Chris Ross

You could likely get one from Dive and See, but they are quite expensive. Assume you have confirmed it will charge through the USB connection. I think my EM-1 MkII wouldn't do charge via USB.

Fogging has to be caused by water inside the housing this can come from many sources, a common one being the drops of water clinging to an o-ring when you open the housing. Make sure you mop up or blow off any water droplets before closing up again. Closing a housing with a clamshell back can push some of that water in. Blow out the inside of the housing with air from a scuba tank if possible, it will remove water as it is very dry before you test the housing. It seems unlikley to me that there is any layer you could remove with a micro fibre and really can't think how that could impact anything. They likely tell you to leave it alone to avoid scratches. Silica gel particularly small packs has a short life as it quickly absorbs moisture from the air. It needs to be stored in an airtight container till you use it. You said it's an AOI housing? do an extended vacuum test to check for leaks and works all the controls. If it holds vacuum it should be water tight. Air leaks in quicker than water.

Welcome aboard, was wondering when you might find us, good to have you here.

Before my most recent trip last year I purchased the Nauticam USB-C bulkhead for my OM-1 housing which uses the M24 bulkhead on the housing. The setup consists of an M16 bulkhead and a specific M24-M16 adapter that is machined so that the right angle USB plug will fit through. In summary it works as advertised, I can charge the camera without breaking the vacuum and also download images. Download is a little slow compared to using a card reader it seems the limit is set by the camera interface. I achieved around 28 Mb/sec, while I can achieve 150 Mb/sec with my card reader. Battery charging seems to be about the same as plugging the camera directly into a charger. I got the bulkhead as I shoot the Canon 8-15 with metabones adapter, which requires placing the camera in the housing then assembling the lens from the front placing the dome over the installed lens. This takes some time to pull apart and re-assemble, so being able to charge and download without opening is one less thing I need to deal with each evening after diving. Here is a couple of photos of the bulkhead installed, it seems to be a high quality cable. and externally the bulkhead uses a sealed cap similar to a vacuum valve to protect the USB terminal inside. It is sealed so holds a vacuum if the cap is removed. Overall I'm happy with it as it does what it's meant to do.

Hi Lembeh resort, thanks for joining us, good to have you onboard.

Welcome aboard Mike, good to have you here and great to have another Sydney diver/UW photographer here.

I found the thread with what's needed on Isotta to house an 8-15 on m43 - 40mm ext with gear, 3546 zoom gear, 20mm extension, 4.5"crystal dome and lens/adapter, adds up to $USD2844, quite a bit cheaper and all using their standard B102 extensions.

Thanks Wolfgang, I'm, thinking the costs would be a bit lower if you could do it this way, a single extension and a 4" or 4.33" N85 dome you might already own and you would only need the lens and the extension ring and figure out a zoom ring. The price of the Nauticam N85-N120 extensions is a bit crazy now - the 47mm N85-N120 is now $USD685 and the 41.7mm version $707 on the Nauticam website. The total bill for an adapter (if you can get the 34.7mm version) ext ring, 140mm dome 8-15 lens (new), Metabones and zoom gear would be $USD4737 with current prices.

Hi Wolfgang, wondering if it would be possible to use the Tokina 10-17 in an all N85 setup? the lens itself is 70 mm dia x 70mm long compared to a Olympus 12-40 which is 70 x 80mm long. The 12-40 just fits through a Zen dome. If it fits through an N85 extension it should work with an appropriate extension and a Zen 100mm dome or an N85 4.33"dome. The limiting factor is likely to be the diameter of a zoom gear to use on the housing zoom control and this is a problem due to the internals on the extension rings. Seems like is an extension ring without the internal lock, same as the extension on the Zen 170mm would allow it to work. I recall you mention having a local dealer who could make custom extensions for you? The lens is only 20mm longer than a Panasonic 8mm which uses a Zen 100mm dome with no extension. So should need about 20mm plus the Metabones thickness of 24.75mm extension?

