Nikkor 12-24mm & SEA&SEA Fisheye D.Port

Hello Everybody,

Is some one using this setup :D70(or any other Camera) Sea&sea Fish Eye dome port (The big one) and Nikkor 12-24mm.

I am expierencing major corner softness ( It's not only in the corner's !!!).I tried a 3+ Diopter result: Nothing. Tried the 40 mm extension Ring Result : Still major parts of the image are blurry .

Is there some one out there who has experimented with this setup..?

Or any other suggestions ?

Thanks?

Hi Tunc,

Did you try the 40mm ext ring AND the dioptre? This setup is close to what I use on my Subal setup.

Alex

HI,

I use the compact dome port with 40mm extension. This can be used without a dioptre without too much corner softness.

Alex - don't get too irate with that !

I imagine even with the big dome you would still need the extension though

Here is an example

Example Pic

I do intend to test with a variety of dipotres on my next trip though (only 2 weeks - can't wait !)

Mark

Hi Alex Hi Mark,

Thank you for your response,

Yes Alex , i tried the 40mm extension ring behind the fish eye dome port with a +3 diopter on the lens,but unfortunatly the results are still the same. Maybe i am expecting to much from this lens?

Mark , I had exellent results with the compact dome while i was using the Nikkor 16mm . Never tried it with the Nikkor 12-24 .I was thinking the bigger the dome gets the better the image quality should be..but unfortunatly it didnt work out .

I even emailed Sea&sea for this matter ,but ....no reply !!!

What quality do i have to expect from this dome &lens combination ,can you send me an example.

Thanks ,

Tunc

What aperture are you shooting?

The lens is ugly wide open, and it isn't perfect stopped down. Some time ago I compared Aquatica, Ikelite, Sea & Sea, and Nexus domes (the 170), and the Sea & Sea w/ Extension Ring 40 was by far the best of the lot, so I used Sea & Sea ports with the Light & Motion housing I was using at the time.

I also had a customer who fought & fought w/ crappy results from his 12-24, until he returned it for evaluation and Nikon totally replaced the lens. That might be worth a shot, too.

I used the 12~24 behind Seacam's WidePort (WP) and 35mm extender with and without a +4. To get anything like decent results I had to use f/11 or smaller and at settings wider than ~15mm I had to work on distant (~1m+) centrally placed subjects with little corner detail. I don't think that this lens is an inherently bad one, but this type of very wide zoom doesn't seem to work particularly well behind most domes, from either my own experience or judging from comments repeatedly made on Wetpixel. There have been many explanations as to why this should be so, but if I were you I'd shoot a series of images at all apertures from wide-open to minimum on a close, static subject and work out whether the corners ever become acceptable to you with and without your diopter/extender and at different focal lengths.

I've gone back to fixed focal length lenses but this may not be a viable option.

As an example of the sort of image I got with my 12~24 at 12mm here's one where corner detail is not relevant - an ideal situation!

Ryan

I am curious what Aquatica housing/port combination you used to test the 12-24 with?

I have used the AD100, AD70 and the AD2x Aquatica housings with the 12-24 with supperb results. No diopters needed and all done with the 8" dome of course.

I have used f5.6 - F16 with no issues.

Please advise.

Mauricio Handler

Hi Mauricio,

It was with a Light & Motion Titan and Aquatica Port Conversion ring. I tried several extension ring combinations, too, because the distance from the lens mount to the port mount likely wasn't identical. The Aquatica dome did well, but I felt the Sea & Sea was a better choice after viewing the results. Yes, it is possible there was an issue with my methodology, but it is equally possible that Sea & Sea's NX Fisheye port holds up better with that lens (it is a larger diameter). It is also possible that I had a bad sample, which I doubt.

Mauricio, do you have any galleries from your d2x shooting? I'd love to see what you've done with that camera.

Ryan

The problem you had may have well have been that the Aquatica dome sits very differently on other housings. It is imperative that the housing and dome be completely compatible.

Other manufacturers have indeed made rings for the use with this dome port but they are not all accurate.

The best combination use is with the Aquatica Housing.

Regarding my D2x images........Shhhhhhhhhh! Top secret.

Soon.

Mauricio

I used the 12-24 with the Aquatica housing, 8" dome and 15mm extension.

Examples here:

http://www.reefpix.org/gallery/album37

http://www.reefpix.org/gallery/album30

I'd say that's pretty darn good.

I used the 12-24 with the Titan housing, conversion ring, and Aquatica 8" dome w/ 15mm extension. Examples here:

http://www.reefpix.org/gallery/album56

I remember this combo as not being as good, but not bad either.

Cheers

James

You've shaved the exif on those- What focal length & f-stop?

Hi everybody,

Thank you very very much for your comments and recommendations,here is a example taken with the 12-24 ,the fisheye D.P and 40mm extension ring.

Please notice the back scatter at the lower right corner.How it gets stretched more and more starting nearly at the middle of the picture.Should i accept this as normal or go on experimenting.Maybe they were to close for the lens to focus ,like the coral at the lower left corner?

Hi Tunc,

That is pincushion distortion, and common with extreme wideangle lenses.

Cheers

James

Here is another example,what do you think..?

What can i do to avoid it ,any suggestions?

Thanks,

Tunc

HI Tunc

looking at your picture of the diver next too the reef.

I'd have thought that all your dealing with is a DOF issue.

If your working at wide apertures even with your 12-24 you cant expect total front to back focus.

your diver seems to be a considerable way back from the reef scene.

Depending on your focusing point within this picture you would end up with different results. your divers face actually looks quite focused.

If you focused on your Diver, then i would anticipate that your foreground would be soft.

Depth of Field is always Less infront of your subject then behind it, Couple this with say F5.6 and even though its a 12-24 your going to get less than pin sharp results front to back

A good tip is try and get your diver in the same immediate area as your section of reef as near as you can get to your key focus area if you wish them to appear as sharp as your subject. and away from the edges as possible to avoid and distortion of their features.

Otherwise just use them in the backgound as a scene enhancer as Paul's cools example above

Take a look at the following image. Not a wonderful picture but you will see that the diver is very close to the my reef scene and will appear as in focus as the rest of the reef.

This was shot with a Nikkor 18-70 AF-S & +4 Dio i expect around F5.6 to F8. Lighting from 2x sb_105s Manual using Sea & Sea compact dome port.

Again the next image shot with the same combo. but the divers just set in the background.

Try and get some hard testing of your combo done using different aperture settings see how things come out.

regards

craig