Which housing for the A7 IV?

Currently owning Isotta and RX100VA, but decided to go bigger. 
As I have the A7 IV and the new 16-35 PZ that was reviewed by Phil, I‘d like to bring this combo under water. 
 

Marelux, Aquatica, Ikelite, Nauticam? Any real life experiences? 
I‘m not so happy with Nauticam and Ikelite, but it seems to be difficult to get anything else…? (Writing from Germany)

May I suggest the Subal A7 IV housing, which Backscatter says is to be released shortly.  I have owned six Subal housings, and several of my dive buddies also use them, never a problem, plus they are very easy to maintain. 

Isotta housings also are excellent, very nicely priced, $3,290 for this model, as you no doubt know, and the factory service is first quality.  

I had a Nauticam D500 housing, it worked well, but as its build is unnecessarily complicated I did not feel comfortable doing the maintenance (which I routinely do on my Subals), so I sold it and went back to Subal. 

On 9/13/2022 at 3:23 PM, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Currently owning Isotta and RX100VA, but decided to go bigger. 
As I have the A7 IV and the new 16-35 PZ that was reviewed by Phil, I‘d like to bring this combo under water. 
 

Marelux, Aquatica, Ikelite, Nauticam? Any real life experiences? 
I‘m not so happy with Nauticam and Ikelite, but it seems to be difficult to get anything else…? (Writing from Germany)

 

Marelux is quite new, I think I saw one German shop advertising they sold them but no details on the website.  You might need to contact the shop for price and availability.   Isotta should be available but they don't have a housing for the A7IV (only the A7RIV) .  What is it about the Nauticam and Ikelite you are not happy about?

On the matter of choice of camera I generally advise that while you may like using a particular camera on land it may not be your best choice to take underwater.  I suggest starting at the subject and working backwards to the camera.  The 16-35 lens for example ideally needs a 230mm dome port which is large and difficult to travel with.  It could be argued that if you are going to the expense of going full frame you probably should not skimp on the port and lose out on resolution particularly in the corners.  There are probably better alternatives to take UW such as a WWL or WACP with kit lens or a fisheye lens, depending on your preferred subject. 

Then of course there is the matter of whether full frame is really needed which is a subject of endless debate.  There can be a significant price and portability penalty for full frame equipment and whether to go that way is somewhat a personal decision and does depend on where you like to dive.

I just have some third pary feedback regading Isotta. most people love these cases. Easy to use, quite compact and a good price. The only issue is, there is no case for the A7 IV, I thery didn't even said when they will release a case. I think the modeswitch from stills to video needs a special solution ... 

6 hours ago, Kraken de Mabini said:

May I suggest the Subal A7 IV housing, which Backscatter says is to be released shortly.  I have owned six Subal housings, and several of my dive buddies also use them, never a problem, plus they are very easy to maintain. 

Isotta housings also are excellent, very nicely priced, $3,290 for this model, as you no doubt know, and the factory service is first quality.  

I had a Nauticam D500 housing, it worked well, but as its build is unnecessarily complicated I did not feel comfortable doing the maintenance (which I routinely do on my Subals), so I sold it and went back to Subal. 

Did subal not go bust at one point?

For what concerns the nauticam housing my view is that the tray and handles are over complicated with many bolts and parts I rather stick the housing on a 3rd party tray however the weight starts to be considerable

In terms of maintenance the housing are robust I have changed one wheel internally but for the rest they are really reliable

I like Nauticam port system and water contact optics and when I look at other makers I do not see the same level of attention to detail but subal has for sure got a great reputation though I think their housing look ugly

On 9/13/2022 at 1:23 AM, fruehaufsteher2 said:

m not so happy with Nauticam and Ikelite, but it seems to be difficult to get anything else…? (Writing from Germany)

Like, Elias (Kraken de Mabinogion) I’d suggest Subal too. Company is based in Austria. I understand they went through some restructuring a couple of years ago but are available. I’m on my 6th having gone through CP5000, D100, D200, D300, D800 and now D500 and all have been highly reliable. 

