WWL-1 vs UWL-09F (acrylic)

Anyone who has made a comparison between the WWL-1 and UWL-09F? Corner sharpness, ghosting or other things related to image quality.

I have found som threads in the forum, but I feel the answers are more of the "guessing style".

To be paired with Sony 28-60mm.

Thanks

I didn't compare the two, but I did own UWL-09 (AOI's non-F version, F is basically just Fantasea's branding on the AOI lens) so I can give you some insights on it. There was some ghosting visible in certain positions, but nothing major really. Corner sharpness was good, when shooting at f8 or higher (compact RX100 III camera). Colors and image quality were very good in general. In general I liked it because I was able to shoot at 24mm with just a slight hint of vignetting (one specific corner was always black, but it was so small, that it was possible to remove it with content aware fill in Photoshop; no cropping was needed) and it was a zoom-through lens, camera focused at any focal length. Basically I considered it as a poor man's WWL-1. You can get 2 UWL-09's for the price of one WWL-1. I'm sure WWL-1 is at least as good, but most likely even better, and it's easier to resell.

There are some sample images posted on this site, they are are large 1920 x 1080 images, you just need to scroll down to find examples from each of the lenses.  Unfortunately they are not all ideal for comparison, but will give you some idea. You should read the Exif data to see what focal length was used and  also note the largest sensor used is an APS-C sensor.   If the lens is zoomed in the corners are going to be better than what you get at minimum zoom and it is generally more difficult to get good corners as sensor size increases. 

https://www.housingcamera.com/blog/product-reviews/the-ultimate-wet-lens-sample-post

There is also a post on Wetpixel recently with a lot of smaple images from a Sony A7C with 28-60 and WWL. 

View archived post in: First WA and Macro attempt with Sony A7C Nauticam gear

If you end up getting the UWL-09, please post some pictures - I'm very curious as to how it performs on a full-frame.

14 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

There are some sample images posted on this site, they are are large 1920 x 1080 images, you just need to scroll down to find examples from each of the lenses.  Unfortunately they are not all ideal for comparison, but will give you some idea. You should read the Exif data to see what focal length was used and  also note the largest sensor used is an APS-C sensor.   If the lens is zoomed in the corners are going to be better than what you get at minimum zoom and it is generally more difficult to get good corners as sensor size increases. 

https://www.housingcamera.com/blog/product-reviews/the-ultimate-wet-lens-sample-post

There is also a post on Wetpixel recently with a lot of smaple images from a Sony A7C with 28-60 and WWL. 

View archived post in: First WA and Macro attempt with Sony A7C Nauticam gear

 

Thank you! Yes, I've seen some pictures on this site, but as you mention, it's hard to compare, and most of them are with smaller sensors. I should have mentioned that I'm planning to use the lens on a FF camera. Due to the sensor size, my biggest concern is corner sharpness. I guess the two options ar pretty similar, but if the WWL has better corners I think it is worth the extra cost. Guess I have to do some more research...

15 hours ago, Andrej Oblak said:

I didn't compare the two, but I did own UWL-09 (AOI's non-F version, F is basically just Fantasea's branding on the AOI lens) so I can give you some insights on it. There was some ghosting visible in certain positions, but nothing major really. Corner sharpness was good, when shooting at f8 or higher (compact RX100 III camera). Colors and image quality were very good in general. In general I liked it because I was able to shoot at 24mm with just a slight hint of vignetting (one specific corner was always black, but it was so small, that it was possible to remove it with content aware fill in Photoshop; no cropping was needed) and it was a zoom-through lens, camera focused at any focal length. Basically I considered it as a poor man's WWL-1. You can get 2 UWL-09's for the price of one WWL-1. I'm sure WWL-1 is at least as good, but most likely even better, and it's easier to resell.

Thank you! Great to hear that IQ in general is good. I've seen many great pictures taken with the UWL-09 on smaller sensor cameras, but I should have mentioned that I'm planning to use it with FF. As known, the corners get worse as sensor size increase, and I'm curious if there is any differens between UWL-09 and WWL-1.

9 hours ago, Barmaglot said:

If you end up getting the UWL-09, please post some pictures - I'm very curious as to how it performs on a full-frame.

I will!

Just checking if you got a chance to test it out. It might be a cheaper option for my seafrogs housing

I'll be taking my UWL-09F, Panasonic GH5 and Panasonic 14-42ii on the WetPixel Red Sea Odyssey in June. If anyone on the trip has a WWL-1, I'll see if we can arrange some side by side comparisons.

For science!

