Sony 10-18 f4 e-mount lens

Dear all,

Just wondering if the new Sony 10-18 f4 e-mount lens will be the new WA flagship lens for UW photography with the Nex series (especially the NEX-7). Any UW reviews?

Also, has anyone seen the Nauticam port for it?

Cheers,

bgfspeedy

There are a few photos from the port testing here:

http://nauticam.smugmug.com/HousingTests/NA-NEX6/27990373_pNtCbg#!i=2363461691&k=97fKxNd

Like all other super wide rectilinear lenses in this focal length range, corner sharpness will be a challenge if used wide open. This can be managed by stopping down, and working in the 11-12mm range instead of full wide.

There are a few photos from the port testing here:

http://nauticam.smugmug.com/HousingTests/NA-NEX6/27990373_pNtCbg#!i=2363461691&k=97fKxNd

 

Like all other super wide rectilinear lenses in this focal length range, corner sharpness will be a challenge if used wide open. This can be managed by stopping down, and working in the 11-12mm range instead of full wide.

Hi Ryan,

Thanks a lot for that. Those are pictures from Edward Lai from Nauticam. I saw those too. However, he talks about a pre production port, but the post was from early February. I was just wondering if there had been any evolution.

Thanks,

Bgfspeedy

Yes, a 7 inch dome is available already for this, (ref 36129) and SE1018-Z zoom gear (ref 36173)

I have been using this lens uptop on a Sony VG30 for video.

Don't think I will be using my Tokina 11-16 mm for video any more.

I also found for video that the lens on the Sony set at 50p shutter f4 (0-db) is better in low light than the Canon 60D with the Tokina 11-16m @ 25p f2 (100 iso) :-)

Courtesy of our friend Michael Christ of Tauchertraum Germany, these are some of the first images from our 10-18 7" dome port.

Cordial thanks to Michael for allowing us to share his images.

That looks very very nice! Thanks a lot for that!

The port (Nauticam) for this leans is readily available now. Any more neutral early adopters out there that has some first impressions on using this WA lens?

Cheers

/O

Dear Edward: Thanks for the posting. Is there a zooming gear along with this port? How about black corners? Do I need to mount the lens separately from outside the housing as I did in another brand Nex housing?

I have a couple of photo galleries from the Solomon Islands using the 10-18mm at:

Guadalcanal Wrecks

Uepi Island Resort

All the underwater photos are using the 10-18mm and the Nauticam 7" port with my NEX-5n, almost all at the 10mm end. Lighting is 2x Mangrove 40W video lights (I shot more video than stills on this trip, video still in editing).

My thumbnail review: this setup is way sharper, particularly in the corners, than the 16mm + WA adapter with the 4.33" dome. Stabilisation and focus works well for video. If you want to use the zoom gear, the dome port must be removed, and then re-mounted once the camera and lens are installed in the housing body, but if you don't use the zoom gear the lens can be inserted from the rear of the housing leaving the port in place. The 7" dome is more buoyant than the 4.33", which works well for me since my video lights are very negative. My non-expert conclusion: it's a big upgrade from the 16mm + 4.33" dome, and I'm very happy with it. Any other questions, ask away.

Cheers,

Huw

--

http://www.huwporter.com

Thanks for the mini-review Huw, Nice pics from Guadalcanal!

For comparison, are some of your galleries taken with the UWA + 16mm converter?

I suppose you haven't used the fishe eye converter much because of the video, right? It is better on sharpness than the UWA converter, isn't it?

Cheers

Oskar

Hi Oskar,

Sorry, I don't have any stills with the 16mm + UWA to compare, but several of my videos use that combo - e.g: vimeo.com/55703933

[edit - The forum software insists on trying to embed the hyperlink to vimeo - so apologies the link above isn't clickable.]

I found the UWA works better with the 4.33" dome than the fisheye - apart from the centre of the frame, the fisheye was worse than 'soft' and well into 'blurry' territory. (I didn't use the fisheye u/w much because of that - stopping down a lot might have helped, but I'm often in low light as it is...)

Cheers,

Huw

--

http://www.huwporter.com

Interesting, is this the general consent that the UWA gives better quality with the Nauticam dome than the fish eye converter?

Or this caused by variations in the quality of actual items in the combinations?

At what stop if stopped down are the UWA/fish eye acceptable (if any)?

Cheers

/O

I found the UWA works better with the 4.33" dome than the fisheye - apart from the centre of the frame, the fisheye was worse than 'soft' and well into 'blurry' territory. (I didn't use the fisheye u/w much because of that - stopping down a lot might have helped, but I'm often in low light as it is...)

If anyone is interested, I have a first video shot with the 10-18mm up on vimeo at:

vimeo.com/huwporter/uepi <- copy and paste into browser

Cheers,

Huw