ianmarsh

Looking for one of these older units. Let me know. 

(Not the #11075)

Thanks

Ian

57 minutes ago, Isaac Szabo said:

 

I have read somewhere that the 13mm optical design was based on the 16mm, and yes, the diagrams do look very similar. I have my doubts that they are the same excepting the front element, but perhaps I should purchase and disassemble a 16mm and try to find out. 

Perhaps you should....

When you think about it, the inner elements simply look out the front glass, which if water corrected, would "see" the same thing as it was seeing through the air corrected front element. Maybe that is simplistic thinking.

Both the AF-D and Manual focus 16mm's are selling for under $300 usd... boy, that would make a difference. Although if it worked, we would probably soon be paying $2000 for a used 16mm...

Another thought I have had is how different is the optical formula between the Nikonos 13 RS and the Nikon 16mm AF-D lens or even the 16mm manual focus ai-s lens ? The schematics look very similar and maybe(?) only the front element is different? Air vs water contact?

These lenses all use the same rear element filter holder, so dimensionally may be close.

All three lenses were manufactured at the same time, and I wonder if there were any common glass parts.

35 minutes ago, Isaac Szabo said:

I can do my conversion with just the individual glass elements. 

 

It is Andrej Belic of NJU System who has had replacement front elements made. The first 13mm I bought to experiment on had a scratched front element. Several years ago I contacted Andrej about the cost of sending me a replacement and was quoted 1000 € plus shipping. 

 

I wouldn't necessarily say it was serendipitous that the 13mm elements fit inside the Sony 50mm. I put a lot of thought/research into which donor lens to use, comparing optical and mechanical designs, etc. I selected the 50mm because I determined that it was the best candidate.

Yes, It was Andrej that offered that service, come to think of it.

It still blows my mind that you are able to do this with just the glass... how on earth you honed in on the Sony 50mm is beyond me. How fortunate that one of their cheapest lenses happened to be the one. We usually don't get those kind of breaks in this business.

Well done,  Isaac.

ian

5 hours ago, Alex_Mustard said:

I think that the hard part for these small lens producers is making the lens AF and adjust the aperture electronically. Most of these specialist lenses are mechanical.

 

Further up this thread you can see the mechanical 13mm fisheye made by Nauticam. But it is manual focus and mechanical aperture, for the same reason. 

 

Alex

Alex, I assume the Nauticam mechanical version uses "new" elements rather than recycled RS 13 elements? If so then someone is already making them, and could Isaac put them into Sony 50mm lens bodies?

5 hours ago, Isaac Szabo said:

 

I believe a little over 2000 were produced, though that was 30 years ago, so who knows how many are still around.

 

All I really need for my conversion is the glass itself, and since the optical formula is known, I do wonder about the possibility of having an optics company reproduce the elements. I just worry the cost might be too high, but I don't know for sure.

I have had the same thoughts about a modern re-creation. If it only comes down to the glass, and the optical formula is known, that should be doable. I believe Seacam has contracted someone to make the front port glass for those lenses that are scratched.

I would also note that at this point, the external part of the RS lens is immaterial. The only part that matters is the glass. When I bought mine from Japan in 2015, it was described as having some "balsam separation" and  "haziness of the rear element", which did not affect the image. The "haziness" was a crack in the inner of the two elements, probably from being dropped. Fortunately for me I was able to source the very last rear element assembly from Rene Aumann, and install it myself.

Best 100 euros I ever spent....

Bottom line; if the glass isn't perfect, Do Not Buy.

4 hours ago, ChipBPhoto said:

Yep - seen the same.  A clean one was on eBay for $2K last week.  It sold and the only one I can find now is $3K.  Too bad…

I saw that lens... it was in nice shape. I put in an offer on it and within 5 minutes of it being posted with offer pending, it got snapped up on the Buy It Now. I'm sure someone on WaterPixels is the new proud owner.

