Which Nauticam 9" dome with Sony 16-35gm?

13 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

The Nauticam 8.5 inch acrylic dome is not on the list of recommended ports for the Sony FE 16-35mm F/4 or F/2.8 but is is on the list of ports for the excellent Tamron 17-28mm F/2.8 Di III RXD for Sony full frame with a 40mm extension.

 

 

It used to be there but my impression is that they have too much on the list. Shame though

The recommended use for the 16-35 F-4 when I bought the setup was 8.5 inch acrylic + 60mm extension. It works (I have it)

The sony 16-35-F4 funnily also works with the Zen Dome 170mm + 60mm extension  (got the confirmation from Phil Burghard from Zen Dome - below)

Quote

The Sony 16-35mm f/4 is a pretty unique rectilinear lens in that it performs very well behind smaller domes like the Zen DP-170 or the Nauticam 180mm dome. You would have the full zoom range with the DP-170.

EDIT : the 8.5" acrylic dome has disappeared from the Sony A7 port charts on Nauticam - that doesn't mean it's not compatible but rather Nauticam wants to push other options (more expensive glass domes) or doesn't have the space.

1 hour ago, waterpixel said:

The recommended use for the 16-35 F-4 when I bought the setup was 8.5 inch acrylic + 60mm extension. It works (I have it)

I found from my old notes the same combination with a 50mm extension, or, does this bring the lense to much forward? I wonder which is right. Perhaps could try 55mm?

20 minutes ago, r4e said:

I found from my old notes the same combination with a 50mm extension, or, does this bring the lense to much forward? I wonder which is right. Perhaps could try 55mm?

I am sure a 55mm would work. I've always wondered how manufacturers made extension always in round numbers (20/30/40/50/60). The answer is likely that the ideal point is somewhere in between and the manufacturers round up to the closer integer

Regarding Nauticam and Zen port charts extensions are based on the three different styles of housings, A7, A7r and A7s use different configurations from, A7II, A7rII, A9 and the rest of the housing going forward to date. They now also have a chart for Sony A7C which is based more off of N100 ports and extensions than the N100 to N120 adapters for the other systems. That docent mean that the N100 to N120 won't work with the A7C housing but the idea is to keep the system small, its advantage. The 170/180mm ports should work well with both the Sony 16-35 and Tamron 17-28 F/2.8 lenses. The Tamron is also listed for use with theNauticam 8.5 inch acrylic port with the Tamron using the 40mm extension for Nauticam 180mm, 8.5 inch and 230mm ports. I will try to test the 180mm port while I have it on loan. 

I have measured the radius of numerous domes over the years; the Nauticam 8.5" dome is 103mm radius, the 8" Aquatica dome is 101.5mm radius, the Danforth hemispherical compass dome is also 101.5, the Pro 1 dome is 91.5mm radius, the 230mm Nauticam glass dome is 110.3mm radius. Or thereabouts...

On 1/19/2021 at 4:59 AM, waterpixel said:

I am sure a 55mm would work. I've always wondered how manufacturers made extension always in round numbers (20/30/40/50/60). The answer is likely that the ideal point is somewhere in between and the manufacturers round up to the closer integer

Nauticam has 35mm and 55mm extensions in the N120 lineup. The 55mm is recommended for the Sony FE 12-24 F/2.8 lens with the 230mm dome port.

On 1/19/2021 at 10:30 AM, Phil Rudin said:

Regarding Nauticam and Zen port charts extensions are based on the three different styles of housings, A7, A7r and A7s use different configurations from, A7II, A7rII, A9 and the rest of the housing going forward to date. They now also have a chart for Sony A7C which is based more off of N100 ports and extensions than the N100 to N120 adapters for the other systems. That docent mean that the N100 to N120 won't work with the A7C housing but the idea is to keep the system small, its advantage. The 170/180mm ports should work well with both the Sony 16-35 and Tamron 17-28 F/2.8 lenses. The Tamron is also listed for use with theNauticam 8.5 inch acrylic port with the Tamron using the 40mm extension for Nauticam 180mm, 8.5 inch and 230mm ports. I will try to test the 180mm port while I have it on loan. 

Hey Phil, thanks for this valuable info-- I'm looking into the Tamron 17-28 or one of the 16-35 Sony lenses for a split shot setup (in rivers where larger domes are more prohibitive and likely to get scratched) How did the 180mm dome preform with the 16-35 F4 and the Tamron?  Were you able to use the S&S correction filter with each combo?

I favor the much newer Tamron for it speed and AF speed. This is a lens I use a lot out of the water along with the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 G2.

Both lenses and the 70-180mm F/2.8 all use the same 67mm  filter mount.

The  pool split is the 16-35mm F/4 at F/4. The Starfish spawning is at 28mm at F/10. The free diver is at 17mm and F/10. The 16-35mm was taken using the Zen Underwater 200mm port (no longer made) and the Tamron shots were with the Nauticam 180mm port and the Sea & Sea correction lens. 

Be aware that I am not nearly as obsessed with ultimate corner sharpness as some others on the form. I would recommend the 230mm port over the 180mm for better corners and because it is the diameter that the S&S correction lens was designed for but the 180 gets you there if that size works better for you.

Also be aware that if you are using Lightroom or other software that have lens profiles the profile alone may trash the corners. Using the Tamron lens profile with the listed configuration the corners were trashed badly by the software when it was removed the corners got better. Not all lenses suffer with this problem but it is worth making the comparison with your favored image processing program. This is also an issue that should be tested if you are using wet optics like WWL-1 and WACP.