Canon EF lenses on MFT cameras?

Now I can show some photos that I have taken with EM1II, Canon 8-15mm and the Zen DP100 and Nauticam 140 domeport. I fear, however, that the real life situation in the sea does not allow a detailed and rigorous comparison of IQ, I guess I am not a good test photographer. Too different are the conditions, is the distance of the main subject, object distance throughtout the image, especially in the cornmers, even the f-stops differ to some extend. Photos of a test image at identical conditions would serve the task much better...

First, I repeat my subjective impressions: IQ is very similar between DP100 and NA140, but the percentage of sharp photos is higher with the NA140. I also do not notice a substantial advantage of the DP100 for CFWA, the NA140 is already small and handsome. My favorite domeport remains the NA140 and is it just because the neoprene cover fits much better on the rig...

Here two uncropped fotos (but resolution and quality greatly reduced to be postable)

DP100: 8mm; f6.3; 1/125; ISO200; 2* Z330.

NA140: 8mm; f7.1; 1/60; ISO200; 2*Z330:

In the next posts come parts of the images at 100% resolution (but not quality)...

DP100: center.

DP100: left, lower, corner:

Since the distance in the left, lower corner, is closer than the rest, here comes a partial image of the lower rim of the photo, taken from the middel, where the distance is more comparable:

NA140, center:

NA140, left, lower, corner:

I hope this is, at least to some extent, useful...

Wolfgang

Thanks, @Architeuthis for the comparisons between the Zen 100mm and Nauticam 140mm domes. Very insightful.

For me, size, budget and weight were major considerations. I picked up a brand-new-second-hand DP-100CR (0.71 kg) for ~£500 on a popular online marketplace, they're not too hard to find around this price. I was also attracted to the built in extension for the Canon 8-15 FE, mitigating the need for a distinct extension ring. The DP-100 also fits perfectly in my lens and port divider bag back-to-back with my wide wet lens. I suspect any larger dome would struggle to fit in and may even lose protection or be at risk of damage.

However, compare this setup to ~£340 - 0.21kg for 30mm N120 extension ring (difficult to find second hand deals) and ~£889 - 1.45kg for the 140mm Optical Glass Dome (£1031 if you want the removable shade), you're looking at ~£729 to £871 cost and 0.95 kg weight saving. Regardless of your budget or airline carrier, these figures are significant.

I am not using the printed extension ring extender (incompatible with zen dome) so have resorted to shifting the toothed zoom ring backwards onto the first set of gripping pads so the teeth can engage with the N85-N120 adaptor port gear. This has not resulted in the zoom gear falling off (yet) so is my make do solution for now.

In my experience the ~5mm misalignment of the entrance pupil of the lens closer to the dome than is calculated to be optimal has not had a noticeable an impact of FOV or IQ. I don't have the 140mm dome and 30mm extension, so I can't perform the comparisons you have made.

See below some images with the 8-15FE on a GH5 with Zen DP-100 CR from a diving trip to the Farne Islands. There's some motion blur thanks to the 1/30 shutter speed, I should have gone faster and upped the strobe power. Overall, the setup completely exceeded my expectations. I did not observe issues with focussing at f.5-6 - f8, focus snapped on every time.

I'll be taking this setup on the WetPixel Red Sea Odyssey at end May early June and will report back with performance with WAM, CFWA and wide scenic. It will take observation of dramatic underperformance of this set up compared to others on the trip to convince me the benefits above have made to big a sacrifice/compromise to image quality or overall usability.

Note: I did experience freezing of the camera when zooming the lens with C-AF. Apparently this is common with some EF lenses on m43 bodies with metabones/viltrox adaptors. This was resolved by holding the lens release button and dismounting the lens using the port adaptor gear until camera warns the lens is not mounted, then rotating back until engaged. I must say it caused more than a small amount of panic and I've struggled to replicate this issue on dry land. Murphy is always with us when diving, I guess.

