Aquatica's new Mini Dome 100 for CFWA photography

Aquatica just sent out a press release about their 4" diameter dome port called the Mini Dome 100.

Here is the text from the press release:

Aquatica is proud to introduce the

BK-7 coated glass Mini Dome 100.

This new addition to our already fine line of ports is ideally suited for fisheye lenses such as the Nikon 10.5mm, Tokina 10-17mm and Sigma 10mm.

Because of its small diameter of only 100mm (4 inches), its reduced frontal signature means you can really sneak up on a subject and have the extra room to properly position your strobes in ultra close-up wide angle situation. Its miniature size and lighter weight are welcome features by travelling underwater photographer in these days of increased travel restrictions.

Made from grounded BK-7 mineral glass and polished to perfection the

Mini Dome 100 is competitively priced without compromising on quality.

Discriminating photographers will appreciate the integration of optical anti reflection and scratch resistant coatings provided at no extra cost.

The Mini Dome 100 will shortly be made available for other housing brands.

Depth rated @ 90m / 300ft

Suggested retail price: 699 usd

Available spring 2010

A sample will be available at BTS this weekend.

~Abi

i currently have the 8 inch dome. other than the obvious convenience of a smaller dome for traveling. will i get the same performance out of it that i would with the 8 inch acrylic when diving with big animals?

4" domes are specialist ports designed to work with fisheye style lenses.

The answer really lies in what lenses you shoot when your diving with big animals.

If for example you are shooting a 16mm FE on a DX sensor camera then it could be great.

4" domes are specialist ports deigned to work with fisheye style lenses.

The answer really lies in what lenses you shoot when your diving with big animals.

If for example you are shooting a 16mm FE on a DX sensor camera than it could be great.

So if I'm shooting the Tokina 10-17mm behind a 8" dome, what would be different or "great". Smaller is nice, but with an already negative rig a smaller dome would make that evn worse.

So if I'm shooting the Tokina 10-17mm behind a 8" dome, what would be different or "great". Smaller is nice, but with an already negative rig a smaller dome would make that evn worse.

The big advantage comes when shooting CFWA shots. WIth the fisheye lens you can be pretty much on top of your subject and still be in focus. However, with the large domes it can often be difficult to light properly with your strobes as you get shadows and such. With a small port the footprint is much smaller and therefore won't block the light from your strobes.

I for one am exceedingly happy about this, been waiting for one since i moved to digital.. my Nik V and 15mm was so small I never had problems lighting CFWA like i do with the 8 inch port..

Mike is Happy..

Now, to save a few paycheques

Hi all,

There is a lot of info about 100mm/4" domes here and some more here

Small domes were historically very popular-because they were the only type of dome available! The reason they fell out of fashion was that it is hard to get acceptable sharpness in the corners. Of course "acceptable" is a loaded term!

The small domes are the business for getting up close to subjects for CFWA and CFM. As Mike has said above, the physical sizes of the domes, and the ability to get your lighting tight in around them, really make these techniques rock. As replacements for an 8" dome for everything else-well my take would be only at a pinch-if baggage or weight restriction were very tight, and you envisage doing more CFWA etc than standard WA shots.

Adam

Hi, any ideas if this could work with the Canon EF15/2.8 fisheye or even Canon EF 16-35/2.8 II ?

//Ola

Thanks for the info. That is much more helpful to a newbie like me. I look forward to seeing some shots with it.

so for example if diving with whale sharks u would still use the 8inch dome?

so for example if diving with whale sharks u would still use the 8inch dome?

I would, definitely. But if I was shooting frogfish with a fisheye I would use the mini-dome.

Small domes were historically very popular-because they were the only type of dome available! The reason they fell out of fashion was that it is hard to get acceptable sharpness in the corners. Of course "acceptable" is a loaded term!

Will be interested in seeing how it works. As you mention, travel restrictions may still make this worthwhile even with some loss at the corners.