I am on my third Nauticam housing and have been happy with them.  If/when buying another housing, I would give a hard look at Subal as well, but would not hesitate to get a Nauticam again.  I enjoy some of the flexibility of the Nauticam.  For example, I have a standard handle on the left of my housing, but a narrow handle on the right to provide easier access to some buttons and levers.  I have two locations to choose from to mount a focus light on the housing if I want, and three options for where to install a vacuum valve.  Perhaps this is true of Subal as well.

I am not sure it really matters but it seems to me that Nauticam is more widely used by Americans and Subal more popular with people on the other side of the Atlantic.  That may make a difference if service or repair is needed, but perhaps not.  I believe Subal owners can service their housings themselves, and that would be difficult with Nauticam, for which I think paying for a professional service is necessary when needed, although that may only be every five years or so.  The upside is that such service returns an almost new housing to you.

I have no idea what housings are or are about to be available for your camera.  If you can, look at the size, weight and button and lever layout of the housings under consideration, to try and get a feeling for which might be more comfortable for you.  I would pay attention to each manufacturer's port and accessory offerings, to be sure there are solutions to whatever optics and electronics you may want to use now or are hoping to use in the near future.  I am not sure of this, but perhaps Nauticam is more innovative in this regard and they do update their port charts fairly often.  On the other hand there is often the ability to adapt different port brands.  Edward Lai seems to always have some new project underway.  Some of those things are available for other housings as well.

Just a few things to consider.  I doubt you would go wrong with either Subal or Nauticam.  I don't know anything about other competing brands, so cannot address those.

On 9/13/2022 at 1:23 AM, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Currently owning Isotta and RX100VA, but decided to go bigger. 
As I have the A7 IV and the new 16-35 PZ that was reviewed by Phil, I‘d like to bring this combo under water. 
 

Marelux, Aquatica, Ikelite, Nauticam? Any real life experiences? 
I‘m not so happy with Nauticam and Ikelite, but it seems to be difficult to get anything else…? (Writing from Germany)

 

The testing of the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm has been done with the Marelux housing for the A7 IV and the Nauticam housing for the Sony A1. With both cameras I had the power zoom set to the wide end of the lens on the OK button and zoom in on the down arrow button. I did wide tests with and without the S&S conversion lens (now $600.00). 

Both housings are well built and the controls are well placed with or without gloves. 

What should not be overlooked are the outstanding Nauticam water contact optics that can be used with the Sony FE 20-60mm lens which is excellent for its cost.

Cost wise the PZ 16-35 and S&S lens will cost around $1800.00 and the 230mm dome will cost in the $2276.00 to $2439.00 , port extension around $270.00 for a total cost from $4346.00 to $4509.00   

The 28-60 with gear cost around $566.00/$681.00 depending on brand. The WWL-1B with bayonet adapter and port runs from $2087.00 to $2224.00. Total $2653 to $2905.00.

If you chose the new Nauticam WACP-C the cost is $3283.00 plus the N100 30mm port extension $413.00 and lens with gear 681.00 for a total of $4377.00. Both of these combinations are going to have better overall image quality and corner sharpness at like F/numbers than the $4346 to $4509 packages. If you remove the S&S lens and go with the 230mm or smaller dome port the differences will be even more noticeable. 

Photo is the Marelux SonyMX-A7 IV housing with the 16-35 PZ lens and the S&S lens mounted.

Thank you so much for all the information-that was much better and faster than I expected. 
In fact the only disadvantage of Nauticam is that for every service I have to send it to the US. Subal seems to have a very high price tag, one third above Nauticam. 
 

Marelux as a new player makes me a little nervous… 

@Phil Rudin I take your hints very serious and consider that option. Only thing is that I already own the 16-35. Would you even then recommend the 28-60?

 Thanks to all! 

Ok, I might have understood most of your tips @Phil Rudin:

16-35 good lens over water. 

28-60 with WACP-C might be the best option but the (older) WWL-1B is nearly as good. 
 

correct? Thank you again! 

Several differences between WWL-1B and WACP-C. First the WWL-1 contacts the water both at the front and rear, while the WACP-C mounts directly over the camera lens and only requires a port extension rather than a dedicated port with a port window. The rear element on the WACP-C is much larger than on the WWL. The WACP-C is about a pound lighter than a 230mm dome port. Both WWL and WACP's work with the outstanding 28-60 zoom. 

