28AD to AD ? Inon 165AD or UWL-100 28AD for S90 w canon housing

Hello everyone !

Thanks to the advices from this forum, I made my mind and decided to buy a canon housing for my S90. The next step is to get a good quality wide angle or fisheye wet lens that I could use on my next camera purchase. ( I realise I will probably keep the lenses longer than the S90 and its housing )

I am looking forward to buy the Inon 28 AD adaptater for the canon housing and I don't know exactly what lens to chose : UWL-100 is 28 AD, so it looks like the way to go. But if I want to add the fisheye dome it is 2 times more expensive that the 165 AD. And everyone is talking about the 165AD as the best fisheye wet lens around. So I have a few questions :

- 165 AD : is there a 28AD to AD adapater ? Or even better one that I can hand make ! So I can use the UWL-165AD on the 28 AD adaptater.

- Do I really need the fisheye dome ? I could go for the UWL-100 28 AD. At first I wanted a fisheye because I freedive with a friend who has one and it gives very good results (and I belive it is the 165AD, he is not sure himself).

I would love to have the fisheye lens, but I realise I need a "do all lens" not a specialised one. Maybe the UWL-100 28 AD is a more do all lens ? And if my next camera doesn't accept 28 AD !?

I would love some more help on this question

For the record, I am freediving. Not shooting deeper than 20m (about 60 feet I think, most of the time between 8m and 15m, the sweetspot for my weight/swimsuit thickness combo) and 50/50 macro with the internal flash and budy freedivers with no flash.

PS : I am going to Japan in july, do you belive it would make sens to buy the lens there directly ?

Everyone, have a good day. Cheers !

Raph

Hello everyone !

 

Thanks to the advices from this forum, I made my mind and decided to buy a canon housing for my S90. The next step is to get a good quality wide angle or fisheye wet lens that I could use on my next camera purchase. ( I realize I will probably keep the lenses longer than the S90 and its housing )

 

I am looking forward to buy the Inon 28 AD adapter for the canon housing and I don't know exactly what lens to chose : UWL-100 is 28 AD, so it looks like the way to go. But if I want to add the fisheye dome it is 2 times more expensive that the 165 AD. And everyone is talking about the 165AD as the best fisheye wet lens around. So I have a few questions :

- 165 AD : is there a 28AD to AD adapter ? Or even better one that I can hand make ! So I can use the UWL-165AD on the 28 AD adapter.

- Do I really need the fisheye dome ? I could go for the UWL-100 28 AD. At first I wanted a fisheye because I free dive with a friend who has one and it gives very good results (and I believe it is the 165AD, he is not sure himself).

 

I would love to have the fisheye lens, but I realize I need a "do all lens" not a specialized one. Maybe the UWL-100 28 AD is a more do all lens ? And if my next camera doesn't accept 28 AD !?

I would love some more help on this question

 

For the record, I am free diving. Not shooting deeper than 20m (about 60 feet I think, most of the time between 8m and 15m, the sweet spot for my weight/swimsuit thickness combo) and 50/50 macro with the internal flash and buddy free divers with no flash.

 

PS : I am going to Japan in July, do you believe it would make sens to buy the lens there directly ?

 

Everyone, have a good day. Cheers !

 

Raph

I cannot answer your basic question, which lens with the DC-35 housing. Why, because the Inon adapter has yet to show itself beyond a few "prototype" pics on the net. Is there really one? Is it an AD or 28AD? I suspect, if it exists, it will be a 28AD mount.

No, the Inon 165AD fisheye lens will not work with a 28AD adapter.

No, there are no AD to 28AD adapters that will work with the 165AD fisheye lens. There is an Inon AD to 28AD for macro lens, not the 165AD, it places the lens to far out, I think.

No, I do not know if it will be possible to mount 67mm lenses to the Canon DC-35 housing, the lens barrel diameter looks to be greater than the port dimensions which would result in the lenses being mounted to far out to work correctly.

I think you have three choices:

A. Get the Inon 100-28AD and shoot it without the dome

B. Get the above lens with the dome kit which would be an outstanding lens, heavy and expensive too.

C. Possibly mount the Fisheye UWL-04 lens to the Canon housing using some sort of DIY rig. Can I do it if I wanted to, yes, can you, dunno.

Or get the FIX90 housing which solves all of your problems including those you don't know you have yet and will lighten up your bank account also.

Shot with Inon 165AD mounted on FIX90 housing:

The deal with the all of the lenses is that they tend to be very specific and there is no universal mount and the camera and housing manufactures don't even seem to know they exist. No wet lens made like a camera with more than a 3X zoom give or take a skosh. No wet lens likes to be placed more than a few mm from the native lens of the camera. No wet lens likes to be zoomed. No wet lens like the camera lens to be large diameter aperture than it's rear element clear aperture. No wet lens made likes a camera native lens less than 35mm FL except for the Inon 100-28AD and possibly the Fisheye UWL-04. (I do not know much about this lens yet).

