dhaas

PS - These days my remaining dive buddies who shoot a mirrorless ILC camera all shoot FULL FRAME (!!!!!!) Mainly because they want to and can afford to no matter what. I only recently went to an APS-C camera after 9 years shooting nothing underwater but 1" sensor compacts. The reasons? Battery life and CMOS DPAF incredible AF over what I'd been shooting with. Also the improved high ISO capability whether shooting ambient light or any flash or fixed lighting. I'm also testing myself against high f-stops so prevalent in most US shooting. Surface photography, especially creative work is 100% the opposite with isolated focus, bokeh, etc. The only place that's seen in UW imaging is macro and also Super macro. But still......We seem obsessed with technical everything in focus more than the "feeling" of images. It kind of bums me out....... One area isolationism is evident are contests....There's many images that make one stop, look, look again and those keep me even interested in hauling any camera set up on trips and underwater. The "thrill of the hunt" as the saying goes...... Stay safe, dive often and have fun! David Haas

Friends, I've only been an APS-C camera owner and shooter over 25 years of digital. I truly have never understood all the obsession with corner sharpness. If that's what you're looking at as THE important element in your image I just don't get it, but that's just me..... I head to Red Sea in a couple days and like last October on a Cozumel trip will attempt to "shoot different". I take a new lowly APS-C 24 megapixel Canon R100 camera, the unbelievably sharp Canon RF-S 10-18mm IS STM lens and compact Ikelite DLM housing with 6" dome port. I have a pair of 2,000 lumen 120 degree beam lights plus a smaller slightly narrower 1000 lumen light especially for inside the Thistlegorm and other wrecks to play with. That's it...... I can borrow a small Inon S220 or Sea and Sea YS-03 flash from some buddies on board our liveaboard if I care to shoot something with flash, or maybe not....... I'm becoming bored with what I've coined as: "SS" for "Shampoo Shooting" as in "lather, rinse, repeat". Been there done that for too long. I don't mean to sound dismissive, again it's just where I'm at after decades of taking pictures. I won't be obsessing over corner sharpness as I also crop every photo I take (well, usually) and fine tune images to my liking. I realize most of this forum has high end talented shooters desiring top technical quality and have the means to buy top shelf gear, etc. Most (all?) are not making a living from photography as hobbyists not selling or licensing photos. Many win contests showcasing their photos and that's great ! Just thought I'd share different thoughts versus debating age old technical discussions that seem to dominate the forums (sometimes, not always......) Keep diving, shooting and more importantly have fun :) David Haas Some pics shot with everything from 1" sensor compacts to APS-C dSLR even with lowly "kit" lenses......

PS - On the Canon R50 there IS a digital teleconverter built in 2.0X and 4.0X. I've played with a shot or two but not to any extent. That could be a feature to try with the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens at 45mm focal length. I'd think LESS is MORE as in don't be too greedy trying to tele-convert too far out......Maybe kick in the 2.0X and see how it look on the proposed Jawfish pics...... DH

When I used compacts notably the Canon G7X II and especially the Sony RX100 VII one feature on these fixed lens 1" sensor cameras was their built in digital teleconverters. The Canon G7X II allowed me to get a sequence of a humpback whale jumping at the max tele-converted range but the pics are only really usable for social media / online. By contrast the small Sony RX100 VII has a built in teleconverter that doubles the optical 200mm long focal length to 400mm. It worked great partly owing to the AF in the Sony RX100 VII (being the same as the Sony A9 dSLR. I think.) It had limitations only applicable on JPEG format and Single Shot. But still in Africa I made pics I was really happy even making some large prints (13" X 19") As to the Canon R50 and Nauticam NA-R50 housing perhaps an internal focus lens choice to limit any length change with a teleconverter like the fixed RF 50mm f1.8 MIGHT give Gary an option for the type of shots he's looking to capture. Personally I'd just shoot the spec'd 18-45mm IS STM kit lens at 45mm. Don't shoot at crazy high ISOs and f-stops (maybe ISO 400 and f11 max) and simply crop and edit utilizing any up-rez and sharpening program. That's just me being the world's laziest photographer :) In today's world it's 50% capture the file and 50% editing no matter how simple you choose to do so. Nauticam's decision for the nice low price point Canon R50 using a fixed port was likely a trade off aimed at the typical mirrorless shooter wanting a small simple to use housing that could still use Nauticam's very capable wet lenses. David Haas

