makes and overpriced "M82 Filter Holder for MFO-3" It allows the use of a lens cap and I use an 82 mm threaded lens hood on it at times. Of course, 3D printer experts like Dave Hicks could make something better.

Some years back I read about and heard about BBF and how wonderful it was. All the cool kids did it, you know. So I set up my camera for it and did the back button thing for a long time. It was fine. It worked. I was able to coordinate my thumb and forefinger fine. But as time went by it seemed that although it was fine and worked, it did not do anything "better" for me and my style of underwater shooting. I began to wonder if it really made sense to use two fingers on two different buttons to accomplish what one finger on one button could do just fine. It also was not the most comfortable on some vertical shots. Maybe it depends on the camera or housing? I switched to using he shutter release button (well, the Nauticam lever) for both focus and shutter release. I am probably not allowed to have lunch at the cool kid's table anymore, but otherwise, I don't feel I am missing anything and I now have an additional, conveniently located button that I can program to do something else. Again, this is for me and for my style of underwater photography. I am not saying one way is wrong or right. Vive la différence.