GH4 - Nauticam Macro Lens/Port Thoughts

Peter - or anyone that has the zoom gear for the 14-42PZ - can the zoom gear be adjusted to operate the focus switch instead of the zoom switch? If that is the case then the zoom can be accomplished via the menu dial (after assigning the zoom control to a function button).

Out-of-the-box, you could not do it with the Nauticam gear as-is because everything is precisely aligned to move the zoom control without moving the focus control. But you could modify it. But the gear is metal (aluminium?) so it'd require some careful cutting. You would have to cut the zoom slot wider and glue some something on to slim down the slot around the focus control. You can see what I mean from the photo. The focus switch is on the left and the zoom switch is on the right.

But, even after you had that done, I'm not sure that the focus control wheel on the housing, coupled by internal gears to the lens gear, would be precise enough to make the fine focus changes required for macro.

And, IMHO, I'm not sure what problem it would solve. I had no problem doing auto-focus-lock on any tiny part of the subject then moving the camera as required. The Pinpoint AF is very precise and easy to see what is in focus. With a larger monitor, like the Shogun, it'll be even easier.

Regards

Peter

Sorry to be so dumb - and thanks Peter for providing some excellent info / photos.

Why would I choice the 14-42PZ over say the 12-35mm? I appreciate the long end isn't as telephoto. But never contemplated this lens

before.

I've only had a brief look, but it appears the 12-35mm fits in the flat port for the Oly 60mm.

I think you could have some challenges in really silty conditions but if the camera has peaking you can lock focus at a specific distance and then move the camera.

At the end with a close up lens you usually have around 1" range of focus anyway so that should work fine for most

Looking at your 7-14 footage things do look tiny even when fully zoomed in. The camera does focus and also very close but the capture area is really vast

It is a shame that there is no flat port for the 12-35 lens as you could mount a wetmate and then diopters for close up work on a sharper lens. Instead there is a 7" dome that is cumbersome if you want to do close range work. Could still be fine with medium size fish where you lack the extreme big fish or they don't get close and don't have real super tiny subjects.

In Lembeh however I can't think of any dive site where I would take a 7-14 or 12-35 instead of taking the 14-42 with diopters

Sorry to be so dumb - and thanks Peter for providing some excellent info / photos.

 

Why would I choice the 14-42PZ over say the 12-35mm? I appreciate the long end isn't as telephoto. But never contemplated this lens

before.

 

I've only had a brief look, but it appears the 12-35mm fits in the flat port for the Oly 60mm.

Interesting about the 12-35 and flat port. Maybe the dome is required to fit the hood. But I also see you can put extension 20 and 30 on the 35 port. So you could probably do something

 

I've only had a brief look, but it appears the 12-35mm fits in the flat port for the Oly 60mm.

Close but no cigar...

It fits without the zoom gear. With the zoom gear, the lens is a bit too fat to get into the port tube. Almost fits. If I hit the camera with a hammer, it might just squeeze in.

So, yes, you could use the 12-35mm in the Oly 60 port but only set to one focal length for the whole dive.

Regards

Peter

Off to buy the 14-42mm now... my question(s) have been answered!

It is a shame as the 14-42 lens is not that sharp

Surely the 4K brings a lot of detail with the high bitrate but the glass itself is average

I am looking forward to see results until then I keep my compact RX100 II

It is a shame as the 14-42 lens is not that sharp

I'm wondering why you'd say that it is not that sharp. Have you used this lens and seen sharpness issues?

Most of the reviews seem to be positive on its optical qualities. One of the reviewers that I tend to trust (because they do precise bench tests rather than subjective hands-on field tests) says:

"Sharpness

The Panasonic 14-42mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 X is remarkably sharp, and a noticeable improvement over the existing 14-42mm kit lens. Used at its widest focal length setting (14mm) at its widest aperture (ƒ/3.5) the lens provides excellent results for sharpness in the center of the frame, with very slight corner softness; there is very little improvement as the lens is stopped down at this focal length, and diffraction limiting sets in at around ƒ/11. Even then, there's no noticeable impact on sharpness until ƒ/16 where the image is still decently sharp from corner to corner; even ƒ/22 is pretty good.

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1458

Personally, I'm not seeing any lack of sharpness in any of the underwater testing that I am doing. I'm looking at 4K video at 100%, both corners and centre and it all looks fine.

Like most lenses, best to avoid the zoom and f-stop extremes for best performance. I wouldn't recommend using it as a main WA lens - there's the excellent 7-14mm lens for WA - but as a macro lens (with a flip diopter) that can double-up as a general purpose lens, it seems to fit the requirement. Use it in the 20mm to 35mm range and it is fine.

