FX7 or V1 for the Endeavor

Roger, that's because you don't limit the f stop to 4 or 5.6 like I do. Anything more than 5.6 and the picture goes softer. Next time try a sunball shot and you'll see what I mean.

Roger, that's because you don't limit the f stop to 4 or 5.6 like I do. Anything more than 5.6 and the picture goes softer. Next time try a sunball shot and you'll see what I mean.

Thanks for the tip Drew I will try that next time I get into the Blue, probably early July

Roger

Great excitement! V1 and Endeavor/94 degree ordered.

Thanks again for all the tips and knowledge on this site. Time will tell if I have done the right thing!

Just to bring back this topic...

I finally decided to buy an Endeavour housing for my V1 - but I am not sure whether I should go for the 94 degrees wide angle lens or maybe it is better (and cheaper) to buy the dome port and buy an .55x or so wide angle lens from Century optics. I suppose it will fit but I think this way I would loose the flip filter.

Has anyone tried the dome and a wide angle lens with the Endeavour? I know RonScuba uses this combo with his Gates housing.

Best,

Jules

Hi Jules.

Although I have not dived with it like this I did mess around with a SONY .55x wide angle behind the Macro Dome Port.

I had full zoom through focus in air but yes you loose the flip arm function.

Well,

thanks Wagsy, it seems it will fit...

Jules

Jules,

I have very successfully cut a magic filter to fit directly onto the camera, holding it in place with the inner retaining ring from an old filter. However I do use the 94 degree port as it is a beautiful lens. With the magic filter in place I can use a dioptre in the filter arm giving more flexibility. If I have lights fitted for macro subjects at depth. I switch to auto WB and it balances even with the magic fliter in place. This saves me losing the MWB setting when I am too deep to re-balance in ambient light.

Seems to work a treat.

Cheers

Roger

Jules,

 

I have very successfully cut a magic filter to fit directly onto the camera, holding it in place with the inner retaining ring from an old filter. However I do use the 94 degree port as it is a beautiful lens. With the magic filter in place I can use a dioptre in the filter arm giving more flexibility. If I have lights fitted for macro subjects at depth. I switch to auto WB and it balances even with the magic fliter in place. This saves me losing the MWB setting when I am too deep to re-balance in ambient light.

 

Seems to work a treat.

 

Cheers

 

Roger

Roger,

previously I owned this lens for my Phenom - really nice, but if you scratch it, it will cost a couple hundreds bucks to repair. :-)

The magic filter is a good idea. Right now I try to figure out which combination would serve me best for wide angle (unfortunately I am a pixel peeper, so it is not so easy job...)

As I found an the Amphibico site, the 94 lens is a 0.68 wide angle. If I would buy a Century optics 0.55 wide angle, it could produce similar image? I know it is not full zoom, but I want to use only for really wide angle shots, zoom out...

I heard about a Swiss lens manufacturer, who has a nice aspheric wide angle lens for this camcorder... I will check it as well.

I found this compilation of these lenses at a German site:

Hello Jules,

One thing to consider is the Amphibico port dome protectors. When I tried a .3x semi fisheye behind my Gates dome, the protectors were in the frame. My .7x was fine though.

Have you found any pictures or video of the fx7 or v1 shot with the Century/Schneider lens ? I ask because I found w/a adapters beyond .8x or .7x to be tricky. Reports of softness in the corners, distortion, etc.. I bought and returned a RedEye .5x because it was too soft.

Hello Jules,

 

One thing to consider is the Amphibico port dome protectors. When I tried a .3x semi fisheye behind my Gates dome, the protectors were in the frame. My .7x was fine though.

 

Have you found any pictures or video of the fx7 or v1 shot with the Century/Schneider lens ? I ask because I found w/a adapters beyond .8x or .7x to be tricky. Reports of softness in the corners, distortion, etc.. I bought and returned a RedEye .5x because it was too soft.

Hi Ron,

that's way I would spend more bucks on a good lens - and then I can use it topside as well. Right now I am looking for more info on the .65 wide angle with full zoom. It is 51 mm long in physical size. I hope it will fit to the dome port. But I have still time to decide, so will looking for test pics. On DVinfo I found a similar thread, but I am sure I will find more.

Edit: found some more test, and the testers were not satisfied with it... Hm... not easy... Ron's results on DVInfo showed that the Raynox for that price is quite good.

thanks for sharing your experience,

best,

Jules