21 hours ago, Kraken de Mabini said:

Yes, Howard Hall's book is good, but almost half is about film technique. Can you recall when we were limited to 36 film shots per dive, with no way to know if the photo was any good?  Plus having to change film rolls, and then wait until the film was developed? Then uw photography became digital at the beginning of the 21st Century, as did the books about underwater photography. 

The improvement in photo performance and ease has been so marked that I was able to exclude books about film photography with no regret, and to list only those books dealing with digital photography.  

 

  

Indeed. Agree.

I recall going to Sipadan in 1992 with 36 rolls of Fuji Velvia 100, spending 10 days there and not having a clue if I had a single keeper. Also, the learning curve was completely flat. You could continue to make the same mistake over and over, with no feedback. Three weeks later, when the film returned from processing, you could toss 90% of the slides into the bin.

Digital photography is the single most important advance in UW imaging.

The reference to Howard Hall was more of a shout-out to one of the greatest UW image makers, who is still active, all these years later...

Ian

On 1/23/2024 at 9:19 AM, Will Greene said:

Ian, thanks for the kind introduction!

 

Sadly, our oceans are changing faster than we can document and understand effectively... Even being in my 20s, the changes I've seen in the Caribbean just during my lifetime of diving have been dramatic and truly scary. The research I do is mainly in The Bahamas and the changes to the benthic community even in just the past 5 years have been crazy, due mainly to the combined influences of Stony Coral Tissue Loss Disease (which some of you may be familiar with, others not - it's a disease affecting about half of Caribbean hard coral species with extremely high mortality rates, threatening to cause local and/or total extinctions of corals like pillar and some brain corals) and coral bleaching.

 

This past summer, the warming influence of climate change combined with the effects of El Niño to produce extremely warm ocean temperatures in Florida and across the Caribbean, and the bleaching we observed this August/September in  The Bahamas was unlike anything we've seen. 

 

My main research involves using underwater photogrammetry to create "digital replicas" of sections of reef that we monitor repeatedly to track changes happening over time. Attached is a side-by-side example of some of the time-series data we collect (demonstrating severe bleaching) and a photo from the Exumas showing some extensive bleaching on a very high coral-cover reef. Across much of The Bahamas and Florida, the ocean heatwave killed a gigantic portion (90-100% in many areas) of Staghorn coral in particular- formerly one of the most important coral species for adding structural complexity and habitat quality for shallow reefs in The Caribbean that is now critically endangered and on the cusp of extinction in many regions. 

 

The one other thing I'll say is that most of us working in the coral research world haven't given up hope - there are good people working on thermal tolerance in corals and many restoration projects working to nurse dead and dying reefs back to health. More broadly, those of us who have seen the changes happening under the waves need to use our voices to speak up and advocate for policy change that protects our oceans and our planet. Climate change may be the biggest direct threat, but is just one of many including overfishing, pollution, disease, dredging, etc. The majority of people aren't able to see under the ocean, but as underwater photographers, we have a unique role in sharing what we witness underwater with the world to help bring awareness and attention. Keep fighting the good fight!

 

 

 

 

Hey Will... welcome aboard. Good to see you here!

I spotted this on the BBC website... interesting stuff

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240123-the-race-to-build-climate-resilient-coral-reefs

Hey Pavel!

Great to see you here. Your expertise is greatly appreciated.

Ian

8 hours ago, DocTock said:

This is exactly my reasoning for NOT making the switch to mirrorless yet.

I have an Andrej converted RS13 and shoot Nikon D850.
It makes no sense personally for me to go to a system that would have me lose my favorite WA lens.
I was a super late adopter of D850, shooting D800 waiting for the D850 replacement than never came.
The abilities of the camera far exceed my abilities as a photographer so no personal need to chase technology.

 

Right on! It's good to know one is not alone.... group hug!

10 hours ago, TimG said:

I have a ULCS arm loaded with Stix floats horizontally across my housing. My dive computer straps on to that. It's very easy to read by just glancing up. And then if I'm diving without a camera - very rare! - I can just unbuckle the computer and wear it on my wrist.

 

Sorry, traveling for work so can't post a photo. 

