UWL-H100 type 2 vs WWL-1

I use a rx100m2 and currently a uwl-04 wide angle lens.  

The uwl-04 is ok, (was inexpensive) but I'm considering upgrading to a sharper wide angle lens.

Is the inon uwl-h100 (w and w/o the dome) an appreciable enough upgrade from the uwl-04 or should I spend twice the money for the wwl-1?

It seems the wwl-1 is compatible with a decent number of m4/3 and mirrorless cameras which would allow me to keep using the lens when/if I move beyond compacts.

All inputs appreciated.

It depends on a number of things, like how far you think you might upgrade and what to.  The WWL-1 has m67 threads and can be used on many systems, the WWL-1B has a bayonet fitting and needs to be mounted on a port that is compatible with the Nauticam bayonet.   

A couple of other considerations, include that the WWL is zoom through while the UWL-H100 is not.  The WWL can be used on certain camera lines only - for example Sony APS-C but not Nikon/Canon APS-C. Also certain housing lines only as you need a housing line that offers flat ports for the very small kit lenses the WWL works with.  The lens needs to fot the port well to avoid vignetting and loss of angle of view.

There are some good size sample images from the WWL and UWL-H100 here:

The Ultimate Wet Lens Sample Post | Mozaik UW (housingcamera.com)

be sure to access the EXIF data as not all of the images are at the widest setting - which is where corner sharpness is most likely to show up.   Some are shot on 1" sensor camera (RX100) and others on APS-C.  You generally can't project performance at 1" to larger sensors 

15 hours ago, Skeptic14 said:

I use a rx100m2 and currently a uwl-04 wide angle lens.  

The uwl-04 is ok, (was inexpensive) but I'm considering upgrading to a sharper wide angle lens.

 

Is the inon uwl-h100 (w and w/o the dome) an appreciable enough upgrade from the uwl-04 or should I spend twice the money for the wwl-1?

It seems the wwl-1 is compatible with a decent number of m4/3 and mirrorless cameras which would allow me to keep using the lens when/if I move beyond compacts.

 

All inputs appreciated.

 

 

 

Wrote this 7 years ago 

https://interceptor121.com/2015/09/14/nauticam-wwl-1-wet-wide-angle-lens-review/

14 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

A couple of other considerations, include that the WWL is zoom through while the UWL-H100 is not. 

There are some good size sample images from the WWL and UWL-H100 here:

The Ultimate Wet Lens Sample Post | Mozaik UW (housingcamera.com)

 

Thanks, meant to ask specifically regarding the zoom through.

I think I'll eventually upgrade to a sony mirrorless like a6500 or a7, which I think the wwl-1 works well with.

4 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

Wrote this 7 years ago 

https://interceptor121.com/2015/09/14/nauticam-wwl-1-wet-wide-angle-lens-review/

Your blog has been very useful over the years, thanks for the link.

24 minutes ago, Skeptic14 said:

Thanks, meant to ask specifically regarding the zoom through.

I think I'll eventually upgrade to a sony mirrorless like a6500 or a7, which I think the wwl-1 works well with.

Your blog has been very useful over the years, thanks for the link.

 

 

The INON lens looks fairly decent on the APS-C Sony cameras , could be a good option if you don't need zoom through, The INON lens being smaller and lighter is an easier proposition to take on and off compared to the WWL, so while you don't get zoom through you'll get a little more reach out of the 16-50 lens by removing wet lens compared to the WWL being used with the 16-50 zoomed all the way in.  Be aware the dome needs to be fitted on land as it requires and air space to work.

On 5/22/2022 at 6:38 PM, ChrisRoss said:

 

A couple of other considerations, include that the WWL is zoom through while the UWL-H100 is not.  The WWL can be used on certain camera lines only - for example Sony APS-C but not Nikon/Canon APS-C.

 

False.  I have UWL-H100 and I use the Rx100 2 like the OP, it's definitely a zoom-through lens. 

As for OPs question, I'm not sure UWL is significantly sharper, need to find some comparison tests online.  Definitely don't buy UWL-h100 without the dome, as image quality will be total garbage for any close-up shots. It'll only be useful for far away photos or videos, of something like sharks/mantas.

On 5/22/2022 at 12:33 PM, Skeptic14 said:

I use a rx100m2 and currently a uwl-04 wide angle lens.  

The uwl-04 is ok, (was inexpensive) but I'm considering upgrading to a sharper wide angle lens.

Is the inon uwl-h100 (w and w/o the dome) an appreciable enough upgrade from the uwl-04 or should I spend twice the money for the wwl-1?

It seems the wwl-1 is compatible with a decent number of m4/3 and mirrorless cameras which would allow me to keep using the lens when/if I move beyond compacts.

 

All inputs appreciated.

 

 

 

19 hours ago, pygmy_whaleshark said:

False.  I have UWL-H100 and I use the Rx100 2 like the OP, it's definitely a zoom-through lens. 

As for OPs question, I'm not sure UWL is significantly sharper, need to find some comparison tests online.  Definitely don't buy UWL-h100 without the dome, as image quality will be total garbage for any close-up shots. It'll only be useful for far away photos or videos, of something like sharks/mantas.

 

 

By zoom through I mean it is designed for that and depending on the lens in question is still sharp when significantly zoomed in,  I have found very few UWL-H100 posts that are not at or quite close to the widest setting (28mm full frame equivalent) .  It certainly doesn't mean it stops working when zoomed in. 

I linked above a article with quite a few good resolution images to compare quality between the Inon and the WWL.  You have to be a little careful and check the EXIF as some of the WWL shots are zoomed in quite a bit.