35 minutes ago, joncroweucl said:

I'll be taking this setup on the WetPixel Red Sea Odyssey at end May early June and will report back with performance with WAM, CFWA and wide scenic. It will take observation of dramatic underperformance of this set up compared to others on the trip to convince me the benefits above have made to big a sacrifice/compromise to image quality or overall usability.

Note: I did experience freezing of the camera when zooming the lens with C-AF. Apparently this is common with some EF lenses on m43 bodies with metabones/viltrox adaptors. This was resolved by holding the lens release button and dismounting the lens using the port adaptor gear until camera warns the lens is not mounted, then rotating back until engaged. I must say it caused more than a small amount of panic and I've struggled to replicate this issue on dry land. Murphy is always with us when diving, I guess.

 

=> A pity you booked the second turn of the Odyssey and not the first one. We almost would have met, since we will be on the first turn (May 22nd - 29th)...

=> The seals at the Farnes Island are still on our wishlist. 2021 we were ready to book the trip, but then an immovable professional appointment of my wife (and the pandemic) got between. I hope it will be possible this summer...

=> I see in your profile that you are using a GH5. The problem of freezing is both scaring and interesting. Can the freezing be solved by switching the camera on/off (and/or updating the camera and adapter firmwares)? I never experienced freezing with EM1II and always use C-AF&tracking (my wife is using EM5II with Tokina 10-17mm fisheye and Metabones 0.71x adapter and never experienced freezing so far (she uses S-AF)...)

When the difference in IQ cannot be clearly seen in real live photos, it cannot be substantial (at most an f-stop, if even existing)...

Wolfgang

1 hour ago, Architeuthis said:

=> A pity you booked the second turn of the Odyssey and not the first one. We almost would have met, since we will be on the first turn (May 22nd - 29th)...

=> The seals at the Farnes Island are still on our wishlist. 2021 we were ready to book the trip, but then an immovable professional appointment of my wife (and the pandemic) got between. I hope it will be possible this summer...

=> I see in your profile that you are using a GH5. The problem of freezing is both scaring and interesting. Can the freezing be solved by switching the camera on/off (and/or updating the camera and adapter firmwares)? I never experienced freezing with EM1II and always use C-AF&tracking (my wife is using EM5II with Tokina 10-17mm fisheye and Metabones 0.71x adapter and never experienced freezing so far (she uses S-AF)...)

 

When the difference in IQ cannot be clearly seen in real live photos, it cannot be substantial (at most an f-stop, if even existing)...

 

Wolfgang

>> A near miss! I booked the trip to Egypt when the only week available was the week in June! 

>> Let me know if you're organising a Farne Islands trip this year and I'll see if I'm available. September is the best time of year, the pups are building independence from their mothers and are incredibly curious and playful! We couldn't go 30 seconds without being inspected. Maybe we got very lucky, though I was completely unprepared for how fast they are! 

>> Re: freezing. It is a very strange issue that only happened in the thick of the action! The freeze COULD NOT be resolved by switching the camera off. The image on the LCD was frozen; zebras were flashing but the whole system was unresponsive. Thankfully disengaging the lens worked; I was fortunate the lens did not fall from the mount and end up loose in the port and dome!

I have managed to replicate this issue once outside of the housing. Having the camera in C-AF, AF-ON mapped to thumb button and held down, while quickly racking zoom on the lens. I cannot get this issue to repeat with AFS or AFF. I cannot diagnose the issue any further than establish that it exists. Given that other users have experience similar issues with other EF lenses on the viltrox and metabones adapters, I don't think 'upgrading' to the metabaones will eliminate the issue. I have a solution that I can deploy in the water, so as much as the issue is deeply annoying, it can be quickly resolved, albeit very much complicated by wearing 5mm gloves!

Has anyone had a go with the Nauticam 4.33in n120 port, with either the Canon (which I have with the 140), or the Tokina? By the look of the charts, it should need 10mm less extension than the 140, but I don't know how accurate that is. I also don't know how much the smaller dome will affect IQ, though I'm assuming it would be similar to the Zen 100, but potentially with more reflection issues due to acrylic vs glass.

