thoughts on mini domes

I'm going to try using a 4" dome on my next trip and wonder if there is any preference between the Zen DP-100-ACR and the Aquatica 18410 Mini Dome 100?

The Aquatica Mini Dome requires the 48463 Port Extension and the shade is not removable.

Does the Zen DP-100-ACR require a separate port extension?

Also, the shade is removable on the Zen and that has me leaning toward the Zen.

Thanks for any insight.

Hi Waja

Whether or not you need an EXR depends on the lens you are using. I found with the Tokina 10-17 I needed a 13mm EXR. But with a Nikkor 10.5 I didn't need one.

I never removed the shade on my Zen. I'm not sure I even realised that was feasible. You've got me wondering why you would.

If you plan to use your 8-15mm at the 8mm end, you will need to remove the shade. The shade will vignette when you are shooting full circular fisheye.

Aquatica do offer a version of their port (by order) that has the shade machined off.

My understanding is that the Zen DP-100-ACR does not need an extension. I have used it with another housing brand and it did not.

Unless someone comes along who has personal experience of using this lens/port combination, I would follow the advice of your local dealer.

Adam

I use the aquatica mini dome which I removed the shade petals with a dremel ( removed the glass first). I have used the port with the 8-15 and also with 15 mm fisheye (also with kenkco 1.5x teleconverter). I can't recall which extension I use with the 8-15mm but I did write to aquatica to correct there original option.

I'm planning on using the Canon 8-15mm. I missed the option to have Aquatica remove the shade (or do it myself). However, with the Zen not needing an extension and thus one less seal along with the removable (and re-attachable) shade has me going in that direction. Time to see if updating the flat port at this time also makes sense.

Thanks all.