The 165AD is a very sharp lens with depth of field from dome port surface to infinity. It is also the widest, 165 degree diagonal FOV when working on a well matched camera. In practice the diagonal FOV is more like 150ish degrees, still very wide. This is a small, compact 4 inch dome, lightweight lens that produces excellent results, is somewhat prone to flare, does not do over/under well and is very particular about having an exact geometry with the camera/port/mount.

I have a 100WAL with dome, it is heavy, expensive, larger 5ish inch dome, can do over/under if careful, is less particular about an exact camera/port/mount/lens geometry.

The 100-28AD is something of an hybrid, heavy and larger like the 100WAL and dome (same dome BTW) and yet designed for a 28mm FL camera lens.

Shot with Inon 100WAL (with dome) at about 4.5 feet give or take on FIX housing:

Shot with the Inon 165AD at about 3ish feet give or take:

Inon 165AD:

Both the 165AD and 100WAL with dome produce very similar results in practical use, once you get out over 125 degrees FOV you have the same barrel distortion, corner distortion (not focus--distortion!) etc that are typical of semi fisheye and fisheye lenses.

Photo testing shots above are Jpegs straight from the camera, no P'Shopping, cropping or other magic.

One other thing, it is my opinion, untested as of yet, that the 100-28AD lens with dome would probably have as wide a FOV as the 165AD on this S90 camera and may be the top choice. The Fisheye UWL-04 may also rival the 165AD at about the same price, it is a 6 inch dome with a 52/67mm mount.

The Inon UFL-165AD will fit on the Fix 28AD mount attached to the Fix S90 housing. I can't make any promises about the adapter for the Canon housing, however, no way to know until it actually reaches the market and someone has the opportunity to try the combination.

With the Fix setup, however, you can switch between macro (UCL-165AD), native lens, and wide angle (UFL-165AD) in seconds. Great combo. You do have to zoom in a bit with the wide angle, losing some FOV degrees. I hope to do more tests soon, as long as my buddy is willing to continue loaning me her UFL-165AD wide angle lens, until I have the funds to buy my own.

There is some more detail on my tests from a two weeks go here: http://www.uwphotographyguide.com/canon-s9...x-housing?home=

I did not say it would not fit, I said it would not work and I should have added this--without some vignetting even zoomed to 35mm. Additionally, by mounting the lens further forward, not only is the tendency to vignette aggravated but the FOV is somewhat decreased further. Whatever I said, that is what I meant and believe to be the case.

I believe this may explain the 165AD photo on the FIX page that shows the 165AD yielding the same FOV/magnification as the Inon 100WAL etc. They state "zoomed to eliminate vignetting" and I suspected all along they were zooming to 50mm equivalent on the S90 to eliminate all vignetting with the 28AD adapter. I have zoomed to 50mm and that is about what I get also, mystery solved, they were at 50mm zoom. Note further that the do not show either Inon 100WAL and dome, which I believe is as wide in practice as the Fisheye UWL-04*

* (per their specs it is a .42X lens with 131 degree DFOV which is approximately what the 100WAL and dome combo are. Note the 165AD is .405X magnification if I recall)

But mounting the lens such as Compu is doing eliminates, I think, another adapter piece?

However, I agree, if one can live with the remaining vignetting, then, yes, the 165AD lens can be mounted on "some" 28AD applications such as the 28AD/FIX kit adapter.

FWIW, the photos I posted have not been cropped or edited, have no vignetting to speak of and the FOV is pleasingly full if not quite to the potential of the lens.

A curiosity, the camera tends to vignette more to the right side, I see that on Compudude and on mine when zoomed out, more vignetting to the right. I first thought this might be the IS shifting he lens about and it might still be but it may also be "Canon lens decentering" a supposed common defect of all Canon P&S cameras, the lens is not exactly centered on the sensor??

Another thing, and this is not accurate to an absolute, my Canon A570 and Inon AD mount places the rear lens of the 165AD approximately 25mm from the camera lens barrel face. The FIX housing using the FIX 67mm threaded adapter, again, not absolutely accurate to the nano-hair, using my DIY AD to 67mm adapter places the lens at exactly the same total distance, 25mm. The 10Bar AD to 67mm adapter places the lens, again approximately, 1mm further forward or about 26mm total distance lens to barrel face. I am still working with this, I think that I can get the 10Bar down to 25mm and the DIY adapter down to 24mm. But it may not be worth the effort.

