D500 ports for WA, zoom and macro (nauticam)

Hey John

Ahh, yes, spend more and more on gear that I use maybe once..... I know the feeling!

I'll have to leave it to Alex on the 60mm lens in the 85 port. He's the Nauticam Man.

On your and Mark's (AussieByron) comments on magnifying viewfinder, I totally agree. I bought a 45-degree viewfinder for my Subal D300 system about 10 years ago and, gotta say, it's probably the best and truest "investment" i have made in my system. It makes a huge difference for macro - even WA - work. In addition to providing a larger, image for focusing and composing (and, yeah, the aid to Aging Eyes), it allows you to get the camera to a lower angle for shooting upwards rather than risk smashing down into the coral or seabed. They are horrendously priced but, for once in my view, really worth the money. Mine has slowly migrated over the years from the D300 housing to a D800 housing and now to the D500. Easy to remove and install, solidly built, it has been one of my wisest purchases (ok, there haven't been too many of those).

The magnifying viewfinder and the vacuum valve system are my top recommendations.

I'd also consider the macro port 60 with a 20mm extension. You can then use both the 60mm AF-S lens (with the macro port 60) and the 105mm VR lens (with macro port 60 and 20mm extension ring). This 20mm extension will be useful when using the teleconverter with the Tokina.

Pretty sure you'll need two zoom rings with the Tokina 10-17 and then 10-17 plus TC.

Adding the TC on to the 10-17 obviously increases the total length of the "lens" (ie 10-17 plus TC). This means the actual Tokina zoom ring on the lens is now further away from the meshing teeth on the housing than it would be with just the 10-17. So the Nauticam zoom ring for the 10-17 plus TC needs to be longer to fit between the Tokina zoom ring and the housing meshing teeth. Hope that makes sense!

Just one thought: if you want to save some cash - just go with the 105mm and not a 60mm as well. I think I wrote early on that the 105mm is harder to start with but once you get into it I reckon its a better macro lens than the 60mm. It allows you to be a bit further away from a skittish subject. The 60mm is good for "fish portraits" of subjects say the size of classic reef dwellers, butterflyfish, jacks, lion fish etc - but not so good for real macro, eg, ghostpipefish, shrimps and, as I say, anything skittish.

I started with a 60mm on DX but added a 105mm when I was working in Lembeh using a D300. I never really went back to the 60mm once I'd got used to the 105 and now don't even own one for my D500. I don't miss it.

Sounds good thanks me.

Either CFWA or WA isnt so hard - well, relatively speaking. Lighting is the tricky bit - not lighting backscatter at the sides of the image, Thats an issue with both WA and CFWA. After that the main issue is composition. I dont think youll struggle switching between the two.

Im not familiar with the layout of the Nauticam gear but the issue usually with the zoom rings for 10-27 v 10-17+TC is length not girth. So, no, tape or such wont do it.

Fair enough, thanks TimG.

Do you have any pics with and without the 1.4x teleconverter? Does it effectively allow you to get closer or does it just zoom in a bit more? My understanding is that this provides a different type of image but I'm not entirely sure how it alters it as I've not seen any posts with comparison images.

Any help would be appreciated as I'm gonna order tomorrow!

Sorry, I can’t send pics at the moment as I’m traveling.

CFWA, as the name suggests, let’s you get very close, same as the 10-17 on its own. But because of the TC magnification the main subject fills more of the frame but you still have a wideish angle image. This allows you to show the subject in a habitat or against a backdrop.

If you google around you should be able to find pics which show the effect. If you search in WP I think you’ll find comparisons shots. It’s discussed as an issue ever couple of years.

Thanks Tim.

I've decided to start small and go big later.

So I'm going for:

4.33dome + zoom

105mm VR port

I'll get an extension port when I've used the unit a bit more 😊

sinetwo

Sorry I might belaying a few things that have already been mentioned here. But.

I too was in exactly the place at the end of last year. I took the advice of going down the route of the 10-17 with Zen 4:33 +zoom, the 60mm macro port and 20mm extension that can be used on the 60mm port to use the 105mm lens and also the 4:33 dome for using the teleconverter. You would need a different zoom gear for using the teleconverter.

If you dive in this country I would think about the 60mm.

There are Nauticam port charts available http://www.nauticam.co.ukso you can see the ports that are recommended. But also give Alex a call number on the website.

For those interested, after much deliberation, I opted for the following combination. Thanks to all those in the thread who helped me reach a decision, and a special thanks to Alex T (Nauticam UK) for letting me know that the below combination actually works.

* Nikon D500 + Nauticam housing

* Tokina 10-17

* Nikkor 105mm VR macro

* Kenko 1.4x teleconverter

* 4.33" dome for Tokina 10-17

* 20mm extension port for 1.4x teleconverter

* 60mm macro port, combined with the 20mm extension, giving me an 80mm macro port which can house the 105mm VR, despite official guidance stating 30+60 (probably to give room for user error with filters etc.)

* ...and reusing the same 60mm macro port for a 60mm macro lens in the future

That's the most economical travel kit I could come up with! This is not to say I would personally recommend 20+60mm for the 105mm VR, it's just to say it works.

I hope you have a great time with the system! And do post some pics.....

If not too late, you can easily shoot the Nikon 60mm 2.8D Micro behind the same port the 105 uses (87), and that lens is really good -- i used that combo in Lembeh on a D7000 a lot.

I would definitely recommend getting the zoom gear for the 105. In Lembeh, using the 105 + diopter i used manual focus a lot -- more than I had expected. The D500 AF is much better, but I would still want the option to use manual for super-macro.

If not too late, you can easily shoot the Nikon 60mm 2.8D Micro behind the same port the 105 uses (87), and that lens is really good -- i used that combo in Lembeh on a D7000 a lot.

 

I would definitely recommend getting the zoom gear for the 105. In Lembeh, using the 105 + diopter i used manual focus a lot -- more than I had expected. The D500 AF is much better, but I would still want the option to use manual for super-macro.

James, out of interest, which diopter did you opt for? I've had a look at a few on this article: http://www.nad-lembeh.com/blog/photography/6990/which-diopter/

...as the INON UCL-100 which I used for my RX100 does not work with the 105mm...