 

 

Like Tim, I strap my ancient Suunto Vyper to the float on my strobe arm. It is always in my field of view, and is about the size of the speedometer in my truck.

I wear a second Suunto D6 on my forearm. I wear this throughout the day of diving so I can track surface intervals etc. Agreement between the two instruments is remarkably comparable, although I use the D6 as the "Official" recording, since it is much newer.

Both computers are linked to the same Suunto Transmitter on my regs first stage.

The last piece of paranoia is a SPG on a short hose which is bungeed to my backplate. I can retrieve this if needed, and is just long enough.

While I have never had a computer fail, I have had a number of dives aborted due to a glitchy transmitter. The SPG is good insurance at no real cost.

I will throw in one from the film era. This one kicked off the madness for me:

Howard Hall's guide to Successful Underwater Photography, First printing 1982.

Somewhat dated, but the basics are all there.

Hard to argue with Howard.

9 hours ago, Barmaglot said:

Does it have to be this super expensive though? I mean, yeah, you could drop $$$$$ on WACPs, EMWLs, etc, but I'm looking at upgrading from my Sony a6300, which I got back in 2017, and a slightly used a6700 body is going to cost me somewhere around $1000-1100, while a new SeaFrogs housing, once it comes out, if it's priced identical to their a6600 housing, will be slightly under $700 with a basic flat port for use with my 16-50mm and UWL-09F wet lens. Add $150 for a long port and zoom gear for my 90mm macro (also fits Canon 60mm which I use for blackwater), and I'm still under $2k. I can keep the UWT trigger and Leak Sentinel from my current setup, and possibly get a second-hand Tokina 10-17mm, 3D print a port adapter and zoom gear for my 4" mini-dome, and get extra wide-angle capability. Yeah, it wouldn't be the absolute best in terms of either IQ or ergonomics, but it gets most of the way there for a fraction of the cost.

Barmaglot, you are absolutely correct... 

I am currently sitting on a camera system that is completely serviceable, and until recently would be considered state of the art. The drive towards new technology, in this case mirrorless, always makes the grass look greener. But really, in my hands, will probably make no difference, at least none that I can perceive underwater. It is a different argument for Alex, and other shooters at his level.

With the amount of time I spend underwater, that will never be me.

To stay with my current gear will cost me nothing...

As Sheryl Crow once said, "It's not having what you want, It's wanting what you've got"

I asked a mountain biking buddy if he thought it was an expensive hobby. He said yes, with state of the art mountain bikes reaching upwards of 10K cdn. A new chain can cost $100.

I just laughed....

He has no idea. 

2 hours ago, Barmaglot said:

In addition to autofocus improvements, there's also battery life. Early A7 cameras used NP-FW50 batteries; starting from A7 III they switched to NP-FZ100, which took their battery life from anemic to excellent.

 

If the budget is limited, are you dead-set on full-frame? A6700 is reported to have excellent performance.

Thanks for the reply... I have to admit, it's a first world problem. I have the A7 and housing, as well as a D850/Nauticam, with a Nikonos 13mm. The recent talk about converting the 13mm to mirrorless got me thinking. 

At the end of the day, I think a major upgrade to modern Sony, and new housing, along with lens conversion really starts to add up. I guess if I was making a living at it, it would be a no brainer. 

...And then there is the Auditor General standing behind me when I'm cruising the Classified Forum.

Hey guys, thanks for the input. Fantastic replies!

I once asked a similar question of Alex Mustard, "Should I move from the D2X to the D800". I am pretty sure I already knew the answer.

Same thing here. Time and technology marches on....

Since I retired, equipment changes cast a much bigger shadow. This game is not for the faint of wallet.

Ian

Hello all.... Looking for practical advice from people using this camera system.

I am an original Sony A7 and A7R user in a Nauticam Housing.

Given the premise that I would ONLY use this camera underwater for STILLS ONLY,are there any COMPELLING arguments to upgrade the camera to A7ii, A7ii or A7iv, and if so, where is the sweet spot. Strobes are Retra Pro.

Please weigh in and thanks for the advice.

