Seacam Nikonos R-UW 28mm conversion

Hello all,

Now that Harald has announced the option to convert the 28mm Nikonos RS R-UW water contact optic, anyone care to weigh in on the utility of that lens?

(FOV = 60 degrees and minimum focus distance of 0.9 ft.)

Price of conversion is 1150 Euros.

Should work well on Nauticam with Seacam port adapter, and natively on Seacam, of course.

What are your thoughts? What would it be good at?

ian

My thoughts.....

Do it Ian! You know you want too. Its only money after all. I was also wondering about this lens.I think it would be good as a fish portrait lens ?

17 hours ago, John Doe II said:

My thoughts.....

Do it Ian! You know you want too. Its only money after all. I was also wondering about this lens.I think it would be good as a fish portrait lens ?

Bit too wide I would have thought as a fish portrait lens? Unless they're big fish of course!

The idea sounds fabulous, but for so much cash, I think I'd be struggling to find a use for it to justify the cost. My experience has been that it tends to be "extreme" lens which get the most use: 105mm and FE/8-15 for full frame; Maybe a rectilinear 16-35. 60/105 and 10-17/8-15 for cropped sensor (DX).

REALLY nice to have that Nikonos but, apart from maybe Big Fish (dolphin pods; maybe whale sharks), not sure when you'd use it..... 

But maybe I'm missing something.

I think I have to agree with Tim. It's an expensive hammer looking for a small nail.

That said, it could be useful for large animals, Tonga Humpbacks come to mind. Also sharks, dolphins, baitballs.

The small footprint would be great for freediving. That is where the 13mm also excels, compared to a domeport. However the above applications are typically "Blue water" shots where there isn't much in the corners anyway...

I have the 15mm, 20mm and 28mm wet lenses from the Nikonos V days, which work beautifully on the Sony A7 platform. The 15 and 20 are amazing optics. Can't say I have ever chosen the 28mm though. Maybe I will have to try it next trip as a testbed to see if the RS version is worth the effort. (Of course, focus becomes a bigger issue with longer lenses, so this may be an unfair comparison compared to the autofocus 28mm RS. With the 15mm using zone focus, everything is sharp from infinity down to about a foot and a half.)

It is interesting that the lowly, low priced 28mm R-UW seems pretty much to have disappeared off of the usual sites, and I am guessing they will re-appear at a higher pricepoint:((

ian

So this 28mm lens is what.....36 or 37mm? Not long enough to get in close for a portrait (smaller fish)but not wide enough for typical wide angle stuff....so what is it for? 

Larger fish/animals - yes. Apart from that...what was in the intended usage ....they did go into production with this lens after all so there must be some strategy behind it.

Inquiring minds want to know ;-)

I’d suggest it was the way lens planning was seen when the RS series was designed. 28mm was a very standard WA lens.