My only comment to this is will it apply to selfie stick GoPro / DJI Osmo / Insta36 / iPhone and Android shooters too? What about once a year divers who barely "survive the dive" as I call it? AOW rating means nothing in today's world.....I tink I read somewhere 50 dives is a bare minimum people get their weighting and buoyancy anywhere approaching horizontal and balanced. I think it's window dressing but maybe it'll at least divers will think: "Some old guy told me if you can't feel your feet they're likely destroying the reef below !!!!!! !" Reefs need protection and publicizing this is a good thing overall :) DH

Back from Florida and being almost exclusively a wide angle shooter I tried 3 different wet lenses. Day one I used a friend's Inon UWL-H100 (designed for 28mm focal length, close the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens through the Nauticam NA-50 flat port. I also shot another friend's Nauticacm WWL-B lens. As expected with great results. Last day I used my El Cheapo' Sea and Sea .67X wide angle wet lens. Like the Inon UWL-H100 in the Bayonet to 67mm adapter those less expensive wide angle optics vignette a bit and aren't as wide as a Nauticam WWL-B / WWL-C / WWL-1. I let another friend shoot his WWL-1 with buoyancy "donut" and bayonet mount on his. Mated perfectly on the Nauticam NA-R50. He rwas impressed with the Nauticam NA-R50 and I had the * button set up to BBF for him too :) All in all the Nauticam NA-R50 is an impressive camera and package in a small size. The Canon R50 pop up flash synchs to 1/250 and the LCD screen is bright and easy to maneuver around. The 18-45mm Canon lens designed to be used exclusively with the housing delivers fine results. It's a great choice if you'll never go full frame. I also got some great shots of Phil Rudin, my dear friend and fellow UW shooter since 1990 !!! Using his Marelux rigs he's a master of his gear. He let me try an Apollo S strobe as I only shot one strobe. The first few days a single Inon S220 and the last day the Marelux Apollo S. I have to say if "Buy Once, Cry Once" the Apollo S price of $840.00 is in your budget get one !!!! It does Manual, Manual Rapid mode flash (MTL I think it's called) super accurate TTL from my Canon R50's pop up flash, HSS (High Speed Synch if your cameras does that) and more........It only requires two Lion 18650 batteries lightening your travel load for hundreds of flashes per charged set. Hope this helps potential UW shooters in the price point of a fabulous housing / camera combination :) David Haas

There's a feature built into the Canon R50 I have yet to play with on mine in the Nauticam NA-R50 housing. In Canon RED Menu tab there is Digital TeleConvertor feature of 2.0X and 4.0X. I have barely played with the 2.0X on the 45mm zoom end of the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens. I'm pretty sure this only works in JPEG mode (have to find details in the 814 page Canon R50 PDF manual, LOL) to be sure. Still, if shooting through the NA-R50 flat port it could be what I call a "poor man's semi-close up" lens option. With today's software including sharpening, uprezzing, backscatter removal, etc. I contend shooting any photo is 50% capture / 50% editing to make photos shine 🙂 I'll try it while diving some Florida freshwater springs next week 🙂 David Haas

Owned the Canon R50 for a few months and still exploring if one rear button can be mapped to back button focus start. Personally I don't find the "feel" of the Nauticam NA-R50 housing trigger and spring tension difficult to 1/2 lock and then shoot. Flash synch speed is 1/250. Nice........ As to having a port for vacuum AND another to rig a data transfer / charging USB-C not likely.... Only one M16 port and my housing has the vacuum system in it. Works fine and popping the camera in an out is a breeze anyway. The housing fixed port hasn't been limiting since numerous macro 67mm choices out via Nauticam's 67mm / bayonet t adapter. For wide shooting a WWL-B, WWL-C lenses (likely a WWL-1 too just not sure of any fdifferences in corners, vignetting, etc. Possibly less expensive wet WA choices with less wide to zoom in full focus coverage, some vignetting, etc. depending what lens you try with the 67mm / bayonet ring. I'm realistic and don't expect WWL-B or WWL-C total quality in this silly experiments. I'll try various ideas mid-April in North Florida's clear freshwater springs and share some pics 🙂 David Haas

