Amphibico diopters on flipout arm...opinions?

I am looking for some feedback on the quality (or lack thereof) of the diopters Amphibico sells for their housings. I am assuming these 52mm guys swap in on the flipout arm for the red filter. I know/suspect that they are not the good, multi-element diopters, but also suspect that those would be too thick for me to get into my housing.

I have an Endeavor housing a V1U. It has been on one trip, to Lembeh, and for that trip I only had the 95-degree WA port. I got a lot of surprisingly good video of a lot of pretty small stuff, but became convinced that to shoot the really small critters, I'd have to get them inside the port.

I have since purchased the flat port for this housing. I expect this gives me more elbow room between the camera glass and the port. I'd like to be able to flip in/out a +2 or +4 diopter for my next "little critters" trip. The V1U should give me pretty good magnification without either, but for the really small stuff, I'll want to get closer than the normal minimum focal distance for the V1U lens.

I'm no optician, but I suspect that the level of aberration from single-element diopters gets worse as the power goes up, but would also expect the multi-element ones to get thicker as the power goes up. Does anyone here have direct experience with using Amphibico's single element diopters with this setup, and if so, how were your results? Does anyone here have experience using other, higher quality diopters as a flip-out option on this setup, and again, how'd it go?

My sweetie has asked for a birthday wish list, and almost any diopter I would choose would fit within the budget. I'd rather go for quality than price, but would really like something that works well in my housing. And am willing to go with a lower-power solution if I can get there and wind up with good optics.

Thanks in advance for your feedback. The next time I shoot a boxer crab, I'd like to be sure I'm not going to crush it with my port!

--Richard

I was going to use this for a color correction tip but can't bother with that. So you get the benefit

This frame grab is from the Century Optics +4 58mm which is not sold anymore. It's really a SD diopter and there is a slight drop in resolution of the V1. As you can see, there is very little CA or softening. The newer +3.5 are much bigger being 72mm. Click on the img to get the fullsize version.

Do a search for a list of diopters in the video subforum. I put up a list a while back.

Hey nice pic there Drew...I would luv to see one of those little fellows.

For best macro quality do what Drew suggests with the Macro Port on.

For best of both worlds put a +2 diopter on the flip arm and keep the 94 degree port on. This method will give you increase zoom range as well for normal shooting. ie you will be able to zoom in for more tighter shots.

Using the smaller diopters that go on the camera itself may cause bad tunneling.

Go here for a look.

http://www.hdvunderwater.com/review.html

And what was the colour correction tip? That's some serious correction.

Richard, it's surprising how wide you can get even with a strong diopter in place. My Century +3.5 screwed to my Z1 behind a flat port was OK for just about everything in the Lembeh Strait except passing schools of mullet and wide coral shots. But you're not there for those anyway. You might consider getting one of those and just screwing it to the front of your V1 with a 58-72mm adaptor, if there's room.

It would of course be even better to fit it on the flip somehow but I doubt there's room.

There's also a Canon +2 achromatic that's smaller. We discussed it on the Gates EX1 thread.

Nick, it was just a natural light experiment shooting pygmy seahorses without artificial light and also a lowlight stress test. Too long to write and really of no use in practical terms.

I have the Endeavour but the FX7 rather than the V1. I also have both the Flat and the 94 degree port. I bought a spare flip arm from Amphibico and have fitted this with a 67mm +2 single element Hoya dioptre using the flat port. It works well but there is a very limited depth of field.

There is plenty of room in front of the flipper, but it rides VERY close to the front of the camera lens. This causes problems with the CC filter. I have tried to attach a Magic filter to the front of the camera using adhesive tape. But even that snagged the filter arm. I have looked at putting the Magic filter directly into front of the camera and holding it in place with a filter ring. However the convexity of the camera lens will mean that the filter will be in contact with the lens at least in the centre. I suspect this will cause problems with Newton's Rings colour aberration. (I would appreciate opinions here from those that have done this.)

Without the filter if your dive is to be all macro then using lights gets around the colour balance problem, but if the dive is mixed then the CC filter will be missed. A fixed filter will mean MWB'ing should you wish to use lights for the close ups, and you could have difficulty getting the MWB to set back again if you are at depth.

The lack of two filter arms is certainly a disadvantage for the Endeavour, but there isn't enough room for two with the magnificent 94 degree port, and personally very little of my filming is true macro. In Sulawesi I got some great nudibranch and soft coral crab footage using the WA port with lighting, and could still flip the CC filter back in for the WA stuff. The nudi's were virtually crawling on the port though. Great to have a port that will focus right to the glass!