Typical right side corner vignetting, no crop, no edit, with the FIX 67mm kit and 10Bar AD to 67mm adapter, shooting distance about 2ish feet here if I recall yielding a diagonal view 15 feet across, Inon 165AD fisheye lens:

This is further reduced and usually eliminated with the DIY adapter.

James

Crawdad, CompuDude,

I hear you, and am absolutly convinced that the Fix housing is what I need.

Unfortunatly, in France, we are speaking of 1000 US$. On top of that, I would have to add a 250$ adapter and finaly the 600$ lens ... this is getting dangerously close to a one month salary. This is an insane amount of money compared to the 900$ it would cost me for canon housing, inon adapter and lens.

Sometimes when I read this forum, I have the feeling that everyone in here can easily fork 3000$ for a top notch case with multiple strobes, and 3 lenses and not even blink twice. For something they would use 4 times a year max. I am confused as I see many post of people new to underwater photography buying very expensive gear for a planed trip to some remote location.

How many of them can really benefit from all the new technology they have in their hand ?

Just to be extra clear here, I am speaking of new comers to underwater photography, not experienced users kind enough to give advices.

I am very thankfull to you two (and all the people from my previous posts) for taking on your time to share your experience and advice me.

I must do with my budget, and it is a canon housing type budget. On top of that, I don't see how spending 700$ more on a housing for a camera that will disapear from the market in 2 years is a good thing.

I am a beliver in "give the basics tool to the beginner until he understands them".

I guess I will go for the UWL-100 as it sounds like the inon adpater is going to be 28AD.

Cheers ! Raph

Raph, I feel your pain. Trust me, it causes me pain to see all the people on this forum dropping $3-4k on new housings for DSLRs that cost over $1500, and then talking about needing another one for a spare.(!) I saved and scraped to buy the Fix housing as I was fairly convinced it was my best bet to replace my beloved S80, which was very long in the tooth and due for replacement. So far I have been happy with it, but I still lust after the bigger rigs... at times I am VERY aware that I am still limited by a point and shoot compared to what I could have if I could afford a DSLR.

Regardless, as long as you're willing to live within the limits, it sounds like the Canon housing and perhaps the Inon mount, if it ever makes it to market, will be a good way to go for you.

I did not say it would not fit, I said it would not work and I should have added this--without some vignetting even zoomed to 35mm. Additionally, by mounting the lens further forward, not only is the tendency to vignette aggravated but the FOV is somewhat decreased further. Whatever I said, that is what I meant and believe to be the case.

 

I believe this may explain the 165AD photo on the FIX page that shows the 165AD yielding the same FOV/magnification as the Inon 100WAL etc. They state "zoomed to eliminate vignetting" and I suspected all along they were zooming to 50mm equivalent on the S90 to eliminate all vignetting with the 28AD adapter. I have zoomed to 50mm and that is about what I get also, mystery solved, they were at 50mm zoom. Note further that the do not show either Inon 100WAL and dome, which I believe is as wide in practice as the Fisheye UWL-04*

I think you're right. There is definitely vignetting unless I bump the zoom up to three steps. It's not apparently on screen, oddly (or perhaps the Fix housing obscures a sliver of the screen?) but it was there when I downloaded the images. And as you note, there was definitely MUCH more vignetting on the right than on the left. Actually, looking again, I don't think I had ANY on the left, other than on the widest setting.

I haven't made any final calls on how good the setup works for WA, nor have I been able to make any measurements yet. I hope to soon, however. Any way you look at it, it's considerably wider than what I could otherwise get with any other lenses (except perhaps the Fix lens, which I will have to consider more carefully now), but the convenience of switching WA to macro was demonstrated thoroughly on my test dives the other weekend (3/7). It was exactly what I've been looking for! I only wish conditions had been better.

As an aside (sorry for the highjack) Do you know how to convert zoom #s into lens equivalents? The EXIF tag gives a very different number than I was expecting, when I looked to see what zoom level a given photo had. I'm seeing "6mm" and "6.852mm" and "7.493mm" as a general rule. I assume the 6mm corresponds to the 28mm setting, and perhaps 6.852mm is 35mm, and 7.493mm is 50mm? I'm guessing we're looking at the 35mm equivalent conversion issue here, but I thought if you know the numbers off the top of your head it would save me from some basic algebra.

Crawdad, CompuDude,

 

I hear you, and am absolutly convinced that the Fix housing is what I need.

Unfortunatly, in France, we are speaking of 1000 US$. On top of that, I would have to add a 250$ adapter and finaly the 600$ lens ... this is getting dangerously close to a one month salary. This is an insane amount of money compared to the 900$ it would cost me for canon housing, inon adapter and lens.

