Phil Rudin

Photos of the Marelux MX-A1II housing with the new 112 macro port for the Sony 100 macro. First image with the port and no extensions. With the 1.4X teleconverter the 15mm extension is just a mm or two short, second photo is with the 1.4X tele and 20mm extension and the third is with the 2X tele converter using a 30mm extension. Ports with extensions have the Marelux MV +10 C/U lens in place. The C/U lens does not seem to slow the AF but I need in water tests to evaluate.

All of the lenses you listed in the original port are designed to be used at 28mm (130 AOV) and shot from behind a flat port will not work with your 24-50. The WWL-C (not WWL-1C) is designed to work with lenses that have 24mm at (130 FOV) behind a flat port. If you look at the lens on the Nauticam page you will see that it was primarily designed for sub-full frame cameras like compacts with 24mm zooms and M43 and APS-C it also works with full frame but as Chris suggested would have the lowest image quality v. WWL-1B, WACP-C and so on.

First of all neither Marelux or Nauticam support the RF 24-50mm STM lens for use with WET WIDE lenses behind a flat 67mm port. This eliminates use with WWL-1/1B, Aquista 110 and 130. This lens does however work behind dome ports from 180mm or greater with the proper extension. The lens also works with wet wide lenses like WACP-C, WACP-1/1B and FCP-1 using the proper port extension and in some cases will not zoom through the entire zoom range. WACP-C and WACP-1/1B also work on Marelux housings with the NA to MX N120 and N100 port adapters. The best Canon RF lens for zooming through the entire range using wet wide lenses behind a flat port remains the 18-45mm. for APS-C.

So this is what I have been told so far, Marelux will release M43 housings for GH6/7 and OM-1/11. If you go to the Marelux.co web site you will see that both housings are large enough for the Flash Fuel 2100 battery package a combo extra battery and manual flash trigger and the port for the remote trigger. If you compare these two housings to FF and APS-C housings you will see that the port opening is smaller than the 5 inch (125mm) ports for the other MX housing's. Currently the new port size for M43 has not been announced and no port charts have been announced. I am sure that 67mm flat ports will be made and that they will accept Aquista 130 and 110 wet lenses and as such should also accept Nauticam bayonet mount for WWL-1B. The Marelux NA to MX adapters are N120 for WACP-1/2 and N100 for WACP-C. For WWL-1B and Aquista 130/110 they are interchangeable between brands so Aquista to NA with MX bayonet mount and WWL-1B to MX with NA bayonet mount. I have no idea when the ports will be released but it seems logical it would be when the housings are released.

Your information seems incorrect to me for at least two reasons, #1 if memory serves me right the Nauticam has three blades of equal size that slip into three slots of equal size on the mount. #2 When the lens is mounted and turned it is locked by a small vertical pin that depresses using the blue plastic lock to release the lens. The Marelux Aquista 110 and 130 lenses have two blades of equal size and a smaller blade. This design prevents you from installing the lens any way but correctly on the mount. The lock on the Marelux mount is on the side at 90 degrees to the NA lock and blocks the smaller blade from being able to turn. I don't have a WWL-1B to test but I would be very surprised if either lens would work and lock on the other manufactures mount.

Several mistakes in this response, First WWL-1B needs the Nauticam bayonet mount adapter NOT the Marelux mount for Aquista lenses. The NA-adapter will work on any of the Marelux flat ports with 67mm mount. With the Canon RF-S 18-45mm used with R50 you would use Marelux flat port 32 and have full zoom through in APS-C. With EF 16-35mm F/2.8 L III you need Marelux flat port 87+20mm extension NOT port 97. With Aquista 110 the same two port configurations are used except with the Marelux bayonet mount and they will also work with the Aquista 130. Also be aware that just like the Nauticam wet wide lenses the EF 16-35 will have a limited zoom range starting at 28mm, each of the lenses on the Aquista ports will start at 28mm and very depending on zoom range. Aquista lenses are now 130 & 110 to reflect the max AOV. Photos with the Aquista 130 prototype (no float collar) both full frame at 28mm and vertical at 44mm using the Sony 28-60mm, Marelux Apollo S stones in TTL. Paradise Reef, Bali Indonesia.

Nauticam WACP-1B has N100 and N120 port mounts so if you are concerned about the 3mm you could use the Marelux NA-N100 too Marelux 5" port adapter which is 17mm rather than 20mm. In the Sony system I also suspect that Marelux Aquista 130 and 110 will work with the Sony 28-70mm kit zoom using flat port 32 and a 20mm extension. Photos with the Aquista 130 prototype (no float collar) both full frame at 28mm and vertical at 44mm using the Sony 28-60mm, Marelux Apollo S stones in TTL. Paradise Reef, Bali Indonesia.

FCP is not a lens I have used so no first hand knowledge. I have however heard similar feedback from some that have used FCP. Perhaps a new thread should be started to hear others opinions.