As much as I like the 140, anything to make my rig smaller and lighter helps - I do >95% of my photography on breath-hold, so less drag = better. Getting it closer to neutral without bulky arms and the like is significant too.

Has anyone had a go with the Nauticam 4.33in n120 port, with either the Canon (which I have with the 140), or the Tokina? By the look of the charts, it should need 10mm less extension than the 140, but I don't know how accurate that is. I also don't know how much the smaller dome will affect IQ, though I'm assuming it would be similar to the Zen 100, but potentially with more reflection issues due to acrylic vs glass.

As much as I like the 140, anything to make my rig smaller and lighter helps - I do >95% of my photography on breath-hold, so less drag = better. Getting it closer to neutral without bulky arms and the like is significant too.

You need an extension for that set up you can see it on the nikon chart probably 10-20mm so after all is only smaller diameter and lighter but not much shorter

The canon 8-15mm is an amazing lens it shines in any format

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On 11/12/2022 at 11:41 PM, Interceptor121 said:

You need an extension for that set up you can see it on the nikon chart probably 10-20mm so after all is only smaller diameter and lighter but not much shorter

The canon 8-15mm is an amazing lens it shines in any format

I see in another thread you're now advocating a bit for the 4.33in acrylic dome. This interests me a lot - especially if you got a suggested extension from Nauticam. The size is one thing, but the weight is another entirely. After all, if you want a neutral(ish) rig, weight == size anyway. 

Of course what I'd really like is if the n85 EOS-M dedicated port for the 8-15 also worked for m43, but I fear that is too much to hope for

I see in another thread you're now advocating a bit for the 4.33in acrylic dome. This interests me a lot - especially if you got a suggested extension from Nauticam. The size is one thing, but the weight is another entirely. After all, if you want a neutral(ish) rig, weight == size anyway. 
Of course what I'd really like is if the n85 EOS-M dedicated port for the 8-15 also worked for m43, but I fear that is too much to hope for [emoji20]

43 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

That canon port may actually work
When I got mine I looked at the adapter for canon eos M to N120 (was not considering acrylic) so that I could mount the 140mm
The acrylic dome on its own requires the same extension of the 140 on the 8-15mm

Anyone feeling brave? I've asked Nauticam, but I think the answer will be that it isn't officially supported

Anyone feeling brave? I've asked Nauticam, but I think the answer will be that it isn't officially supported

Anyone feeling brave? I've asked Nauticam, but I think the answer will be that it isn't officially supported

Nauticam came back to me to say the 4.33 dome uses the same extension (as you said above), and that the EOS-M port is not compatible.

Hi guys, 

I currently own a GH5 and I am relatively happy with it's performance UW however I have 2 things that I would like to improve without breaking the bank.

1. AF - Based on land reviews it appears the GH5m2 which is compatible with the original Nauticam GH5 housing has an improved AF - is the upgrade worth it if you shoot UW and on land? Has anyone done this with the old housing?

2. If I go for the Canon 8-15 + 4.33/140mm combo, in terms of focal length would I be able to replace both my Oly 8mm and pana14-42 +WWL-1? The idea is to sell the Oly 8mm and WWL1 to finance the Canon 8-15 setup and take 'less bulk on trips'. 

Will the Canon 8-15 setup be able to cover CFWA + sharks + fish school shoots?

Cheers

The 8-15 gives you a 180° diagonal field at one end and 88° deg diagonal on the other, the easiest way to compare with a more rectilinear lenses is to compare horizontal field and the 8-15 gives 131 -67°  doing similar calcs for the WWL it is about 117 - 58°  horizontal field.

Converting that to 35mm equiv focal lengths it would be Fisheye - 26mm  vs a 11-33mm lens for the WWL.  SO the 8-15 goes close but does not have quite the reach of the 14-42 on the WWL.  You can certainly replace the 8mm fisheye but you already knew that but you won't get the max reach of the WWL, basically the smallest field is about 10° wider at max zoom on the 8-15  or another way it is like the 14-42 became a 14 - 26mm. 

If you used to use the focal length on the lens range from 26-42mm  you wouldn't be able to do this with just the 8-15.