It can be done, I carry my Nauticam housing, Canon 8-15 and 60mm macro and their ports plus 2x Z240 in a backpack which with a laptop weight about 12kg. I think the Fix lens is designed for smaller sensor cameras this page says it doesn't work too well with an RX100 which is a smaller sensor than the OM-1. https://reefphoto.com/products/fix_uwl-28_fisheye_wet_mount_conversion_lens_for_52mm_mounts?srsltid=AfmBOoos5YJ1iz_HTnEUiE0mhynbs_G9wYzLEJnAODAmpzJnhALX-FjE If you go a wet lens you could look at the WWL-C with Panasonic 12-32 or a WWL-1B with the Oly/Pana 14-42. Something cheaper maybe find an INON UWL-H100 secondhand or look at some the AOI wet lenses. The extension adapters, 140mm dome and Canon 8-15mm weigh about 3kg. a WWL-1B about 1.3kg plus the flat port to go with it, probably 2kg with port and lens?. The Tokina 10-17mm setup would be lighter and cheaper and you could use a 100mm or 4.33"dome to make things smaller and lighter. I expect the tokina with the N120 4.33"dome would be about the same weight as a WWL-1B with lens and port.

This of course is about the Easy dive housing which never seems to have taken off . The Doris housing that is the subject of this topic seems to have made changes from that and how well it works will depend of the firmware the housing uses to control the camera. I think though that it will be hard to beat using a dial to set shutter and aperture and other common adjustments. We'll have to wait to see the reviews.

which is the actual attraction of the fisheye less water between you and your subject. But of course there are limits and large animals might be too far away for a full frame fisheye, but it has no rival for reef scenics. This is why I moved to the 8-15 on an adapter , as I said it covers Fisheye, the wider part of the WWL through to a covering a 7-14mm rectilinear at least in field of view. It's not for everyone as it gets expensive quite quickly with the N85-N120 adapter, extension ring, port plus the metabones and the lens itself, it's also quite heavy compared to a small dome alone. But if found it excellent on my last trip to Papua New Guinea. A WWL could be a good option, but it doesn't match a 180° diagonal fisheye for reef scenics. Certainly it's good on the wide end, but see people saying the long half of the zoom range is not so sharp.

I have used the Panasonic lens with the Zen DP-100 and it doesn't show the dome shade. The Olympus with the 30mm extension should not be showing it either. There should only be one N85 port from Zen, assume you are using the DP-100-N85 model with the Nauticam 30mm mini extension ring? The dome shade is non removable on this one so really can't be rotated incorrectly. Perhaps post a pic of your setup?

In F mount the port chart says that the 105mm F lens uses macro port 87 or 60mm plus 30mm. It uses this same combination with the FTZ adapter on the Z series cameras. In Z mount the 105mm lens uses the macro port 80 or the 60mm plus 20mm. Not sure what the concern about the Tamron would be, it looks like it should use the 10mm extension with the 60mm port You would need to confirm this of course. The specs for the 60mm say it is 89mm long and with the FTZ adapter which is 46.5-16 long = 30.5mm long. So total of length of 119.5. The Tamron is 126.5 long which is 7mm longer than the 60mm on the FTZ so a 10mm extension should be about right to use with the macro port 60 for the Tamron if you go that way. All this assumes the published lengths are correct, hence the need to check

I wouldn't necessarily go with the 7"dome, I've not used it but know several who have and it's quite big and floaty. I have the Zen 170mm dome and it's more compact, though if you want to use the 8-25 you need a N120 version with adapter with the lens installed from the front as the front end of the lens won't fit through the N85 port. Same problem with the 7"dome. So if you think you might want to use the 8-25 or a 7-14 f2.8 then you need to consider this upfront. I'm not sure what you mean by "what converted field of view would be left"? You get the full 24mm full frame equivalent field with this lens in any of the domes. It's not particularly wide UW. I use it a bit diving in Sydney(temperate waters), but rarely otherwise. I'm not sure what your objection to the fisheye lens is, the barrel distortion only is a problem if there are straight lines in the pic and they are placed towards the edges. 3 main things would be wrecks, the water line at the surface and the bottom if it is in the frame, but for the most part it's not noticeable. With the 8-15 lens the barrel distortion reduces progressively as you zoom in. What subjects are you wanting to shoot to complement the fisheye?

try this link, hopefully it takes you to the post: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BHGYrvWKt/ It's the bottom left photo on the post with the guy taking a photo with his phone, the Viewfinder is on far right of photo and is as you described. Have to wait for some field reports to see how it works in practice.