The short answer is yes, also keep in mind that I found WWL-1B to be noticeable wider when used with the Marelux N100 to 5 inch, 17mm adapter. I have used Laowa 10 & 12mm, and at least four different versions of both 14mm and 14mm zooms that have all had better DOF. This is an issue I was discussing with a well known U/W photographer at DEMA who has compared fisheye water contact optics V. lenses like Canon 8-15mm in 140 to 230mm domes and he remarked that the differences are even greater with fisheyes. I have used 28-60/70 zooms and the 28mm F/2 and DOF at 28mm is about the same across all of the wet optics I have tried that are advertised to be 130 degrees. With WACP-2 you can use lenses up to 14mm and DOF then improves.

For the original poster, Alex I have used both the Sony 28-60 and 28-70 kit lenses with WACP-1 (native N120) and both also work with WACP-1B (native N100). The 28-70 uses an additional 20mm of extension, does not focus as fast as FE 26-60 and if you look at many land reviews the 28-60 out performs the 28-70. In real world use with water contact lenses you won't see large differences between the two lenses in terms of IQ. I don't think it's a big mystery that a kit lens introduced by Sony in 2021 would have improved over a Sony kit lens introduced in 2013. By the introduction of the WACP-C I had sold the 28-70 so can only comment on WACP-1, however I would expect results to be about the same. Since I rarely used the 70 or 60mm end of the lenses I don't miss the difference. Any comments from wet pixel you may have seen would I believe reference overall performance not just IQ. I have found best results with both lenses to be in the F/8 to F/11 range even though with full frame my normal starting point is F/13+/- I reviewed the WACP-C and both the WWL-1 and WWL-1B in past issues of UWPMAG.com. As a sidebar the first Nauticam wet wide lens I tested was the WWL-1 and I used the Sony 28mm F/2 lens for that review because 28-60mm was not yet released. Nauticam still offers an N100 32 flat port for that lens but it is not shown on the port charts for use with WWL-1/1B. Last what is hardly ever talked about when involved in a wet wide lens discussion regardless of brand is Depth Of Field. While many of these lenses advertise a 130 degree diagonal AOV it has become clear to me and many others who have used these lenses extensively that DOF is far less than what you get with a lens of the same 130 degree AOV behind a dome port. This became blatantly obvious to me when I tested the Laowa 10mm F/2.8 a 130 degree rectilinear lens against images taken with wet lenses of the same130 AOV.

Perhaps I was not clear, Marelux has added a 112mm flat macro port to the Sony port chart for the new Sony 100 macro. Nauticam has added a 125mm macro port to the Sony port chart for the Sony 100mm macro. Neither Marelux nor Nauticam has made any additional recommendations. It appears that if Nauticam made an N100 20mm extension and it was added to the current Sony 90mm 105 port it would be 125mm. Also if the Marelux 15mm port extension were added to the 97mm 90mm macro port it would also be the recommended 112mm's. I have no idea how close to the port glass the lens 100 will sit with each port. The Nauticam recommended 30 II extension for both the 1.4X and 2X teleconverters seems odd since the 2X is about 2/2.5 times the length of the 1.4X. My guess is that about 30mm of extension seems correct for 2X and more like 15mm would be good for 1,4X. I travel with the Marelux macro port 71, with 20mm extension it is perfect for the Tamron 90mm macro, with 30mm of extension it works great with the Sigma 105mm macro ART, 40mm would get you to 111mm which should fit the new 100mm and with 100mm's of extension it works with the Sony FE 70-200 F/4 macro from 100-200mm all doing 1:2, with 90mm's of extension it focuses between 70 and 100mm at 1:2 through the range. This is my way of doing things not all Marelux recommendations. This also allows me to use the extension's with other ports like the 140, 180, 210 and 230mm dome ports.

Marelux offering for the new Sony FE 100mm F/2.8 Macro will be flat port 112 (part 31307) on the Sony port chart. The current sony 90mm macro port is 97 so could be combined with the standard 15mm port extension to get to 112. All flat ports have the 67mm filter threads.

You could make it work, you would need a custom zoom gear and the 230mm dome port for best results. This is not a lens I will be reviewing or recommending due the 25cm minimum focus distance just to many newer lenses that focus to less than 20cm and work great in a 180/170mm dome. At F/2.8 one example would be the Sony FE 16-25mm with a minimum focus distance of 18cm big difference when using the 180mm port.

I also have one mounted on the Marelux A7C II/R housing and no problems. Headed to Bali tomorrow for extensive testing of all features.

Best case scenario, Sigma 105 is 135.6 and uses N100 110 port, Sony 100M is 147.9mm minus 135.6=12.3, 110 port plus 12.3=122.3. So to be in the ballpark you need a 122.3mm port. NA N100 32mm port + 90mm's of extension is going to work well I think, so three N100 30mm extensions or the New coming N100 50mm + a 40mm extension. Anyone interested I have a like new N100 40mm for sale. This will work much better with SMC's, EMWL and others. A sloppy 12 to 20mm gap will not work with EMWL and will reduce magnification greatly with SMC type lenses and yes a few will vignette. Choice number two wait for the new 100M port which I am sure will be coming.