1 hour ago, Blenny84 said:

Hi guys, 

I currently own a GH5 and I am relatively happy with it's performance UW however I have 2 things that I would like to improve without breaking the bank.

1. AF - Based on land reviews it appears the GH5m2 which is compatible with the original Nauticam GH5 housing has an improved AF - is the upgrade worth it if you shoot UW and on land? Has anyone done this with the old housing?

2. If I go for the Canon 8-15 + 4.33/140mm combo, in terms of focal length would I be able to replace both my Oly 8mm and pana14-42 +WWL-1? The idea is to sell the Oly 8mm and WWL1 to finance the Canon 8-15 setup and take 'less bulk on trips'. 

Will the Canon 8-15 setup be able to cover CFWA + sharks + fish school shoots?

Cheers

I cannot comment the GH5, as I have Oly EM1-II, but I can say something about Canon 8-15mm and WWL-1:

Nauticam port chards say that the diagonal field of view (FOV) of WWL-1 with Pana 14-42 is 130° - 50°. This compares to Canon 8-15 with 1x adapter as 180° - 85°. When you want it narrower, you could use the Kenko 1,4x TC and then you have FOV of 118° - 58°. Together with the TC, I think the combination is comparable to WWL-1. I suspect that the barrel distortion at a given FOV is very similar, but the sharpness, especially in the center, with the Canon lens may be better (Massimo/Interceptor here is using both Canon 8-15 and WWL-1 on GH5, he will know better; also JonCrowleucl here uses the Canon on GH-5 with DP100).

I personally prefer the 1x adapter without TC, as I like the big angle and zooming out to 85° is already very versatile, in case required. I also observed that with the 1,4x TC the AF started to struggle (a little), when there was not so much light (deeper and cloudy), while I never observed this so far without TC. This was with EM1-II that has better AF as GH-5 (again Massimo can say more)...

Regarding IQ (sharpness), I could not see a difference when I used the 1,4x TC, compared to without TC (MFT image). I could see a difference with another fisheye zoom lens, the Tokina 10-17mm: this is used with the 0,71x speedbooster and is as sharp as the Canon 8-15 with 1x adapter. The Tokina becomes less sharp when using it with the 1x glasless adapter and 1,4x TC (the 0,71x speedbooster together with 1,4x TC does not make sense). The IQ of the Tokina with 0,71x adapter is surprisingly good, but I do not recommend this lens, as you have to spend excess money on the 0.71x adapter and in the end the sum of lens+adapter gets in the range of the excellent Canon (that later also could be used for FF and is also excellent over the water (the Tokina is not))...

Wolfgang

P.S.: with the Canon 8-15, I definitely have no urge to acquire a WWL-1. I also have different rectilinear WA lenses and currently prefer the Zuiko 8-25mm + DP170, when the FOV should less wide, but I use it much more seldom as the zoom fisheye...

I have both GH5 & GH5M2. I use GH5M2 only underwater with the old NA-GH5  housing, mainly with 14-42 + WWL1-B. It's perfect. 

I did not find any improvement for AF but I use it for video only in SAF+MF. I guess I'm the only one with zero shutter count.

The main advantage is the 4K@50p 10 bit codec (4:2:0 actually).

I know nothing about photography  but what's wrong with the native 8mm fisheye and 4,33" dome? I sold it years ago but IIRC it focused on the dome.

2 hours ago, Architeuthis said:

I cannot comment the GH5, as I have Oly EM1-II, but I can say something about Canon 8-15mm and WWL-1:

Nauticam port chards say that the diagonal field of view (FOV) of WWL-1 with Pana 14-42 is 130° - 50°. This compares to Canon 8-15 with 1x adapter as 180° - 85°. When you want it narrower, you could use the Kenko 1,4x TC and then you have FOV of 118° - 58°. Together with the TC, I think the combination is comparable to WWL-1. I suspect that the barrel distortion at a given FOV is very similar, but the sharpness, especially in the center, with the Canon lens may be better (Massimo/Interceptor here is using both Canon 8-15 and WWL-1 on GH5, he will know better; also JonCrowleucl here uses the Canon on GH-5 with DP100).