As I said if it works for you that's fine. The focus stacking is one I hadn't thought of but might make sense in today's modern cameras with a sessile type creature. Hmmmmm........ DH

I have only used Sony RX100 VII compact but common complaints I hear from Sony Axxx models underwater are in no particular order: * Slower than other camera brands top synch speed with flash * Flash triggers "problematic" * On built in pop up flash if your model has one there's no small tripping flashes versus TTL only. Nikon cameras have a 1/128 on some built in pop up flashes and Canon's do 1/3 - 2/3 - FULL increments plus TTL on their built in pop up flashes. Being a Canon fan I've never had anywhere near the flash problems I read about over decades shooting manual or TTL whether in an Ikelite, Fantasea, Nauticam or whatever housing. I usually had direct hot shoe connection (Ikelite corded ) or took any flash trigger out of the equation using a camera's built in flash which simply works for manual or TTL on Nikon or Canon. The latest obsession seems to be shooting in low or high speed multi-frame flash, even with macro nudibranch shooters (WTH ?????) I can see maybe low speed continuous but seriously, as a "standard" way of shooting? I guess I don't feel the need to have that, but hey, if it's your jam go for it !!!!! Just another nobody's opinion 🙂 David Haas PS - I'll be trying an Ikelite Canon TT5 Optical TTL trigger in a different camera and housing in a couple weeks and will report on results 🙂 I'll use Ikelite DS160 strobes (for years I shot back to the DS125.) Using one or two wide beam strobes despite the size always delivered nice warm images and recycle time was never an issue. Stay tuned!

Very sharp pics! Well done :)

All these lenses had Type 2 rear mounts. Not sure if the Type 1 Inon would make the rear element too close to the housings front port glass as water in between is required. Results in no particular order shooting dry. Full wide, then zooming a tad to eliminate vignetting, then zoom in to 45mm on my Canon 18-45mm lens all with WA lens attached. Both the UWL-H100 and UWL-100 vignette require zoom but not much to eliminate vignetting. Corners not impressive even at f8 on any of them. This isn't surprising as these lenses were designed for compact cameras with smaller sensors up to the 1" popular models. The Fantasea / AOI UWL-09f lens barrel is too fat to fit in the Nauticam 67mm / bayonet adapter on my fixed port kit lens housing. So that's out but for those wiht interchangeable port housings and a skinny 67mm threaded from it might work. Surprisingly the cheap Sea and Sea .6X lens almost looks the same center sharpness but again corners are crap no matter what f-stop 😞 Your results may vary but I'm inclined to not use any of these choices. The Nauticam WWL-B or WWL-C seem to be the best for overall wide to medium kit lens shooting and the price justifies their performance! DH

Both my friend's UWL-100 and UWL-H100 have no additional dome. The UWL-100 front element is larger diameter front element yet the stubbier UWL-H100 feels heavier (!!!!!!) The UWL-H100 rear element also doesn't end up as flush with the Nauticam bayonet / 67mm adapter. Either Inon UWL-100 / H100 lens is shorter that a WWL choice. How much vignetting at 18mm wide focal length of my Canon kit lens is the first consideration plus how much one needs to zoom in to eliminate it. I've always cropped any pic anyway and mild dark corners I really don't care to waste precious underwater time zooming to some exact focal length. Just crop it....... The crap old Sea and Sea .6X lens actually had very minimal vignetting but the corners shooting close in my last pool dive weren't anything to rave about. But it did work and was much lighter and smaller than my buddy's WWL-B. I have a sneaking feeling after all this screwing around I'll just shoot my kit lens through the port and and add whatever cheap WA lens is available. Mainly because I'm weight OCD about packing and diving. We'll see! DH

I just received from a friend the following lenses to test on my Nauticam NA-R50 housing bayonet to 67mm adapter: * Inon UWL-100 (designed for 35mm compact focal length) * Inon UWL-H100 (designed for 28mm compact focal length) * Fantasea / AOI UWL-09f (polycarbonate dome designed for 28mm focal length) My Canon R50 camera is a 24MP APS-C sensor and the Nauticam NA-R50 is a fixed port for using only the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM kit lens. Like my buddy Nemrod I'm looking for possible medium wider solutions if not using the very wonderful bit large and heavier (and $$$$) Nauticam WWL-B or WWL-C. Doing some dry tests today with all 3 then will try to get into a pool soon. If none are worth the size / weight / travel hassle of just shooting my housing with the built in flat port won't be as disappointing as many surmise it will be. Stay tuned! David Haas

No longer available..........