Still this is nothing like the problems my wife has with her still camera when she meets a Napoleon with her 105mm lens in place - nice picture of an eye

I really came to the conclusion that if the dive was to be mainly small stuff then I would go with the flat port and no dioptre, and still have the CC filter for wider angle shots. For TRUE macro dives, use the dioptre plus lights and get to see the gills moving on that Pygmy seahorse

Roger

Roger

You may find you will get better macro with the HOYA +2 on the flip arm with the 94 Degree Port than with the Macro Port on. Also you may find you will have full zoom through focus with the 94 Degree Port on with the macro still.

Tomorrow I'm out for 3 dives with the Phenom and I am not taking a URPRO filter, just the +2 on the flip arm. Hopefully I will have some footage to show how you can shoot in natural light without a filter or lights.

Tomorrow I'm out for 3 dives with the Phenom and I am not taking a URPRO filter, just the +2 on the flip arm. Hopefully I will have some footage to show how you can shoot in natural light without a filter or lights.

Thanks Wagsy, I look forward to it.

One problem with just filming on holidays is that it is difficult to try all the combinations without changing ports etc. while on the boat, and I hate doing that

Roger

I was going to use this for a color correction tip but can't bother with that. So you get the benefit

 

This frame grab is from the Century Optics +4 58mm which is not sold anymore. It's really a SD diopter and there is a slight drop in resolution of the V1. As you can see, there is very little CA or softening. The newer +3.5 are much bigger being 72mm. Click on the img to get the fullsize version.

 

Do a search for a list of diopters in the video subforum. I put up a list a while back.

Drew, I have read you're earlier reviews, and appreciate the info. You like the Canon 500D +2, and I think it would meet my needs. I was planning on doing a Wagsy and getting a spare flip-arm and mounting a diopter in that, and swapping that arm in for places like Lembeh and leaving the red guy in for Galapagos and other places with less tiny stuff. I know I can do this with the diopter Amphibico sells. I also know that's a single-element lens with less than stellar optical performance.

You've used the Endeavor, and you've played with the 500D. Do you think it's feasible to place the 500D elements into the Amphibico flip-arm and have adequate clearance for the port and camera lens? Since

I'd be getting the arm, I am willing to cement the elements in place, if that's what it takes. Canon makes the 500D in a 52mm, which is what should fit the flip-arms from Amphibico.

If there's nothing for it but to buy bits and keep going until I get something that works, that's life. But it'd be nice to start from a plan that has a prayer of success.

Thanks in advance,

Richard

52mm, which is what should fit the flip-arms from Amphibico.

Hi Richard,

The Endeavour flip arm takes a 67mm diameter dioptre or CC filter. So a 52mm would not fit

Roger

Hi Richard,

 

The Endeavour flip arm takes a 67mm diameter dioptre or CC filter. So a 52mm would not fit

 

Roger

Is he flip arm threaded? I've never used Amphibico products so not sure. If so use a step up / down ring if it fits in the lens. Forget the vignetting at wide as you will be tele'd in for diopter work and will travel through that vignette.

Pre coffee so forgive if stating the obvious.

Cheers,

Mark.

Hi Richard,

 

The Endeavour flip arm takes a 67mm diameter dioptre or CC filter. So a 52mm would not fit

 

Roger

Well, thanks for saving me from *that* mistake. Since all of the diopters and internal filters on the Amphibico site are listed as being 52mm, that seemed like the ticket.

--Richard

You've used the Endeavor, and you've played with the 500D. Do you think it's feasible to place the 500D elements into the Amphibico flip-arm and have adequate clearance for the port and camera lens? Since

 

Richard

Richard, that question is best answered by the manufacturer themselves. I seriously doubt you have the space but I haven't measured the clearance.

Is he flip arm threaded? I've never used Amphibico products so not sure. If so use a step up / down ring if it fits in the lens.

Hi Mark,

No, the flip arm is flexible and has some little lugs to hold the the "push fit" filter/dioptre in place. I was lucky as my dioptre was a stable fit. With a spare arm it would be safer to glue the dioptre into the arm, it takes one screw to change the arm. I suspect that if you only use one arm, after a while the lugs would wear and the dioptre would fall out.

With the 94 degree port in place I really don't think there would be room for a "fat" dioptre, there is quite a convex inner element to the port. That is why there is only one flip arm. More space using the flat port though.

Richard, as Drew says, check with Joe at Amphibico, they should be able to give you an accurate measurement between the arm and the flat port glass.

Roger