E-M5 set up!

Hi you informative lot,

So, I finally upgraded from my very loyal and trustworthy G11 that travelled the world with me but was ultimately extremely frustrating underwater (And topside, too, I suppose!)

I have gone and bought the E-M5 with the 12-50mm lens and I'm about to order the 8 mil Panasonic and the 60mm Olympus lenses for it along with the Nauticam housing. I already have 2xS2000s with optics and the Inon D4 base with the arms and stuff - two Inon 165s and one wide angle lens from Inon that just didn't work.

So, basically - I have read a bit about the praises of the Nauticam 3.5" vs the 4.33" dome and as far as I can tell - the 3.5" allows for closer focusing (Which I gather would be an advantage with my not-so-powerful S2000s) but the 4.33" offers greater depth of field? Given that the 8mm can focus as close as 4" - is this really an issue? And what kind of depth of field differences are we talking about? I thought fisheyes were known for having HUGE depths of field?

Also, THIS port works not only with the 12-50mm but also with the 60mm macro, I understand? Are there large differences between that port and the specific macro port? Or really.. will I even use the 12-50mm underwater?

Lastly - what size arms do you all think I should get? http://www.seaoptics.com.au/products/trays-grips-arms/components

I was thinking 2x5" arms on each side?

Wait for all my frustrating questions regarding m43 in the future - changeable lens cameras, ports and gears are all new (Especially that virtual image with the domes!)

Cheers

Adam

I recently was deciding between the Nauticam 4.33 and 3.5 domes for my EM-1 setup too. I ended up going for the 4.33 since the dealer had it in stock and the 3.5 was going to take a while to back order. Seeing the 4.33 in person, it's still quite small. You can get closer with the 3.5 but the 4.33 is no slouch in this department either.

As for the 12-50 and 60 port situation, they both work in the other's port with the some limitations. The 12-50 in the 60 port requires a third party zoom gear (search for 'Austrian' gear or 3D printing files) which does not support the macro mode (using a wet diopter helps out here). The 60 works fine in the 12-50 port, but the port is fairly expensive and it doesn't take a wet diopter as easily due to not having the standard 67mm filter size.

How much closer are we talking, really?

On the E-M5 thread it actually looked like the 4.33" was sharper (In I think Doctor Mustard's duck phots?) than the 3.5"?

And when you say works fine - it works well? No difference in image quality between the 12-50mm port? And I thought the 12-50 port came with a 77mm-67mm ring?

How much closer are we talking, really?

 

On the E-M5 thread it actually looked like the 4.33" was sharper (In I think Doctor Mustard's duck phots?) than the 3.5"?

The photos in that thread I think speak for themselves. The 3.5 will get you closer but the 4.33 probably gets you better image quality in the form of better corners/ability to open the aperture more.

And when you say works fine - it works well? No difference in image quality between the 12-50mm port? And I thought the 12-50 port came with a 77mm-67mm ring?

... but the 4.33 probably gets you better image quality in the form of better corners...

Maybe. But to confirm you need to see a pic of the duck with the same aspect ratio and, of course, same f/stop.

Open the aperture more in CFWA situation? Why would you want to do that?

Greetings,

Jock

Open the aperture more in CFWA situation? Why would you want to do that?

You probably wouldn't for CFWA, but I suppose it depends on the specifics of the shot. It might also make sense for other types of shots. Either way, both of the domes have been successfully used to produce excellent shots. My opinion is that it's easy to overoptimize here.

Hi chaps..

Just to let you know that there is a better and cheaper option available of that 12-50mm gear for the Macro Port 65. You can find them here: http://deepshots.myshopify.com/

PS... yes I make them myself

Bit late for me to get your zoom gear for the 12-50 unfortunately. Cheaper than the one I got from Austria. Curious as to what the pins are holding in place?

Hi chaps..

 

Just to let you know that there is a better and cheaper option available of that 12-50mm gear for the Macro Port 65. You can find them here: http://deepshots.myshopify.com/

 

PS... yes I make them myself

First of all, if you haven't done so already, you'll want to read the comprehensive OM-D thread and the comprehensive set-up instructions at these links:

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46536

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=48625

Then in answer to your question . . .

Or really.. will I even use the 12-50mm underwater?

. . . lots of us do exactly that. I use mine almost exclusively as I like the combination of decent wide angle, zoom capability, and good macro functionality. It is certainly true that prime lenses and the ports to go with them will make technically better images in the appropriate circumstances, but when circumstances change or unexpected targets materialize you also can't change your objectives once you're under water like you can with the 12-50.

Bit late for me to get your zoom gear for the 12-50 unfortunately. Cheaper than the one I got from Austria. Curious as to what the pins are holding in place?

 

Hi Nautilus

with all Deepshots gears the little scrub screws can be used, if needed/wanted, to tighten the internal o-rings that grab on the lens zoom ring. This way you minimize the risk of misalignment that might happen if you push the gears from the side for example.