MINT (used once by previous owner, not a mark on it) Nauticam CMC-1 Super Macro lens with 67mm threads. Includes original box, neoprene such, front and rear Nauticam rubber caps, 67mm threaded adapter. $350.00 shipped US domestic. Payment via Zelle or PayPal F&F. No returns. Email directly: [email protected] Call / text EST 330-329-5981

I'm with Chris as coming to me tomorrow is my "new to me" Nauticam NA-R50 housing for the low price but powerful Canon R50 camera. I realize I will be relegated to the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM "kit" lens in the fixed Nauticam bayonet port. Other than the 28-70mm approximate focal length of the "kit" lens options are super macro lenses via a 67mm bayonet adapter and wide angle WWL-B or WWL-C. Have a few other ideas I'll try out but for my budget the Canon R50 at 24MP, the latest Canon DPAF and even 6K downsampled 4K video I'll be fine with the limitations. Size both for travel and diving is #1 and I personally can't justify full frame in today's digital shooting world, but that's just me. While I enjoyed the 9 years of ringing every bit of capability out of my Canon G7X II compact 1" sensor camera I'm looking forward to the APS-C return 🙂 Already practicing with the Canon R50 camera in my office and the daily visitors in my back yard 🙂 DH PS - IN the deal I found I'll already have a second Canon R50 with the RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens required in the Nauticam NA-R50 housing so I'll be set for awhile !!!!!

Dave and Tim, Yeah, he has access to that lens, just not sure on a non-diving trip if he really wants to haul it all for what will likely be a brief few in water encounters. Thanks! DH

OK, and my original post meant to say I WASN'T looking for a debate on sharpness, typing too fast LOL.... I did recall about the screw type AF of the Tokina 10-17mm. On APS-C it was very popular and are pretty cheap these days. I wonder if the Nikon 16mm or Nikon 10.5mm Fisheye works on the FTZ adapter? Hmmmm........ My friend's looking for a possible alternative on his Galapagos eco-trip. It won't have any scuba, just some snorkeling with iguanas and sea lions. I suggested instead of hauling his whole housing for limited water opportunities he get one of those EWA bags, slap a small fisheye in it and shoot away....... I know, I know......Not the most elegant idea but it could lighten his load and allow him to make "water theme" images on those excursions. Thanks for the replies Dave and Issac...... DH

I'm looking for a debate on sharpness, etc. of the long heralded Tokina 10-17mm APS-C Fisheye lens. I and my fired realize there's other choices for Nikon FX mirrorless bodies. My friend is shooting a Nikon Z6 and simply wants to know it it would work with his Nikon FTZ adapter. He has access to a Tokina 10-17mm APS-C lens for a project. He currently uses a FTZ adapter on various FX Nikkor lenses with zero problems. His Nikon Z6 can change to DX so he just wonders if the Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye lens autofocuses and aperture can be adjusted via the camera. Hopefully any Nikon mirrorless shooters here might know :) Any insights appreciated! David Haas

