Sony A7C + 28-60 kit lens + WWL vs Olympus OM-D E-M1 II + 14-42 + WWL

On 3/3/2021 at 8:38 AM, JayceeB said:

I'm wondering if the Sony 28-60 kit lens is better quality than the Oly 14-42 kit lens, and would perform better behind the WWL-1.

Fred Miranda posted a review recently on his site of the Sony 28-60, comparing it to some well-known and well-liked prime lenses.

It turns out that, even though it is inexpensive and lightweight, the 28-60 is very high in image quality. It actually bested some primes in most ways. At the apertures it can offer, of course. You can't compare the 28-60 at f/2.8 to a prime, since the 28-60 doesn't go that big.

I was shooting an E-M10 with the 14-42+WWL-1 for several years. I upgraded to a Sony a7rIV last year and just got the 28-60 a couple of weeks ago (still using the WWL-1). I just got to shoot it this past weekend. It looks pretty good to me, so far. But, Phil is the man and, well, it's clear that he thinks the Sony/28-60/WWL-1 is going to be better than the Oly/14-42/WWL-1. LOL My agreement really means nothing next to his wealth of knowledge and experience (yet I DO agree).

I know you are looking for compact, so you're thinking about the a7c. But, I would just throw this out there: The a7rIV (or a7rIII or an a1) has a lot more megapixels. I can switch my rIV to APS-C mode and still get a 26MP image while also narrowing my field of view to the equivalent of 1.5X focal length.

I think all those extra MP really add flexibility to the setup. You can shoot in crop mode, or you just still shoot in FF mode and crop in post. Regardless, with that many MP to work with it's almost like having a close-up lens to use at will - without having to actually physically change the camera.

The extra weight and bulk of a housing for an a7rIV (etc) may not be worth it to you for that extra flexibility, but it's at least something to consider.

Also, regarding AF performance, I found that my E-M10 benefited from using a focus light and so does my Sony rig. If it's anything less than "good" ambient light, I'll turn my focus light on, just to make sure my AF has the best chance of getting a good lock on my subject.

Thanks, @Stuartv.  Definitely a good consideration, and still more compact than a regular ff + dome.  

On 3/3/2021 at 8:38 AM, JayceeB said:

Yes, the 12-40 had no trouble focusing on the tiger and the sharpness of the photo is better.

I have the Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 II R.  I checked with Nauticam and asked if they recommended one of the 14-42's over the others.  They mentioned it was 'splitting hairs' between the different offerings.  Since I already had the Oly, I just used that.  @Intercepter121 mentioned that Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II ASPH Mega OIS is the best he has used.  How much better than the Oly?  I don't know.

Reflections in the last two shots are actually a submerged fish pen (attracts the Oceanics).

I do have the 7" acrylic dome.  Picked it up used.  Perhaps I should reconsider the Zen dome.

I'm wondering if the Sony 28-60 kit lens is better quality than the Oly 14-42 kit lens, and would perform better behind the WWL-1.

To be honest, I don't see any difference in quality between the shot of the dolphins and the tiger shark. One doesn't look more clear or contrasty than the other, and there's nothing to say that the tiger shark is in focus and the dolphins are not. I think what you're seeing here as others have commented is the effect of 10'+ of water. Water is an awful filter that will destroy all contrast and resolution. The more of it you have between you and the subject, the worse the results. Both these shorts have subjects that are so distant that no lens or camera is going to make any difference in terms of the perceived contrast and resolution.

If you're using any lens at 50mm+ (full frame equivalent) zoom to fill the frame with a pelagic subject, that means the subject is 15'+ feet away. You're not going to get good results in terms of sharpness and contrast with that much water between your lens and the subject regardless of how high quality your optics are. Most cameras are going to struggle with focus in such circumstances because the water column removes contrast.

To reiterate, I don't think those two photos show that one lens is focusing on the subject properly and the other isn't. I'd say the focus is probably correct in both.

I've tried various 14-42mm lenses on m43 behind the WWL-1, including the Oly 14-42 pancake. Differences are miniscule. I also ended up using the Panasonic 14-42mm II.

Don't spend money upgrading your camera or optics for shots of large pelagics more than 15' away. You'll be dissapointed when your results do not improve. The only reason for using a focal length of 50mm+ underwater is to fill the frame with a smaller subject within 10' of your camera. Any further, and the results will be equally disappointing.

Two more test shots from today with the WWL-1 back on.  Seemed to work a little better, but still doesn't feel quite as responsive or sharp as my 12-40, but not as far off as the testing from last week.   