Ian

Thanks Alex... very interesting!

Does the Nauticam lens use a modified Nikonos 13mm or is it a totally new construct?

Are there plans to release it into the wild?

Ian

Awesome! Thanks Alex.

I have emailed Isaac with the question of whether previously modded lenses can be re-modded to work with the mirrorless set up. Maybe Isaac could comment on this?

Alex: are you free to discuss the Nauticam mechanical product, or would they sent Seal Team 6 after you?

ian

Another thought.

Perhaps this would be a good place for original authors to transplant their own threads/content from that "other website" on this topic (Nikonos RS 13mm) to form an archive on WaterPixels. There has certainly been lots of discussion over the years and it would be a shame to lose it.

Or... maybe start a new thread for Archive material and keep this one fresh for discussion on adaptation to mirrorless?

ian

Excellent work, Alex and Matt!

I was gobsmacked (as the English say) regarding the developments around the Nikonos 13mm, and have started a discussion page on the Photography Gear and Technique thread.

I can't wait to sit down and work through the rest of your new content.

Ian

One thing is close to my heart: Nikon Water contact optics. The two most important of these are:

Nikonos 15mm mechanical - can still be used with Sony Mirrorless and a Nauticam port adapter

Nikonos RS 13mm autofocus

As many old timers know, the Nikonos RS 13mm lens died a slow death at the end of the film era, but due to work by dedicated individuals (Andrej Belic, Borut Furlan/Seacam), was brought back to life in the 2010's. The lens was state of the art at the time, and in many ways, still is. Conversion was carried out to adapt the lens to work with Nikon DSLRs, as well as (independently) Red Cinema cameras in Gates housings. This required both electronic conversion for the autofocus and mechanical conversion to mate the lens to the camera/housing system. Andrej and Borut came up with different ways of accomplishing this magic, but both systems work very well. The only hitch is with the aperture linkage, which is mechanical. This does not convert 1:1 with Nikon DSLRs and requires a fudge-factor to set and read aperture values.

As Nauticam introduced its line of water contact optics, the status of this lens came into question, and went from being the only water contact game in town, to a player in an expanding field. It's key feature remains it's very small footprint, which the Nauticam products do not possess.

With the advent of mirrorless cameras, the lens is again threatened with extinction, as the autofocus is based on the Nikon D lenses, which use mechanical autofocus.

I currently own a Nikonos RS 13mm which was modified by Seacam in 2015. I used it with a Seacam housing originally, but never really liked the housing ergonomics. I switched back to Nauticam with a D800, and then a D850 housing and Seacam/Nauticam port adapter (no longer available) which has worked brilliantly.

I have been thinking about a switch to mirrorless, but to be honest, the reason I haven’t is this lens.

 At this point, I would like to invite discussion on this lens, and specifically the recent development by Isaac Szabo (www.isaacszabo.com) of converting this lens to work with Sony Mirrorless. This was recently highlighted by Alex Mustard and Matt Sullivan on their new Youtube platform, the Underwater Photography Show.

I am soooo excited about this development!!!

Alex? Matt? Isaac? Care to get this party started?
 

Reef and Shore Fishes of the South Pacific (Randall JE)

Fishes of the Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea (Randall JE, Allen GR, Steene RC)

Coastal Fishes of Oman (Randall JE)

Shore Fishes of Hawai'i (Randall JE)

Reef Fishes of the East Indies, Vol 1-3 (Allen GR, Erdmann MV)

Micronesian Reef Fishes (Myers RF)

ATOMIC ST-1 Stainless steel regulator. Top of the line non-titanium regulator. Includes DIN fitting and DIN to yoke adaptor, new in package.

New in 2018.  Was only used for one liveaboard trip prior to Covid and not used since. Performs as you would expect for gear of this quality.

You won't be disappointed with either the condition or performance.

In perfect condition.

Retails in the US for about $1400USD, will sell this with Suunto pressure sensor, LP hose and Scubapro regulator case for $900 USD plus shipping.

PayPal if international. E transfer or PayPal in Canada.