Sometimes when I read this forum, I have the feeling that everyone in here can easily fork 3000$ for a top notch case with multiple strobes, and 3 lenses and not even blink twice. For something they would use 4 times a year max. I am confused as I see many post of people new to underwater photography buying very expensive gear for a planed trip to some remote location.

How many of them can really benefit from all the new technology they have in their hand ?

 

Just to be extra clear here, I am speaking of new comers to underwater photography, not experienced users kind enough to give advices.

 

I am very thankful to you two (and all the people from my previous posts) for taking on your time to share your experience and advice me.

I must do with my budget, and it is a canon housing type budget. On top of that, I don't see how spending 700$ more on a housing for a camera that will disappear from the market in 2 years is a good thing.

 

I am a believer in "give the basics tool to the beginner until he understands them".

 

I guess I will go for the UWL-100 as it sounds like the Inon adapter is going to be 28AD.

 

Cheers ! Raph

Probably off topic but I also fully understand. I am thinking the OEM housing will do fine, with limits, as soon as Inon releases the adapter.

I would just get the WAL100-28AD and you can upgrade it later if you desire and not have to absorb the price in one bite. A big bite too.

Spend the money on a S2000 strobe to go with the 100-28AD, that will be an excellent combination.

I bought a T1i and took it back. I did not like it. I was going to buy a Sea Tool or RDX housing. I may eventually move to a dSLR or Micro 4:3 or EVIL but I just do not like what is there now. I want and must have a live view LCD. I have owned and shot film SLRs in Ikelite housings. Unlike many, I do not have a fantasy of being a pro-photog and I do not have dSLR envy. The S90 is a hell of a little camera and even in the OEM housing you should have a ton of fun with it.

And, I can afford one and the reason I can is because I have a wife who will not let me spend any money and when I look around and realize the suffering that goes on in the world, I can make do with less.

James

I think you're right. There is definitely vignetting unless I bump the zoom up to three steps. It's not apparently on screen, oddly (or perhaps the Fix housing obscures a sliver of the screen?) but it was there when I downloaded the images. And as you note, there was definitely MUCH more vignetting on the right than on the left. Actually, looking again, I don't think I had ANY on the left, other than on the widest setting.

 

I haven't made any final calls on how good the setup works for WA, nor have I been able to make any measurements yet. I hope to soon, however. Any way you look at it, it's considerably wider than what I could otherwise get with any other lenses (except perhaps the Fix lens, which I will have to consider more carefully now), but the convenience of switching WA to macro was demonstrated thoroughly on my test dives the other weekend (3/7). It was exactly what I've been looking for! I only wish conditions had been better.

 

As an aside (sorry for the highjack) Do you know how to convert zoom #s into lens equivalents? The EXIF tag gives a very different number than I was expecting, when I looked to see what zoom level a given photo had. I'm seeing "6mm" and "6.852mm" and "7.493mm" as a general rule. I assume the 6mm corresponds to the 28mm setting, and perhaps 6.852mm is 35mm, and 7.493mm is 50mm? I'm guessing we're looking at the 35mm equivalent conversion issue here, but I thought if you know the numbers off the top of your head it would save me from some basic algebra.

If you have to crop a little, so what, we ain't publishing, this is for fun and what you are doing looks fine to me. I accuse others of over science-ing but I am the King of Over science-ing"

Compu, I think the only practical way to convert P&S FL to 35mm equivalent is like you are doing, make a fraction and convert. You could make a graph, like we did in high school, lol. It should be fairly linear. You have the two end points.

james

Ralph,

I'm in the same situation as you - just bought a S90 and Canon case, as the alternatives this side of the pond are out of my budget. I'm also looking at wide angle options so I've found this thread interesting.

To answer your last question - you will almost certainly save money buying in Japan (or the US compared to Europe). The cheapest Online option I have found in the EU is http://www.unterwasserkamera.at or http://www.uw-fotopartner.de. This store in Japan http://www.uwdigitalcamera.com has been used by people in the UK - even after paying customs duty and VAT it is much cheaper than any UK supplier. If you could walk in you'd save even more.

Good Luck

Neil

CompuDude, Crawdad, thank you

the UWL-100 sounds like the logical option if the inon adpater hit the market. I can always upgrade it with the fisheye dome later if I feel like it is necessary. A small strobe (S2000 as you suggested) might be another option.

Anyway I will just start with the bare housing for now and try to get the lens for the summer. There is just too many things I need to learn with UW photography, I will focus on macro and how to properly set my camera. (thanks to underwater photography guide web site btw !! )

I hope to be able to shoot good pictures of Mérou and Murènes in Port Croc when I get to spend some times there in september.

Wish you two well, cheers !

Raph

so ralph how are you getting on with the s90 and did you sort out the lens situ, im thinking of getting the s90 and poss the cannon and eventually inon lens, but would like your feedback.