Nikon 8-15mm in the house!

As I stated in my review, the Sigma 15mm shoots very well. ALL of the lenses on the Nikon need to be checked for calibration issues on the D850. Focus is critical with this super-high resolution beast. I'm not sure that the Nikon 8-15 is worth nearly 3 times the cost. I'll be able to try it on my next trip in the fall.

The Nikkor 8-15 has been around for a while now and I'd welcome some advice.....

I've got a Subal DP100 and have asked Subal for their recommendation for an EXR on that - they recommend an EXR20 for their DP230 and the 8" dome too (DP-FE). But how do folks find using the 8-15 with a 4" domeport? The reviews I have read on various websites sound good - but I'd welcomed the views of WPers. Is there any major advantage using an 8" port (or a 230) other than for obviously over/unders? Are corners significantly sharper?

And how about with a Kenko 1.4TC and a 4" dome? How are people finding that? Finding a zoom ring for that combination sounds problematic. But maybe there is a way to rig one

Thanks!

I have used the 8-15mm with a 4" port and the Seacam CFWA port (with a Kenko 1.4x TC) which is significantly smaller.

I think that while the results are acceptable, there is no doubt that smaller ports do affect image quality. The fisheye effect camouflages the corner distortion, but it is still there...

I would recommend shooting this lens behind a 170mm port or greater size if possible.

Adam

OK, many thanks, Adam

I gave up on using the 100mm/4 inches mini dome ports a while back. Now that I am using the Nikon 8-15mm with a Kenko 1.4x TC as my primary wide-angle, I have been playing around a bit with a Nauticam N120 Optical Glass Fisheye dome, which is 140mm/5.5 inches across.

Here is one image with the barrel sponge was taken with the lens set at 9mm (with the 1.4x TC = 13mm) at f9.5.

Same lens arrangement going closer with the lens set at 21mm (with the 1.4x TC = 15mm) at f13 to get the this octopus and scorpionfish pair.

Lovely image Walt..

Which camera is this with?

Adam

Yeah, I forgot to mention in my post that I'd be using the 8-15 with a D500 - so DX.

Thanks Adam. The body I am currently using is a Nikon D500 in a Nuaticam housing.

Many thanks, Walt.

Nice pics indeed. That combination is working well.

I follow this tread with great interest, although I am not a Nikon 8-15mm user:

I use the Canon 8-15mm fisheye with the Oly EM5MII (MFT sensor; with and without the 1.4x teleconverter). The purpose is similar to the people that use the Nikon 8-15mm on DX - use the lens for WA (instead of switching from circular fisheye to 180 degree diagonal fisheye as is the case on FF).

=> So far I use the 8-15mm fisheye with the Zen DP-170-N120, but this dome is not ideal for everything: (i) the dome is big and (ii) it is not a hemispheric dome as would be ideal for a fisheye lens (I suspect that with a hemispheric dome the images would become sharper)...

=> I am very interested to hear which fisheye dome gives best sharpness with such a 8-15mm fisheye lens with cropped sensors - 100mm or 140mm diameter (with the 2x crop factor of the MFT format, the minimum dome size for sharpest images MAY be even a little smaller than for the 1.5x crop of DX - several people have stated already that the 100mm dome leads to bad image quality when used with the 1x "crop"-factor of FF, so 100m is not a good option for FF, but MAY be very well for MFT).

Wolfgang

Same lens arrangement going closer with the lens set at 21mm (with the 1.4x TC = 15mm) at f13 to get the this octopus and scorpionfish pair.

Walt, what EXR do you use with the 8-15 with that N120 dome; and then what EXR do you use when you add the 1.4TC? How many millimetres is the difference between the two EXRs?

I've not been able to pin down the difference from Subal.

Yes I am currently using the N120 dome port. The two images I posted back on July 23rd were shot with the N120 mounted on 50mm extension ring.

When comparing Nauticam’s N120 Port System chart for Nikon lenses to that of Canon’s lenses, I am a bit puzzled as to difference extension ring size recommendation between the two lenses. The Nikon chart says I should use the 20mm extension ring with the 140mm dome for optimized results, where as the Canon chart says the 30mm is the recommended size extension ring for the Canon 8-15 with the 140mm dome port.

On the outside, the dimensions are virtually the same with the Nikon 8-15 measuring approx. 3.05 x 3.27" (77.5 x 83 mm) to the Canon 8-15 also measuring approx. 3.09 x 3.27" (78.5 x 83 mm). The same applies the minimal focus distances for both lenses with 6.3" (16 cm) for the Nikon 8-15, 6.2" (15.75 cm) with the Canon 8-15. Logic would say the required extension for these two lenses should be the same, leaving me puzzled as to why the extension ring for the Nikon 8-15 needed to be 10mm’s shorter.

Enquiring directly to Nauticam as to why this is, their explanation is that although the two lenses are physically very similar on the outside, in actuality (due to the fact that they two different systems) the results when comparing them behind the N120 (140mm) dome port with the 30mm extension ring, test results with the Nikon 8-15 fisheye experienced very slight amount of vignette at the 8mm focal length on a full frame DSLR, therefore on the Nikon chart, Nuaticam lists the 20mm extension ring.

Keep in mind, when Nauticam did their work on matching which extension ring would work best, the only viable options at the time was the 20mm and 30mm. Since then they have introduced both a new 25mm and 30mm size extension rings.

So now I am giving the N120 port a go with a 25mm and 20mm when using the 1.4X Teleconverter, and just the 25mm when I am not using the 8-15 by itself. Of course, when using the lens by its self, my working range at its widest focal range before vignette is 13mm to 15mm.

Thanks for that, Walt. Very helpful

For what it is worth, Seacam recommends a 20mm extension for both the Canon and Nikon 8-15mm lenses with their dome ports. However, when the C lens came out and these recommendations were not yet out, I tried a range of extensions and got OK results with the 25 and 30mm as well if I recall correctly (tried it with their Superdome which is less than a hemisphere like a lot of other similar domes). Longer extension than what is used with a hemisphere would thus seem better. I suspect the glass part in all of them comes from the same source - how many companies can make them? So results should be comparable. I did not do critical tests - mainly looked out for vignetting from the shade and if my subjects were sharp - I was doing actual shoots of salmon as it was that time of year. Since then I have use the 8-15 C lens much more with their smaller Wideport due to stream depth limitations. I will likely do the same for the N version that is now in my arsenal.

Thanks, Tom!

Hope all's good with you up there in Alaska. Seems a life-time ago since our IDCs, eh??!??!

I hope it is o.k. to revive this old tread...

There is ample experience from many photographers now with the Nikon 8-15mm (and also the Canon 8-15mm) on FX/FF and DX/APS-C...

Since the 8-15mm with 1.4x Kenko Teleconverter turned out to be very useful for DX/APS-C cameras, I am curious whether a FX/FF shooter has tested a 8-15mm with a 2x teleconverter (like the new Kenko "HD") and what the optical quality and AF is like?

Wolfgang