ColdDarkDiver

As a Canon shooter....I think so? I believe the latest iterations of the cameras can White Balance for deeper water without the issues they used to have. I have worked with some Sony footage recently and it looked great, but that was not deep footage.

Sony released a new body today the FX5 - Seems to be the next iteration of the FX3 line with open gate, triple base ISO, internal RAW, and some other goodies. Seems like it would be perfect for the ol' sony wet and dry optic options and could be a popular option. It seems like it won't fit in an FX3 housing... so lets see if anyone makes a housing for it. So many cameras in this space at the moment, it seems like it will be hard for the housing companies to decide which one to support. PetaPixelSony FX5 Has a New Sensor, Open Gate, Internal RAW, and S...The new Sony FX5 answers nearly ever criticism levied against the FX3.

I rented one and used it with the 30mm extension - see comments and images here: I did not try the 20mm. There was no obvious vignetting with the 30mm extension. the 7-14 and the 8-15 are very close to the same length after you add the EF-RF adapter to the 8-15. Would be nice if it was even better with a 20 vs the 30! Solid lens. To your other point - I have never put another lens behind the 140mm dome. Not sure when I would use the 50 or 35 underwater - although I do bring the 24mm macro to use when I want simplicity (but don't love any of those focal lengths underwater...) but I use that with the 180mm port.

Hi Phil - to be clear is is an adapter that allows a Marelux port (or Aquista 135d) to be mounted to an N120 Nauticam housing? I know they have had the other way for a long time. Thanks!

I don't think it is this as much as it is really easy to over zoom underwater and then be frustrated with the results. Are you at 24 or 28? Sometimes hard to tell. I know I would mess it up. Or maybe I just identified myself as a smart ass customer. You bring up many good points- I really struggle with some of the lenses not projecting fully on the sensor, only because I often find that when you put a lens behind a dome, sometimes the canon profiles get wonky. Or they do stupid things like try to correct a fisheye....like I bought a fisheye for a reason! So you have to turn off the canon profile which then adds to some pretty heavy vingetting and then cropping to not have a meh to bad photo. How will canon lenses and their profiles work with the Aquista 135d? Would be great to know. Just because there will be caveats, that doesn't mean we don't want reviews. For example - the 15-30 STM lens should work as a 130 degree lens at 28-30 (sometimes on Nauticam options) - I would love to see examples of that. Can we see that same option for the Aquista 135d? If so, that would help me want the lens. If the 24-105 STM also worked well but one needed to zoom a bit and doesn't get past 50, I'd just love to see what it looks like behind these dry (or wet) optics. Its not like we don't have tons of caveats and work arounds for all of our time underwater to deal with the challenging lighting conditions.

I think that is the biggest hurdle in the dry and wet contact options (from both Nauticam and now Marelux). I would LOVE to see a variety of canon options and field reviews of those lenses. Or even just field reviews of 1 or 2 lenses (like the 15-30 at 30 on the fullframe) Nauticam just pushes most lenses up to the WACP-2 if shooting full frame. So while Sony and the 28-60 is the go too - us Canon shooters are left with a few meh options and no good field reviews for many options. Please no EF lenses....

I reached out to UWTech and they responded that they have not tested their triggers with the Maxi at this time (and they were nice and prompt in the reply!)

Hi @Pavel Kolpakov , Will these work with the Retra Maxi with the same functionality of the other Retra strobes? I was going to email, but realized that multiple people probably have the same question. Thank you.

Phil can correct me, but if shooting Sony the 17mm Marelux to N100 Nauticam adapter (MX-31704) should allow all of the N100 ports to fit with the ~13mm shorter extension that Marelux uses. It will still take a little math to get it right across the port range as that is the equivalent of the 30mm extension on Nauticam, not just straight housing. If your Ports are N120, then there is a conversion ring for that as well, but it is 20mm so doesn't account for the 2-3 mm differences between the two housing brands - not sure that matters.

@Phil Rudin Any update on experiences with this optic? Thank you.

I use the Marelux Ninja V housing. It is just fine. My complaints are the Ninja is great but really for video only. If you can't touch the screen it is not great for stills as Canon (in stills) shows a bunch of the information under the screen parts that Ninja shows other information. You have to dig through the menu, as far as I can tell, to swap it between the HDMI clean out and the mirror, which is needed for hybrid shooting. So I would buy it again to record video and would get a different monitor/ housing if I was shooting stills. The housing is great, no issues (if not a big large... since the Ninja is a bit large). So video and want ProRes 422 or Raw? Awesome. Hybrid within one dive? Hmmm... Stills? I would look elsewhere (including Marelux's other monitor).

Also looks like it is available for Pre-order including the dive case. Unfortunately it looks like the dive case has the same mediocre button on top, even though they made the one on the camera better. This top button has been the one reason I have looked at other housings, but never been willing to pay 20x for a housing simply for a better 'shutter' button. Hopefully the new one still works better! It is unclear from the post referenced above whether the user was just using the camera without housing to 20m (and liked the buttons) or was using it in the housing. Eagerly awaiting more underwater imagery from this camera.

I went down the RAW rabbit hole with Canon for low light and can not get anywhere near the quality of video that the CLOG delivers. Often note mentioned, but if shooting challenging lighting, sometimes RAW is a real beast to make look good and beyond me in Post. Intrigued by Nikon NR being better. Or Sony. Also very intrigued by the C50 but on the fence whether the C400 or C80, with the triple ISO is really the advance compared the R5C, which is a great camera. Few housings for the C400 or C80 though.

While I have no experience with it, the recent release of a diversity of cameras that can shoot full frame open gate (3:2 form) has made me wonder how this would work underwater. It would seem that by extending the corners (aka shooting in 3:2 vs 16:9) it would really make corner sharpness much worse and we would have to shoot at smaller apertures and further push our lenses and cameras (and ISO). I'd love to hear people's experiences with this in real life, or thoughts.

The 15-30 has a MFD of 0.28 and works well behind a dome so it should be good on the 180 or 230mm. No idea on the 140mm. I'll bet its front element is too large to work well with the WWL-1B, that later of which is really designed for small front elements. This may be a nice lens for video (behind a dome and for certain shots), or stills if it works with an wet-mate or dry-mate adapter (WACP,WWL-1, Marelux Aquista) for a solution (with limited to 28mm and greater zoom...) I'm looking forward to seeing some real world examples underwater!