Superdomes vs fisheye vs Nikonos

I am looking for an optimal setup for my fisheye converted sony 28mm (A7II, housing undecided yet).

It seems even if you put a fisheye behind a superdome, exceptional results are not warranted.

Would it be better to go with a hemispheric fisheye dome? Is there a fisheye-focused theoretical discussion, where the components should go (extension rings?), which port diameter is ideal?

I am not familiar with your equipment so cannot address it specifically. Nonetheless, I have used some of the gear mentioned in the link and I agree with the conclusion to the article. Use the largest radius dome possible for the best results optically (for a given shooting situation). My experience with the Nikon 10.5mm lens is that the Superdome (SD) does yield the best results optically.

I have also used three other Seacam made dome ports with the 10.5mm lens - the designated Fisheye Port (FP), the Wide Port (WP), and the Fisheye Macro Port (FMP; listed in approximate decreasing order of dome radius). Note that only the FP and FMP are full hemispheres. This means there is a sizable airspace in front the lens and behind the dome (especially for larger fisheye ports such as the FP; note that many are even larger than the FP, e.g., 8" or 20cm in diameter. This limits how close one can get to ones subject. Alex Mustard has an excellent video describing this in detail - it is linked somewhere on this site. One can get a bit closer using a sub-hemispherical dome. For much of my shooting, the main downside of the SD is that it is too large to shoot in shallow water, so often I resort to one of the other domes mentioned above. I quite often use the WP with the Canon EF8-15mm fisheye lens (at 15mm) to get a similar effect as with the FMP on the 10.5mm Nikon lens. Even using the smallish WP, the top of the dome glass is above the waterline during some of my shooting because of shallow water depth. So to answer your question - there is no such thing as ideal!

Good luck!

Tom

Hi Tom, thanks for the "0.02$"

The equipment is "under construction" I am currently running an olympus E-PL5 in 10bar housing with its minidome, but very disappointed in the corner sharpness, especially at 9mm(~100°FOV). For multiple reasons I am migrating to Sony,

(one being the limited dynamic range and poor video capabilities of the EPL5) but no investments made yet, I want to do proper research before doing the change. This especially applies to the dome vs wet lens vs nikonos question.

Certainly, there is no single perfect solution for everything, e.g over-under @ lack of AF would be a weak point of the nikonos. Superdomes have another drawback: they squeeze out at least 3 sandwiches from my hand luggage:(

I'll wait a little more, until we see some real-life experience with the WWL-1 on full-frame - maybe compared to a superdome. Fisheye domes have their limitations, especially the smaller ones:(

Thanks for the link, I had not seen the article before.

It is a good idea to do the research before spending the money!

You have to figure out what you really want to do, especially the specific pix you want to take. Superdomes are certainly challenging for the traveler. I have even taken them on hikes up creeks etc. - not fun.

Good luck!