On 2/14/2022 at 1:33 PM, Ben-Terje said:

Thank you! Great to hear that IQ in general is good. I've seen many great pictures taken with the UWL-09 on smaller sensor cameras, but I should have mentioned that I'm planning to use it with FF. As known, the corners get worse as sensor size increase, and I'm curious if there is any differens between UWL-09 and WWL-1.

FYI if you're looking for a conversion lens for FF then you're probably looking at WACP.

On 2/14/2022 at 2:35 PM, Ben-Terje said:

I will!

On 2/14/2022 at 5:27 AM, Barmaglot said:

If you end up getting the UWL-09, please post some pictures - I'm very curious as to how it performs on a full-frame.

I did buy the UWL-09, and to be honest I'm not impressed... This photo is shot at f/8, and the corners are quite bad. Yes, I know that f/8 is a low aperture under water, but I get the same result, if not better with my 12-24mm at same aperture. My goal is to find a solution that works well in low light, as I only shoot with ambient light.

On 2/27/2022 at 2:02 AM, vaidhy said:

Just checking if you got a chance to test it out. It might be a cheaper option for my seafrogs housing

Yes, I did. Check my answer to Barmaglot.

On 3/26/2022 at 10:18 PM, joncroweucl said:

FYI if you're looking for a conversion lens for FF then you're probably looking at WACP.

Thanks for the tip. I know about the WACP, but it is quite expensive, especially when I also need to by a new housing to make it fit. But if the WACP has significant better corner sharpness I might consider it still... I kind of feel the WWL-1 / UWL-09 is a little overrated, at least for FF.

On 3/13/2022 at 9:23 PM, joncroweucl said:

I'll be taking my UWL-09F, Panasonic GH5 and Panasonic 14-42ii on the WetPixel Red Sea Odyssey in June. If anyone on the trip has a WWL-1, I'll see if we can arrange some side by side comparisons.

For science!

That would have been interesting! Not sure if it's comparable to ff, but I guess it will work.

Thanks Ben!! The corners look pretty bad on this one. I have the WWL-1 with Sony 28-60 that I will be taking next month to Socorro. Like you, I generally shoot with ambient light. We can see if WWL-1 has better corner sharpness.

4 hours ago, Ben-Terje said:

Thanks for the tip. I know about the WACP, but it is quite expensive, especially when I also need to by a new housing to make it fit. But if the WACP has significant better corner sharpness I might consider it still... I kind of feel the WWL-1 / UWL-09 is a little overrated, at least for FF.

I wouldn't  place the WWL in the same basket as the UWL-09, even though high res pics on full frame are hard to find there's plenty of smaller pics floating around and they are clearly a lot better than the sample you posted.  There is some doubt expressed about the corners for full frame, however the pics I've seen show that the corners are quite reasonable, probably not up to WACP standards of course , but still a lot better than what you have with the AOI lens.

4 hours ago, Ben-Terje said:

This photo is shot at f/8, and the corners are quite bad

Thank you - yes, this is indeed unimpressive. I suppose it's safe to say that APS-C/DX is the upper limit of UWL-09 capabilities.

10 hours ago, Ben-Terje said:

I did buy the UWL-09, and to be honest I'm not impressed... This photo is shot at f/8, and the corners are quite bad. Yes, I know that f/8 is a low aperture under water, but I get the same result, if not better with my 12-24mm at same aperture. My goal is to find a solution that works well in low light, as I only shoot with ambient light.

I have no experience with the UWL-09, but I did shoot available light with the WWL-1 on full frame for a year (usually around f/5.6-f/8), and it performs way better than that. Honestly the edges are so poor in your shot it makes me wonder if something is wrong with the positioning of the lens or something, but it could also be that it just doesn't perform very well. Either way, I'm sure you'd be happier with the performance of the WWL-1.

If it’s helpful, here’s a link to a full resolution (42mp) full frame available light shot taken at f/8 with the Sony 28mm and WWL-1. I’m sure it’s not the best example as I just kind of picked out a random shot that I won’t ever use. It doesn’t have sharpness all the way to the edge like the Nikonos 13mm I’m currently using, but it’s decent and certainly better than your example. Also note that I had the WWL-1 mounted on a homemade port, and I suspect my setup might have been underperforming a tad based on a friend’s photos with a full Nauticam setup. 

Thanks Ben!! The corners look pretty bad on this one. I have the WWL-1 with Sony 28-60 that I will be taking next month to Socorro. Like you, I generally shoot with ambient light. We can see if WWL-1 has better corner sharpness.