Regards

Peter

A friend of mine has it and on the GX7 for stills does not look amazing but possibly with the GH4 it is another story

I don't find it very soft but I don't find it sharper than my little camera either. Surely at 4K resolution will look sharper anyway

Well, seems like it get a bit more complicated now. When shooting video at 4K, the GH4 become a 2.3x crop factor:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/video/tips-and-solution/how-emulate-super-35mm-4k-video-panasonic-gh4

So a 14-42mm becomes a 32mm-96mm. If the lens has soft corner, and the GH4 only use the center portion of the sensor, does that mean there is a chance that the soft corner of the lens wouldn't be an issue? Or am I'm reading it wrong? It's getting confusing now.

No that's correct the crop eliminates some of the problem . Also 32-96 really makes it a close lens at 4K

I actually use the The Panasonic 14-42mm ƒ/3.5-5.6 X lens for wide angle.

Panasonic have 2 conversion lens( a wide angle conversion lens & fisheye conversion lens) that attach to the 14-42 x lens or the 14mm pancake lens.

The Nauticam 3.5" port needs the 30mm extension ring to fit the 14-42mm X lens+ conversion lens.

This was a cheaper option for me compared to buying the 7-14mm lens + new dome port.

The 14-42mm X lens with conversion lens is ok on the GH2. Good FL for sharks. The 14-42X+ conversion lens is much better than the 14mm pancake lens+conversion lens

I have never used the the 14-42x for macro.There is also a macro conversion lens for the 14-42x but i have not tried this combo.

For macro i use 45mm and sometimes the 25mm for general fishlife shooting.

The fish eye conversion lens is interesting. Are you referring to the Panasonic DMW-GFC1? If that's the one, then I don't think it's wide enough because it only give 120 degree on land, and would become 84 degree once in the water. May be a wet wide angle lens is a better solution, just don't know which wet lens work.

The fish eye conversion lens is interesting. Are you referring to the Panasonic DMW-GFC1? If that's the one, then I don't think it's wide enough because it only give 120 degree on land, and would become 84 degree once in the water. May be a wet wide angle lens is a better solution, just don't know which wet lens work.

I think Kevster is using the combo behind a 3.5" dome port.

The fish eye conversion lens is interesting. Are you referring to the Panasonic DMW-GFC1? If that's the one, then I don't think it's wide enough because it only give 120 degree on land, and would become 84 degree once in the water. May be a wet wide angle lens is a better solution, just don't know which wet lens work.

Yes the conversion lens is the DMW-GFC1. I am by no means an expert but this combo is ok for semi-wide. I would guess its more than 84 degrees FOV when using the 3.5" dome port underwater. I would guess its at least 120 degrees.

I bought the 14-42X lens a long time ago , hoping that i would be able to use the zoom function. However looks like there is now a Nauticam gear for this function..

(Sorry for discussing WA in a macro discussion. Just wanted to highlight this lens can be used at both ends!)

Thanks, I left out the Nauticam 3.5" port part. This set up sure is cheaper than the 7-14mm lens set up, I'm sure the 7-14mm has better optic quality.

On nauticam port system recommends the 4.33" but the lens can't zoom so the 7-14 is more interesting for sure

 

Close but no cigar...

 

It fits without the zoom gear. With the zoom gear, the lens is a bit too fat to get into the port tube. Almost fits. If I hit the camera with a hammer, it might just squeeze in.

 

So, yes, you could use the 12-35mm in the Oly 60 port but only set to one focal length for the whole dive.

 

Regards

Peter

What about fitting the 12-35 in the special Nauticam 12-50 port? It's got a 77mm thread, so I'm assuming it's wider than the 65mm macro.

Without the special 12-50mm gear, it's $450--only $150 more than the 65mm macro port. http://www.backscatter.com/sku/na-36161.lasso

Of course, it would mean getting the 77mm flip diopeter instead of the 65mm, but if it works with the quality of the 12-35, it might be a good trade-off.

What about fitting the 12-35 in the special Nauticam 12-50 port? It's got a 77mm thread, so I'm assuming it's wider than the 65mm macro.

 

Without the special 12-50mm gear, it's $450--only $150 more than the 65mm macro port. http://www.backscatter.com/sku/na-36161.lasso

 

Of course, it would mean getting the 77mm flip diopeter instead of the 65mm, but if it works with the quality of the 12-35, it might be a good trade-off.

Unfortunately I don't have that port to test the combination.

Hi Peter,

what about the Oly 12-40/2.8 ?

I have used it with the ZEN170II with good results. There is another thread where you can see how close you can go with that combo.