Being a long time Canon APS-C shooter (before using only a 1" sensor compact G7X II the last 9 years) I'll add another option for wide angle shooting. The very capable and underrated Canon RF-S 10-18mm lens isn't fast but focuses astoundingly well! Being an RF-S lens and a rectilinear versus the long legacy Tokina 10-17mm it is a worthy option. Ikelite posted a recent video and article where a capable shooter put the Canon RF-S 10-18mm and Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye through the paces side by side. https://www.ikelite.com/blogs/reviews/wide-angle-showdown-canon-rf-s-10-18mm-vs-tokina-10-17mm-underwater I actually just pulled the trigger on my own Christmas present, a Canon R50 and 18-45mm RF-S "kit" lens from Canon Refurbished (same 1 year warranty as a "new" one.) I'll test it with my buddy's Canon RF-S 10-18mm in a pool then likely buy one for my own wide angle shooting. Being more a wide angle / medium fish shooter these days means no need for a dedicated macro lens for me. It also keeps me to one dome port making travel easier. Since you have a Marelux housing for your Canon R7 already I'd investigate fixed DRY wide angle lens and dome. The WWL-B / WWL-C or whatever combination can work very well also but will have some curvature. My friend Phil Rudin and I had a long discussion a few months back on dry lens / dome choices versus Nauticam sharp wet lenses. There's advantages to zooming a fairly low cost kit lens (Canon, Sony or Nikon, etc.) in your housing with a full focus WET lens. But there's also a movement I think (Phil can chime in) to fixed lens in a dome of various sizes like the popular Laowa 10mm Rectilinear lens which is an incredible value too. I occasionally go back 20 years on my computer(s) and am happy with many wide angle pictures I made with fixed Canon and sigma 15mm lenses, Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye (I never owed a Full Fram dSLR) plus rectilinear Canon 10-22mm or Canon 10-18mm EF-S lenses. I even shot 90% with a smaller 6" Ikelite dome port (!!!!) In summary I'd advise you check out the low cost Canon RF-S 10-18mm lens as a wide angle shooting option 🙂 David Haas Here's another friend's Nauticam NA-R50 for the Canon R50. It is a fixed port housing and a he bought a WWL-B lens I played with last summer. Quite capable even with my silly small strobe mounted in the cold shoe and I'm not sure which housing I may go with yet for my own Canon R50 as the only other choice is a Seafrogs housing. But my other Canon R50 friend has used his on 3 trips so far and it's kept his Canon R50 high and dry PLUS has interchangeable dome and flat ports available.

I'd like to know aspect ratio with the lens mounted as Davide asked. I set my Osmo 5 currently for WIDE as I don't care for fisheye curvature. My DJI Osmo Action 5 PRO will see some pool testing before my next trip. My understanding of the Inon UWL-03 lens is it sharpens the corners while widening the view, correct? I also assume I'd need whatever adapter clamps on or around the DJI clear housing. I'll use the housing while diving or snorkeling with the Osmo 5 all the time. I'm not going to chance just the camera even though it's rated to 65' depth. Thanks in advance! David Haas

Gary, Long time back in the "F" (FILM" days! LOL..... As to the Canon R50 look for a post I believe I shared dialing in one of my travel guest's Nauticam R50 rig he bought. It is very compact and usable !!!! Yes, one control dial to adjust shutter speed or aperture but the Canon R50 APS-C camera is 24MP and has incredible AF, a burst mode not even found on more expensive APS-C models and great 4K video full sensor. It's light and compact for travel too. While as posted I use a 1" sensor compact the Canon R50 interchangeable lens, Nauticam wet lens add ons is a big jump in my book and should be looked at. Add smaller strobes for Manual or TTL and you'd likely find a significant size and cost savings while still getting great pics. David Haas

Glad to hear Tim is more discerning as to shots per dive! I do still wonder how many serious hobbyists cull their treasure trove of images after a trip (????????) The numbers are likely staggering and we all delude ourselves; "I'll go back and try and see what I can do to that photo". One old article of a conversation with a National Geographic photographer was how many shots they'd shoot to have an editor select the final 5-6-13 or so shots that would illustrate an article. I think it was Joel Sartore who's work I love! His Photo Ark Photo project documenting the last of certain species (too many left in a zoo )draw you in to the essence of all manner of creatures of our planet. I know some criticize his approach but I think the images are stunning..... His conversation with an editor he asked if she thought he shot "fat". Meaning over and over and over of a subject trying to get that one "perfect" shot (whatever that is.) She told him no, you're in the same vein of 6,000 - 10,000 frames PER TRIP. Nat Geo would many times allow a photographer to go back to whatever destination / assignment if they felt he / she didn't "get it". That could result in a doubling of frames clicked and this was in the FILM days.......I'd hate to think about the numbers today....Granted, most (almost all?) aren't shooting for National Geographic or other publication. I hope my previous posts aren't taken as a "burn the house down" for change. That was not my intent. My intent is to get people to THINK about what they'll do with their pictures, how realistic it is then weigh it against $$$$, time and hassles of travel as the OP asked. Then make a best decision for YOU........ Keep shooting and diving! David Haas