monkeybusiness

Price update: Dropping price to 480€ for the housing, flat port and gear for 1650. (excl. shipping)

Camera body sold, housing and ports still available

Hi, are you shipping to europe?

Switched camera body and therefore I'm selling my Fantasea housing for the Sony a6400 with 60m depht rating. Comes with the vakuum system and moisture detection installed. Price: 650€ excl shipping from Europe Included are: - Housing with spare oring, electronics and pump - Flat Port for the Sony 1650 with spare oring - Zoom Gear for the Sony 1650 - Some spare parts for the housing Camera, Lens, Port Extention and more zoom gears are also for sale seperatly: - Sony a6400 body: 650€ with accessoires and leather bag - Fantasea Port extention 25: 210€ - Fantasea Zoom Gear for Sony SEL1018: 50€ - Fantasea Zoom Gear for Sony 90mm: 50€ - Camera tray from Nitescuba with Handle: 90€ The housing is dry and holds its vakuum perfectly fine. Was never flooded and every button works. Flat Port has no scratches in the Glass. The housing has around 80 dives. There is some small scratches at the bottom, which are only on the very surface, but please check the pictures yourself. The small mirror for fiber optics on one side is less reflective, this may affect some ttl led triggers, works fine with the integrated flash and manual led triggers. This should be easy to change if needed. Otherwise good condition. Was always taken care of and rinsed after every dive. Shipping on buyers cost within the EU, no warranty or returns

Thanks for sharing! Apart from the vignetting though, dsc01971 looks quite sharp right? (Pz1020, 6' dome) But I see your point, 6' is a very small dome. The 8.5 that i found is n120. So yea maybe with an adaptor. What I wonder though is if the 1018 maybe performs better, because it has an 7' Port from nauticam. In general the 1018 is not super sharp in the edges even top side. But going for the 1018 with 7' instead of 1020 6' could be an option. Curious if anybody here uses the 1018 behind the 7'? Currently prefering the wwl-c, even its way more money and i have both lensens flying around. Maybe i get used to the distortion.

Also, i just saw that there is even a special flat port just for the sel16-50 and the wet lenses fro. Ääm Nauticam: -> instead oft the 45 port, there is also an 40 port o_O.

I am using the turtle with the ys-d3 mkII. I have still kinda unresolved issues for sttl, it does random over exposing. It seems that they really need the original sea&sea fiber cables have inon). I can report in some weeks when i get the new cables.

The second image is the Wwl-c? Looks kinda good regarding distortion.

So back to my question: - Corner sharpness is okayish with the 1020 at f11 behind a 6' dome, as long as i am not using lens correction (see the raws). -> Depending on your feedback - Yes i have a significant "barrel" distortion with the WWL-C at ~124°. Maybe not so much at 110° (as the 1020). But on the other hand, the image quality could be way better when close to the ground(?) - To the suggestion about the bigger dome: I thought about that, while I would even go with a bigger dome (dont see any in the port charts) I question myself if that not defeats the point in having a rather compact setup. But yea, if you by any chance know an acrylic port that might fit, its a consideration

Okay thanx. But yea of course this is not a great examnullple, as I just learned a bit to avoid them. Here are some more pictures to compare, the P29 wreck (the one above) as well as the turtle and canyon are shot with the SEL1018, mostly F9. The turtle e.g. was a time where i did not know how to avoid those on the 1018. Even after editing I am really unhappy with the corner sharpness. SEL1018: PZ1020: Comparing with the PZ1020, its generally better even in the same 6' dome. *not a final edit* DSC01851.ARW And an unedited raw with my beautifully scratched old dome, PZ1020,@ 10mmf11. Keep in mind that the vignetting is due to an too big extension ring, there is no shorter one for Fantasea. DSC01971.ARW

Thx for sharing. What i see on your example is, that there is kinda a fisheye effect right? Would be curious how the WWL-C performs there.

Thanks for the rapid answers! Out of curiosity, is this also a Sony system? What i am currently not really looking into, is any extreme fisheye look, but i don't mind a little bit of distortion. Do you might have an example of your wreck pics? Never did these 180°, i might not miss it 😃 I saw that the WWL-1B only offers 110° with the supported 16-50 lens, so i might consider the WWL-C which offers 124°. To be clear about my "style" of pictures, here is an example that i have already uploaded, taken with the 1018:

Hi guys, I have seen a couple of threads regarding wet lenses or wide angle, but not so much comparing these 2 solutions. I am currently using an Sony PZ1020 on my Sony a6400 behind a Fantasea 6' dome. Switching to Nauticam now and I am planning to buy a WWL-C or an WWL-1b. The alternative would be using the PZ1020 behind a 6inch Acrylic port from nauticam as before. From what I heard, the Nauticam lenses have way more corner sharpeness and and of course more FOV. I ask myself, will I like the look of those lenses? Especially compared to a traditional one with 110° FOV What are the downsides of these wet lensens? E.g. how do they perform with big wreck shots and details on the wreck. Do any of you maybe have some experiences on APS-C or examples of wreck shots?

One of my favorite shots so far, shot in Malta in 2021. The wreck is called p29 and the guy in the photo was postioned on purpose. Happy to take constructive feedback. Equipment: Sony6400, Sel10-18, 2x ysd2 on full power.