Meyer Optic Trioplan f2.8 100mm for UW Use

Hello, 

I am toying with the idea (I have found one) of getting a new version Meyer Optic Trioplan f2.8 100mm for UW lens for use underwater and on land.

This will be used with a Nikon D850/Nauticam Set Up (I have the macro dome port/rings etc).

I was hoping someone on here has had some real life practical experience and can give me some guidance, so please advise on the following !

1. The lens has a minimum focusing distance of .9m or 35" which is a concern as most of my diving is in the UK in not so good conditions. Can an extension ring be used to bring the images closer to make more of a macro lens ?
2. The lens is manual focus which is a drag, but not the end of the world, is there a focus gear available so I can focus from the camera etc ??

Any other information would be helpful.

Please note I do have a Nauticam SMC-1, I reckon this could be used ??

Thanks 

Brian   

Hey Brian

The question that strikes me is why?

Why not get a Nikkor 105mm AF-S and forget the stress of messing about with bits and pieces to get the Meyer to work well? The Nikkor is easy to house, superb results....... blah, blah...

6 hours ago, TimG said:

Hey Brian

The question that strikes me is why?

Why not get a Nikkor 105mm AF-S and forget the stress of messing about with bits and pieces to get the Meyer to work well? The Nikkor is easy to house, superb results....... blah, blah...

I have to agree with Tim, on land it's no big deal to use exotic lenses,  but underwater what would you shoot with it?  You could get an extension ring to turn it into a macro lens of sorts and achieve half life size, but that also locks you into a fairly narrow range of subject sizes.  As far as a focus gear goes you would probably have to have a custom one made, I have not heard of anyone making a focus gear.  It also looks like it is manual aperture selection which would be a second gear or use it at fixed aperture.

adding a 50mm tube to a 100mm lens focused at infinity gives 0.5x magnification,  Focused at 900mm it would 0.65 x magnification from a macro calculator.    So with a 50mm tube you the frame would be between 55 and 72mm wide when it is in focus.

You could add an external diopter like the SMC but that would give a smaller range of working distances, I found a calculator which suggests  you might get 1.3x magnification with the lens bare at minimum focus and 1:1.1 at maximum focus so a field between 27 and 33mm wide.   That is assuming the lens does not change length, which I suspect it does. To me it sounds like an exercise in frustration.  Of course if you really want the effect - well why not - but I would think the limitations would outweigh any benefit.

This is a specialist lens to get a special look. As long as you don't want this as your normal macro lens, I'd say go for it. Probably you will have to create a focus gear yourself using 3D printing. 

Hello,

I should have posted this in the original post, but looking to achieve as attached.

https://www.uwphotographyguide.com/shooting-with-vintage-lenses

I have worked with vintage lenses topside many times, they are quite specialist but they can produce lovely and rather niche images.

I have found a company that makes a focus gear as well.

Life is now slightly easier.

Thanks 

Brian 

Nice pics, Brian - the seahorse especially. 

Good you found a focus gear manufacturer. Will you need an aperture ring too?

The winner in the "Natural Artistry" section of this competition here has used the lens UW, so practical experience is existing (the description of the image says " 12mm extension tube ND8 filter FIT +5 close-up lens (wet lens or dry within the port?) 1/250 sec at f2.8 ISO 80 ") https://wetpixel.com/articles/results-marine-related-winners-of-wildlife-photographer-of-the-year-2021

Wolfgang

Tim hi,

Thanks, no probably not, I will probably try with wide open which give the best effect and just play around with shutter speed/ISO and Strobe Power etc.

Some experimentation is needed, I do have a Nauticam SMC-1 close up dioptre so that worth a try.

Thanks 

Ok, cool. Yeah, I can see the minimal depth of field produces some lovely results.