This post (scroll down to post by Esk) expresses the opinion that when zoomed in the corners with the UWL-H100 are not as good and provides a link to couple of shots zoomed in half way on a m43 camera.  I would expect worse performance on an APS-C sensor and on a 1" sensor the issue would be less noticable.  Inon UWL - H100 or nauticam WWL - 1 | Page 3 | ScubaBoard 

11 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

By zoom through I mean it is designed for that and depending on the lens in question is still sharp when significantly zoomed in,  I have found very few UWL-H100 posts that are not at or quite close to the widest setting (28mm full frame equivalent) .  It certainly doesn't mean it stops working when zoomed in. 

I linked above a article with quite a few good resolution images to compare quality between the Inon and the WWL.  You have to be a little careful and check the EXIF as some of the WWL shots are zoomed in quite a bit.

This post (scroll down to post by Esk) expresses the opinion that when zoomed in the corners with the UWL-H100 are not as good and provides a link to couple of shots zoomed in half way on a m43 camera.  I would expect worse performance on an APS-C sensor and on a 1" sensor the issue would be less noticable.  Inon UWL - H100 or nauticam WWL - 1 | Page 3 | ScubaBoard 

I see what you mean.  I only zoom my UWL-H100 when taking videos of farther away subjects (sharks, etc.).  Occasionally I'd use it for photos of something like shipwrecks shot farther out in ambient light.

I didn't notice any quality degradation, but at that point the limiting factor is visibility in the water column, and quality of natural light.

WWL will definitely be much sharper, at least for up-close full-wide photos. I don't know if ULW-H100 is much better vs. Wuwl-04 like OP was asking.  They seem to be of similar optical quality.    And that test page you linked to doesn't do A/B lab test comparisons, so it's hard to say.  They'd need to shoot all 3 lenses at identical test patters so we can judge corner sharpness and CA.

2 hours ago, pygmy_whaleshark said:

I see what you mean.  I only zoom my UWL-H100 when taking videos of farther away subjects (sharks, etc.).  Occasionally I'd use it for photos of something like shipwrecks shot farther out in ambient light.

I didn't notice any quality degradation, but at that point the limiting factor is visibility in the water column, and quality of natural light.

WWL will definitely be much sharper, at least for up-close full-wide photos. I don't know if ULW-H100 is much better vs. Wuwl-04 like OP was asking.  They seem to be of similar optical quality.    And that test page you linked to doesn't do A/B lab test comparisons, so it's hard to say.  They'd need to shoot all 3 lenses at identical test patters so we can judge corner sharpness and CA.

 

Unfortunately that page is about as good as is available for sample shots, I'm pretty certain the UWL-H100 is better than the UWL-04 which is only designed for compacts with smaller sensors, but if you have upgrades in mind the INON or a WWL is certainly a better choice.

I have decided to try the INON UWL -H100 lens which I had (but now years unused) nad bought the very cheap Panasonic 14-42 f/3.5-5.6 II and 35mm Nauticam port for Panasonic GX9.

I was used to just select the Panasonic 8mm FE lens and a 3.5" port which gave me great quality extreme compactness and even good CFWA.  However sometimes I just could not get so close to the critter with the FE so I decided to try it without overspending on the WWL1.

Have yet to try more its use but frankly it is very nice.  Quality seems quite good maybe as good as the prime fisheye and it does work with zoom all the way to 42mm which allows me to get to closer framing on the subject.

I uploaded some photos I just took including one at 40mm...if the flickr link works 

I eventually went out to get the WWL1-B and after having tried both the INON and the Nauticam I have some thoughts on their use:

INON:  excellent FOV larger than Nauticam but a bit of vignetting with 14-42mm Pana lens.  Sharp through middle range of the zoom but not so good all the way at 42mm.  Edges with chromatic noise but fixable post processing.  Main problem that had me going to the Nauticam is the internal fogging.  I have 10° or more temperature change between different depths and often I found that without some special dry sealing of the dome onto the lens it will keep fogging.

NAUTICAM:  smaller FOV (strange as some earlier reports show very similar one).  Possibly due to the bayonet? No vignetting and overall less distortion.  Sharp all the way but sharp like Inon at 14mm, a bit softer at 42mm but much better than Inon.  With the floating collar only slightly negative so very nice buoyancy.  Clearly the winner although heavier and slightly bigger (and more expensive)  Bayonet very practical if you want to unseat from the case.

25 minutes ago, nudibranco said:

I eventually went out to get the WWL1-B and after having tried both the INON and the Nauticam I have some thoughts on their use:

INON:  excellent FOV larger than Nauticam but a bit of vignetting with 14-42mm Pana lens.  Sharp through middle range of the zoom but not so good all the way at 42mm.  Edges with chromatic noise but fixable post processing.  Main problem that had me going to the Nauticam is the internal fogging.  I have 10° or more temperature change between different depths and often I found that without some special dry sealing of the dome onto the lens it will keep fogging.

NAUTICAM:  smaller FOV (strange as some earlier reports show very similar one).  Possibly due to the bayonet? No vignetting and overall less distortion.  Sharp all the way but sharp like Inon at 14mm, a bit softer at 42mm but much better than Inon.  With the floating collar only slightly negative so very nice buoyancy.  Clearly the winner although heavier and slightly bigger (and more expensive)  Bayonet very practical if you want to unseat from the case.

I did this comparison when the WWL-1 was released in 2015

https://interceptor121.com/2015/09/14/nauticam-wwl-1-wet-wide-angle-lens-review/

The conclusion was that the edges are better on the Nauticam but CA is more of less the same

If you already have the Inon lens it makes sense to invest in a dome if you don't have it. Starting from scratch I would say today the Inon is not really a preferred option as it remains pretty expensive anyway