I personally prefer the 1x adapter without TC, as I like the big angle and zooming out to 85° is already very versatile, in case required. I also observed that with the 1,4x TC the AF started to struggle (a little), when there was not so much light (deeper and cloudy), while I never observed this so far without TC. This was with EM1-II that has better AF as GH-5 (again Massimo can say more)...

Regarding IQ (sharpness), I could not see a difference when I used the 1,4x TC, compared to without TC (MFT image). I could see a difference with another fisheye zoom lens, the Tokina 10-17mm: this is used with the 0,71x speedbooster and is as sharp as the Canon 8-15 with 1x adapter. The Tokina becomes less sharp when using it with the 1x glasless adapter and 1,4x TC (the 0,71x speedbooster together with 1,4x TC does not make sense). The IQ of the Tokina with 0,71x adapter is surprisingly good, but I do not recommend this lens, as you have to spend excess money on the 0.71x adapter and in the end the sum of lens+adapter gets in the range of the excellent Canon (that later also could be used for FF and is also excellent over the water (the Tokina is not))...

 

 

Wolfgang

P.S.: with the Canon 8-15, I definitely have no urge to acquire a WWL-1. I also have different rectilinear WA lenses and currently prefer the Zuiko 8-25mm + DP170, when the FOV should less wide, but I use it much more seldom as the zoom fisheye...

 

Thank you for clarifying the FOV comparison. The 180 to 130 is what I am actually missing with the WWL1.

I am happy with the IQ of the WWL-1 and Oly 8mm but I like the option of having 'almost both in one' to a certain extent covering 180-85 vs 130-55 or 180.

I have had many situations when out with the Oly 8mm fish eye on and was missing  the zoom and the opposite with the WWL-1 on and wanting a larger FOV than 130. I also understand the Canon 8-15 provides equal or better IQ. 

I don't mind loosing out a bit in the narrower end, as you say if I really needed I could add a TC + extension later on.

Thank you for sharing all this information, tests, 3D prints etc its really valuable for people using the M43 system. 

1 hour ago, Davide DB said:

I have both GH5 & GH5M2. I use GH5M2 only underwater with the old NA-GH5  housing, mainly with 14-42 + WWL1-B. It's perfect. 

I did not find any improvement for AF but I use it for video only in SAF+MF. I guess I'm the only one with zero shutter count.

The main advantage is the 4K@50p 10 bit codec (4:2:0 actually).

I know nothing about photography  but what's wrong with the native 8mm fisheye and 4,33" dome? I sold it years ago but IIRC it focused on the dome.

Thanks, I think you are purely video focused and I am purely doing UW photography. I was just wondering if the AF for stills is better on the GH5m2 for underwater stills compared to the GH5. 

Nothing wrong with the Oly 8mm in 4.33 dome. 180 FOV in a small dome and good IQ however it is much less flexible than 180-85 FOV the Canon 8-15 provides. 

1 hour ago, Blenny84 said:

Thank you for clarifying the FOV comparison. The 180 to 130 is what I am actually missing with the WWL1.

I am happy with the IQ of the WWL-1 and Oly 8mm but I like the option of having 'almost both in one' to a certain extent covering 180-85 vs 130-55 or 180.

I have had many situations when out with the Oly 8mm fish eye on and was missing  the zoom and the opposite with the WWL-1 on and wanting a larger FOV than 130. I also understand the Canon 8-15 provides equal or better IQ. 

I don't mind loosing out a bit in the narrower end, as you say if I really needed I could add a TC + extension later on.

Thank you for sharing all this information, tests, 3D prints etc its really valuable for people using the M43 system. 

Just an addition: The Canon 8-15 works at least as good behind the Zen DP170 with 35mm extension as behind the Nauticam 140. WIth the DP170 you also could use a rectilinear lens, as e.g. the Zuiko 8-25mm, in addition. I personally, prefer the 140 (or the 100) domeport, as it is more handsome, but just that you know...

Wolfgang