Extremely helpful. Thank you so much! 
Now hopefully last question as I am not very familiar with the Nauticam port-family: for the WWL-1B and the 28-60: 

I‘ll find it in the port charts? 

4 hours ago, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Thank you so much for all the information-that was much better and faster than I expected. 
In fact the only disadvantage of Nauticam is that for every service I have to send it to the US. Subal seems to have a very high price tag, one third above Nauticam. 
 

Marelux as a new player makes me a little nervous… 

@Phil Rudin I take your hints very serious and consider that option. Only thing is that I already own the 16-35. Would you even then recommend the 28-60?

 Thanks to all! 

While it is often suggested to regularly service your housings, if you take decent care of them it is not something you need to do that often.  My Nauticam EM-1 MkII is now 5 years old and has not had a service as yet.  I am fairly meticulous with care for the housing, it gets soaked in freshwater and all the controls worked after each day's diving for around an hour.  Then dried off and buttons worked again before putting it away.  What you are trying to do is prevent salt crystals forming in the control buttons recesses.  You need a long soak and to work them as there is little driving force for freshwater to enter the recess. 

The important thing to remember is that just because you own a lens for use on land does not mean it is the best choice to take underwater. Dome port optics mean that rectilinear wide angle lenses have compromises with relatively poor corners.  A 16mm full frame lens needs to be stopped down to f13-16 for decent corners and even then there is room for improvement and many people are unhappy unless they add the $600 S&S correction lens.  Add up the costs for all of your options before starting to decide.

Further to lens selection before you get into deciding which lens, think about which subjects you like and where you dive.  If you mostly do tropical reefs the lens choice might be different to cold water wreck diving for example.

Thank you Chris, I really appreciate all the helpful suggestions! Now I’m done with the WACP-C thread also and feel filled with knowledge. 
PanOcean sent me an offer. Thrilled! 

So currently I‘m planning to go for the Nauticam with the WACP-C.

Sadly today‘s the last day of our Mo‘orea-Trip. Unnecessarily to say that even the RX100 can catch images. 

On 9/14/2022 at 6:32 PM, ChrisRoss said:

"all the controls worked after each day's diving for around an hour"

 

Talk about OCD!

(Just kidding)

17 hours ago, Draq said:

Talk about OCD!

(Just kidding)

It should read " all the controls worked a couple of time after each day's diving while being soaked for around an hour"  I'm meticulous but not that extreme!

On 9/14/2022 at 3:59 PM, Phil Rudin said:

Several differences between WWL-1B and WACP-C. First the WWL-1 contacts the water both at the front and rear, while the WACP-C mounts directly over the camera lens and only requires a port extension rather than a dedicated port with a port window. The rear element on the WACP-C is much larger than on the WWL. The WACP-C is about a pound lighter than a 230mm dome port. Both WWL and WACP's work with the outstanding 28-60 zoom. 

Hi Phil, do you know if the WACP-C is the same optical formula than the WWL-1, or it has been improved? Is the WACP-C worth the Upgrade if I have a WWL-1 on the Sony a1 with a 28-60mm from the pure optical/sharpness standpoint? Thanks!!

The WACP-C is much more like the WACP-1 than WWL-1 because it is a direct mount to the housing rather than mounting to a port Like WWL-1 which is designed to have water on both sides of the lens. I have experience with all four WWWL-1 WACP-1, WACP-2 and WACP-C. As advertised the WACP-1 gains a stop over WACP-C but in every other way they are much alike. This is most noticeable the higher the number of MP's for each camera. It will shine with the A-1 and A7R-4/5 cameras. 

The WACP-C is much more like the WACP-1 than WWL-1 because it is a direct mount to the housing rather than mounting to a port Like WWL-1 which is designed to have water on both sides of the lens. I have experience with all four WWWL-1 WACP-1, WACP-2 and WACP-C. As advertised the WACP-1 gains a stop over WACP-C but in every other way they are much alike. This is most noticeable the higher the number of MP's for each camera. It will shine with the A-1 and A7R-4/5 cameras.