Micro 4/3 with Wet WA for Comapact

Hi,

If my housing has 67 mm thread can I use and WA adapter ( like dyron super wide angle lens 13 mm) with stock 14-42 lens from Olympus E-M10 ?

What would be the limits ( vignetting, lack of sharpness, focusing) compared to a real wide angle lens with a proper dome ?

What about macro diopter to use with this stock lens ?

I'd like to have the versatile and compact ( shooting WA and macro on the same dive) and quality of DSLR sensor.

Is this possible ?

Thanks

Macro diopters will certainly work with that lens. I don' shoot WA so don't know for sure about your first question, but for example Nauticam says their WWL will work with that lens too

Nauticam's WWL-1 is your best bet for WA, just search around wetpixel (I don't have one yet but its on the list). For Macro you have multiple options, I personally use a ucl-165.

I know this is a bit of necromancy, but I have the same question as the OP and it doesn't seem like it has been answered.

Will a Dyron SWAL work well with an OM-D E-M10?

All the stores I see selling the SWAL only talk about using it with cameras with smaller sensors. Except for one that says with a G16, the FOV will be 100 degrees, instead of 130.

That all leads me to wonder if the SWAL is useful on a m43 sensor. What will the FOV be?

I'm starting to think it would simply not be a smart purchase to use with a m43 camera.

Get the Nauticam version, for sure it will work with EM-10 (for the right lens). To the OP, I guess that what you want (small camera, completely versatile on a single dive and quality of DSLR) is very unlikely. I shoot the EM1-II and like it a lot, but it is not quite the same quality of a DSLR. Also, when you think of wet lenses, they are never quite as good as a prime lens in the appropriate port.

Cheers

Bill

Get the Nauticam version, for sure it will work with EM-10 (for the right lens). To the OP, I guess that what you want (small camera, completely versatile on a single dive and quality of DSLR) is very unlikely. I shoot the EM1-II and like it a lot, but it is not quite the same quality of a DSLR. Also, when you think of wet lenses, they are never quite as good as a prime lens in the appropriate port.

 

Cheers

Bill

While I appreciate you taking the time, your reply is not really very helpful. I specifically asked about the SWAL. It is a LOT less expensive than the WWL-1. I want to know about the SWAL. I know the WWL-1 would be better, but I am not prepared to spend that much money on a lens for my (old) E-M10. I can't find a used WWL-1 anywhere. I can get a used SWAL for roughly $250.

Also, the same suggestion (for a WWL-1) was already posted in this thread.

And, the OP is over 2 years old, so he has probably already made his decision.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk (and I know this is probably coming across that way, for which I apologize). I'm just saying that I asked specifically whether a SWAL will work (decently) on an E-M10. I don't need suggestions for a lens that will cost me 4X as much. I already know about that one. That is not my question.

If were really thinking of spending over $1K on a WWL-1, I would start be getting a better camera and a Nauti WACP (even better than a WWL-1).

I'm just looking for something not too expensive that might be better than the Meikon WA wet dome I am using now. And, at this point, I think the SWAL is probably not it.

 

While I appreciate you taking the time, your reply is not really very helpful. I specifically asked about the SWAL. It is a LOT less expensive than the WWL-1. I want to know about the SWAL. I know the WWL-1 would be better, but I am not prepared to spend that much money on a lens for my (old) E-M10. I can't find a used WWL-1 anywhere. I can get a used SWAL for roughly $250.

 

Also, the same suggestion (for a WWL-1) was already posted in this thread.

 

And, the OP is over 2 years old, so he has probably already made his decision.

 

I don't mean to sound like a jerk (and I know this is probably coming across that way, for which I apologize). I'm just saying that I asked specifically whether a SWAL will work (decently) on an E-M10. I don't need suggestions for a lens that will cost me 4X as much. I already know about that one. That is not my question.

 

If were really thinking of spending over $1K on a WWL-1, I would start be getting a better camera and a Nauti WACP (even better than a WWL-1).

 

I'm just looking for something not too expensive that might be better than the Meikon WA wet dome I am using now. And, at this point, I think the SWAL is probably not it.

There is a reason you don't find used WWL-1s. People who buy them love them, and keep them for their next camera.

I don't have the SWAL but the tests from Bluewater suggest that it will vignette a bit on the EM-10. I am sure that you can find a zoom setting where vignetting is not appreciable, but for a micro 4/3 sensor it will probably not be as wide as it will be on a compact sensor. as for the WACP, it probably won't work very well except on full frame cameras. BUT the results that I have seen from that lens are quite nice (a bit pricey though).

CHeers

Bill

Here is a vote for the WWL-1. Find the money to buy it.

I don't have the SWAL but the tests from Bluewater suggest that it will vignette a bit on the EM-10. I am sure that you can find a zoom setting where vignetting is not appreciable, but for a micro 4/3 sensor it will probably not be as wide as it will be on a compact sensor. as for the WACP, it probably won't work very well except on full frame cameras. BUT the results that I have seen from that lens are quite nice (a bit pricey though).

CHeers

Bill

Thanks. That is kind of the conclusion I was coming to. (that it won't work very well) What I read was that it gives 130 degree FOV on a 1/1.7" (?) sensor. It only gives about 100 on some other sensor that is bigger. I guess that means it will be even less FOV on a m43 sensor. No bueno.

Yes, at least for the moment, it seems the WACP is only for full frame cameras. But, that is where I see myself going. I was only considering a new dome (to replace the one I'm using now) as a stopgap in the meantime. Which is why I don't want to spend $1100 on a new WWL-1. If I were to come across a used one, I would grab it. I just thought it might be possible that the SWAL would follow the 80/20 rule - 80% as good for 20% of the price (used).

Thanks, all, for the input. I will not pursue the SWAL.