That should make a difference, interesting to see how it performs This face book page has a lot of pics taken with the housing and various cameras and some pics showing various aspects. https://www.facebook.com/underwaterqinglin/

https://www.facebook.com/underwaterqinglin/

Assuming you mean native 4K/5.3K displays - there don't seem to many around, the Panasonic YZ-F1 is one, you'll see that it achieves 4K resolution by using the same pixel pitch as an Ipad (more or less) of 230ppi and using a 20"display, it's 475 x 334 mm so like using a handheld computer monitor. I see a lot that say 4K but their pixel resolution is not 4K native. Using a finer pixel pitch on a smaller tablet to get 4K resolution might be possible but I would think that extra resolution would not be visible to the eye. Then of course there's the question if the Go-Pro lenses actually resolve to 4K detail with their lenses and the air water interface when used UW. But that's an argument for another time.

Some data on the two lenses: Tamron length: 126.5 mm MFD/working distance: 230/119 Port: ??? 13.5mm shorter than the macro port 80 or 30mm longer than the macro port 60 Nikon Z Length: 140 MFD/working distance: 290/134 Port: Macro port 80 Nikon F 60mm macro with FTZ Length: 89mm + (44-16) = 117 port: macro port 60 The lens is 13.5mm shorter than the Z lens, so should need a Macro port 66? You could use the macro port 80 but the lens wouldn't be as close to the port glass as you might like for using with diopters. If the lengths reported are correct adding a 10mm extension to the macro port 60 should work for the Tamron. If you already have the Macro port 60 you could buy a 10mm extension ring for the Tamron instead of a macro port 80 for the Nikon Z or you could continue to use your existing port for the Nikon F 105mm. As for the 60mm macro, it seems the preferred Nikon choice for blackwater if you see that in your future.

I think the devil will be in the details. The easy dive housing that has been made for a number of years certainly hasn't exploded in popularity. A number of reasons behind that, one being that the housing has to be quite large to fit all those different models. You will notice that is doesn't have a viewfinder as such just a large window somewhere near where a camera viewfinder might be. The housing needs to have an adjustable camera mount so that the lens is centred in the port. The location of the viewfinder centre line in relation to the lens mount centre line is quite random so precise alignment of the viewfinder to the housing back can't be achieved - so no 45° viewfinders for this housing as it stands, unless they develop an adjustable position for the viewfinder port. Another potential problem is if you don't use the cameras on-off switch (mechanical) you have to turn on the camera before closing the housing and leave it on probably disabling sleep functions so it doesn't shut down between dives. On the price remember it's an Aussie website so price is $AUD, probably about $US 5300 or so. Be interesting to see the finer details of it though.

It can be done, but you are using custom made cables so is a little pricey. Dive and See does this sort of cable: https://diveandsee.com/products/cables/DNC-1035-Waterproof-USB-2.0-extension-cable limited to 10 ft (3m) for USB 3.0 though and add a USB-C bulkhead for your housing, you'd need to contact them to confirm it will connect to this cable.

on m43 a 100-140mm port is fine and larger gives no real advantages. The smaller ports allow you to get closer to your subject which translates into a larger subject size. It doesn't seem like much but a small change in subject distance makes a big difference. You can try this out with the lens on land.

Video clips are nice of course, but for ID a series of photos is much better IMO, you can zoom in for details needed and might even be able to count fin rays, all but impossible on video.

I'm using the OM-1 previously the EM-1 MkII and the EM-5 Mkii. The auto focus is fast and snappy on the OM-1 in most circumstances, but can slow down a little with high magnification. It's a step up over the EM-1 MkII in everything bar tracking. UW using the 60mm macro it is pretty good with little hunting. I haven't used the subject recognition UW and the tracking works sometimes, but I tend not to use it much UW. The subject tracking/recognition is great above water. With a fisheye it's seamless and as you say no need for tracking in any shots I've taken.