Maybe it's not technically correct, but I still enjoy taking some wide angle ambient light shots further than 15' away.  3rd shot as an example.  I know no lens/port/camera combination will give a sharp capture in these conditions, just trying to get the best I can with a single wet lens combination.

This tread is interesting...

First: The (diagonal) angles of view (AOV) between Oly 14-42+WWL1 (or Sony 7c/24-60/WWL-1) and rectilinear Oly 12-40 are different:

Oly 12-40: 84°-30° AOV.

Sony24-60+WAPC1 (Oly 14-42+WWL-1 or Sony 7c/24-60/WWL-1): 130°-68° ??? (I could not find AOVs for WWL-1, but guess AOVs are similar to WAPC1)

Second: As others already said, sharpness and contrast in the posted images is produced by the far object distance, the lens/domeport combination has no effect under these conditions.

=> A comparison in contrast and sharpness at similar AOVs and at much closer objects would be really interesting for Oly 12-40 (in domeport) vs 14-42+WWL-1. I would be surprised in case 12-40 performs better, but who knows?

Wolfgang

On 3/8/2021 at 1:04 PM, JayceeB said:

Two more test shots from today with the WWL-1 back on.  Seemed to work a little better, but still doesn't feel quite as responsive or sharp as my 12-40, but not as far off as the testing from last week.   

 

Maybe it's not technically correct, but I still enjoy taking some wide angle ambient light shots further than 15' away.  3rd shot as an example.  I know no lens/port/camera combination will give a sharp capture in these conditions, just trying to get the best I can with a single wet lens combination.

I don't think anyone is saying that it's wrong (for want of a better word) to take this sort of photo or anything like that - rather that the opportunity for improvement on that type of shot is rather limited.  AF may be better in some options - but by how much?  I'm guessing that if you are mostly at the long end of the WWL- combo - you may actually be better off using the 12-40 for this type of shot, any advantage of the WWL in image quality is lost to water at the long end.  The Zen 170mm port is very compact and easy to work with. 

The level of contrast is entirely due to the distance and the incident light angle
The lens doesn’t come into the mix as it only influences the field of view so the results will be similar perhaps more magnification helps the framing but not the contrast
Hence getting as close as possible is a good idea
Using a wwl-1 type of solution only works when the dolphins come at you otherwise a rectilinear standard zoom is better for framing. Dolphins are not so big after all


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you all for insightful feedback on equipment and technique.  You brought forward some considerations I hadn’t thought of, and your responses are much appreciated.

I’ve decided to proceed with the A7C + 28-60 + WWL.

I’ll use the A7C kit for a month or so to confirm if the performance enhancements balance the limitations of full-frame.  If the A7C works out for me, as I hope, I’ll keep it and sell my Olympus kit.  If the A7C does not work out for me, I’ll sell the A7C kit and upgrade to a Zen 170 dome for the 12-40.  

I consider this a learning exercise with no wrong result...albeit an expensive learning exercise

10 hours ago, JayceeB said:

I’ll use the A7C kit for a month or so to confirm if the performance enhancements balance the limitations of full-frame.  If the A7C works out for me, as I hope, I’ll keep it and sell my Olympus kit.  If the A7C does not work out for me, I’ll sell the A7C kit and upgrade to a Zen 170 dome for the 12-40.  

I consider this a learning exercise with no wrong result...albeit an expensive learning exercise

Please keep us in the loop so we can learn with you :-)

Thanks

New Kit arrives in a week or so.  Will report back to this thread on my experiences.

21 hours ago, JayceeB said:

 

I consider this a learning exercise with no wrong result...albeit an expensive learning exercise

Isn't most of underwater photography an expensive learning exercise? 

New Kit arrives in a week or so.  Will report back to this thread on my experiences.

I've had the Sony kit for a few weeks now, and have been jotting down a few notes.

This is not an equipment review but rather my experience moving from the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II in a Nauticam housing  with dedicated lenses and ports/domes to the Sony A7C in a Nauticam housing with the 28-60mm kit lens, WWL-1B and CMC-1. 

Here are a couple of photos of the Olympus on the left and Sony on the right.  The Sony has a Nauticam flash trigger mounted on the hotshoe.

Camera Body Notes:

The Olympus feels less 'plastic-y' and more ergonometric for land use than the Sony.  I only plan to use the Sony underwater, so this isn't important to me.

Sony EVF is on the far left.  I frame with my right eye, so took a bit of getting used to, but now i don't notice it.

Sony EVF is smaller than the Olympus.  Almost too small to track small fish darting around in a larger frame.  Macro I can still manage viewing focus, just barely. 

You can’t turn off fill flash on the Sony in Manual mode.  This means you need to turn off the strobes when shooting with ambient light.  I shoot with 2 custom dials set up.  One for flash.  One for ambient.  The Olympus ambient dial has flash turned off, so I can leave my strobes on.  The Sony ambient custom dial doesn’t allow this, so you need to actually turn your strobes off to ensure they don’t fire when shooting ambient.  Maybe I haven't figured this one out yet.  If any Sony users have tips, please share.

Sony 28-60 doesn’t stop when you zoom all the way out, so you end up retracting the lens if you keep going, which causes a warning sign to appear on the screen.  I did this a few times on the first couple of dives while in the housing, but have gotten used to it now.

Sony does not come with a battery charger.  Charging is via USB-C cable (which is included).

Sony doesn’t charge with the USB-C cable if camera is ‘On’.  I’ve made this mistake a couple of times, went to load my camera, but had to wait to charge it again in ‘Off’ position.  Again, if any Sony users have tips, please share.

4 hours ago, JayceeB said:

Camera Body Notes:

 

Sony doesn’t charge with the USB-C cable if camera is ‘On’.  I’ve made this mistake a couple of times, went to load my camera, but had to wait to charge it again in ‘Off’ position.  Again, if any Sony users have tips, please share.

 

I'd suggest getting an accessory battery charger (and a spare battery), you'll probably want one anyway to be able to swap over batteries between dives if you're doing multiple dives a day.  There's various after market ones and Sony sells one which charges multiple Sony batteries.  If you get in the habit of using the charger turning the camera off is no longer a problem.

1 hour ago, ChrisRoss said:

I'd suggest getting an accessory battery charger (and a spare battery), you'll probably want one anyway to be able to swap over batteries between dives if you're doing multiple dives a day.  There's various after market ones and Sony sells one which charges multiple Sony batteries.  If you get in the habit of using the charger turning the camera off is no longer a problem.

Thanks, Chris.  I have a few odds and ends left to collect.  An extra battery and separate charger were on that list.

I use Nitecore for other batteries.  They also make a double for Sony FZ-100 batteries:  Nitecore USN4PRO for Sony NP-FZ100

I was thinking of the Nitecore unless anyone cautions against non-Sony chargers.

Here are a few photos comparing the size of the Nauticam housings.  Olympus on the left.  Sony on the right.  

Nauticam Housing Notes for the Sony:

Sony on/off button on housing is more robust than the Olympus, and you don’t need to lift the housing switch up before removing the camera like you do the Olympus.

Sony Nauticam housing tray does not overlap the camera battery cover, so you never need to remove it.  Olympus tray has to be removed from the camera every time you change the battery.

Sony is slightly easier to load tray into the housing, as it does not sit as deep in. 

The Olympus housing has a top ball mounting hole, which is where I had my focus light mounted.  The Sony housing does not have this mounting hole, so I moved my focus light ball to the plastic hot-shoe mount on the lens port, which isn’t quite as rigid.

Sony housing has more robust fiber optic ports on the housing, but you have to purchase Nauticam Optical Fiber Connectors ($27) to use standard fiber optic cables.  Olympus housing does not require this.

The Sony nauticam flash trigger has an on/off switch that must be turned on with the housing open.  The Olympus doesn’t require this when using the kit flash to fire strobes.  I used to prepare my camera the night before for early morning dives, including turning on the leak detector and vacuum pumping.  The green leak detection led light doesn’t seem to draw much power, as I haven’t noticed substantial battery drain doing this.  I’m not sure I can do this now, as the nauticam flash trigger will be on all night inside the housing (it has a blinking green light to signal that it is ‘on’).  Will have to test it out.  Anyone have experience leaving the Nauticam flash trigger on overnight?

Most pictures you see of the Nauticam with 28-60 lens show the focus knob installed on the port.  This is optional, so I left it off until I decide whether a manual focus gear is required.

7 hours ago, JayceeB said:

Nauticam Housing Notes for the Sony:

 Anyone have experience leaving the Nauticam flash trigger on overnight? 

Most pictures you see of the Nauticam with 28-60 lens show the focus knob installed on the port.  This is optional, so I left it off until I decide whether a manual focus gear is required. 

I have left the flash trigger on for a whole week liveaboard trip. Bring spare batteries just in case but this trigger draws very  little power.

Is there any way to remove the focus knob on these Nauticam ports?

5 hours ago, waterpixel said:

I have left the flash trigger on for a whole week liveaboard trip. Bring spare batteries just in case but this trigger draws very  little power.

 

Is there any way to remove the focus knob on these Nauticam ports?

Thanks, Waterpixel.  That helps.

The port ships with the focus knob uninstalled.  I left it off.