WFL09S vs wml1-

Hello has anyone tried this weefine lense ? what was the result compared the nauticam version was there any softness? 

I believe Alex Tyrell has one ( @alextyrrell ) but he isn't here often. You can try to reach him on Facebook. 

There is a pretty in-depth test by backscatter but no comparison. I’ve asked a similar question on here recently and there seem to be very few who have used one of the lenses and no one that has experience with both. 
 

my personal opinion just from reviews and sample images is that the kraken is at least as good maybe even better. It is also significantly cheaper and has the float collar built in while you need to pay extra for the Nauticam float collar. Nauticam on the other hand has a Glas front element which is more resistant to scratches but also more expensive to replace if it does break. Right now I’m leaning towards getting the Kraken sometime before next summer. 
 

if you really want a better comparison the guys at backscatter will probably know best. If you do ask please post your findings here. 

There was a review of the MWL a while back by Jack Connick - it seems to be pretty good but on full frame needs to be stopped down to around f16.  The review is here:

https://wetpixel.com/articles/review-nauticam-mwl-1-conversion-lens-by-jack-connick

It has download links for full res images, however it asks for a password, you could always message Jack and ask him for the password.

There are some MWL images in this Flikr page:  https://www.flickr.com/photos/opticalocean/albums/72157703947448144/with/33372820058/

You might be able to search around and find some images taken with the Kraken lens

I have the Kraken WFL-09S, but so far only used it on a D500, mainly for blackwater just in case something a little bigger shows up, however this won't show corner sharpness! I've only used it on one or two normal dives and the results were decent, though would have been shooting it fairly stepped down, as is needed for this style of lens. I haven't shot it on FX yet, but again it will be for blackwater, I prefer not to switch between macro and wide on dives normally and now have the EMWL-1 for this purpose. I haven't used the MWL-01, and very much doubt I will. The price is excessive for a lens that I won't use much!

On 12/8/2022 at 8:03 PM, alextyrrell said:

I have the Kraken WFL-09S, but so far only used it on a D500, mainly for blackwater just in case something a little bigger shows up, however this won't show corner sharpness! I've only used it on one or two normal dives and the results were decent, though would have been shooting it fairly stepped down, as is needed for this style of lens. I haven't shot it on FX yet, but again it will be for blackwater, I prefer not to switch between macro and wide on dives normally and now have the EMWL-1 for this purpose. I haven't used the MWL-01, and very much doubt I will. The price is excessive for a lens that I won't use much!

Thanks for the info @alex pass my best to franck he is an old time friend

I have the MWL-1 and have seen the WFL-09S in action. My roommate on the Philippines Siren had the Kraken lens and was using it with her Nikon D7200 and 60mm macro, and the flexibility it offered convinced me to get one. At the time there was a used MWL-1 for sale here so I went with MWL-1 over the Kraken lens, and also for the benefit of the double flip. The size is similar but the MWL is better built and feels more solid. I have a few of my roommate's photos but I'm not sure the comparison is apples to apples given APSC vs FF, Nikon vs Sony, 60mm macro vs 28-60mm zoom used.

I'm quite happy with the MWL1 in general, took it with me to Komodo and Raja Ampat a few months ago, and it's great for dives when you ask "is this macro or wide" and the guides just say "can be both, whatever you want!" - which is most dives in the Indo Pacific. 

If you want to see examples of the MWL-1 (with Sony A7C, 28-60mm kit lens) you can look at Komodo and Raja albums: https://www.flickr.com/photos/184457560@N06/albums It was my only wide angle lens for those trips.

I am still quite new to the hobby and consider myself quite amateur, but have been very pleased with the images I've been able to get with this lens. I liked it much more than my old WWL-1 which I took with me in between to Sipadan to compare and often missed the flexibility + more dramatic field of view the MWL-1 gives (150 vs 130). 

The two downsides tho are when there is not a ton of light and when visibility is bad. When I got it the reviews said to shoot at f/16 or up for decent corners, I found I can largely live with f/13 or 14 - but even at f/13 I had to bump ISO up to 640, 800, even 1000. I also could not figure out how to light without backscatter in really poor viz - this is probably a skill issue - but I found it harder with the MWL1 vs my old WWL1. I'm not sure how much of this is because it's designed to work with a 60mm macro lens and the Sony 28-60 is not a macro lens. It does not work well w the only macro lens >60mm (90mm) in Sony's line up. You see vignetting below 60mm.

I am selling my MWL-1 w the double flip if you're interested, since I just picked up the shiny new WACP-C. 

Thank you for your input. Can you comment on the behaviour of the MWL-1 at wider open apertures? In the review by bluewaterphoto they made an aperture bracket, which shows that apart from completely wide open, it really is just the DoF that is affected by wider apertures, affecting corners for the most part, but also allowing a kind of shallow DoF look. Is this similar with the MWL-1? Do you have some shots at maybe f5.6 that you could share, even if they aren't keepers?

On the matter of the Flip, this is personally a drawback to me, because I would use this lens with the Olympus or Panasonic 30mm Macro lenses, which don't benefit of wet macro lenses or the Olympus 12-50 which needs a 77mm thread. I already have a 77mm to 67mm flip for the 12-50 port so if I wanted to use the Olympus lens with the MWL-1 I would have to go with a bayonet adapter and find a place to store the lens underwater.

2 hours ago, hyp said:

Thank you for your input. Can you comment on the behaviour of the MWL-1 at wider open apertures? In the review by bluewaterphoto they made an aperture bracket, which shows that apart from completely wide open, it really is just the DoF that is affected by wider apertures, affecting corners for the most part, but also allowing a kind of shallow DoF look. Is this similar with the MWL-1? Do you have some shots at maybe f5.6 that you could share, even if they aren't keepers?

On the matter of the Flip, this is personally a drawback to me, because I would use this lens with the Olympus or Panasonic 30mm Macro lenses, which don't benefit of wet macro lenses or the Olympus 12-50 which needs a 77mm thread. I already have a 77mm to 67mm flip for the 12-50 port so if I wanted to use the Olympus lens with the MWL-1 I would have to go with a bayonet adapter and find a place to store the lens underwater.

It's seems to me that it's wishful thinking that the MWL will work OK at wider apertures in m43.  The depth of field issue - I assume you are referring to the kelp behind the anemone - that is what I'd expect with wider apertures on full frame when you are in very close for CFWA, the magnification is increased and DOF drops away.  It looks like the DOF improves by about f13 -16 and you would see the same depth of field at f8 on a m43 lens framing the scene the same way. 

The corners are a different story - to me the overall look is like a fisheye, so I'd expect the overall system to behave like one.  there's one shot with a diver in the corner and it the sort of distortion you'd expect from a fisheye.  Fisheyes don't have difficulty focusing on the edge of the field of a virtual image as they are not trying to render a line parallel to the sensor straight and in focus, the render a curved surface at constant radius on to a flat plane, so the virtual image is no problem for them.  Corner issues seem to me to be an aberration due to the corner optics of the lens combined with dome optics and stopping down improves the corners the same way stopping down an ultra fast less like a 50mm f1.2 improves corner optical quality.  These aberrations may or may not scale with sensor size to allow you to shoot at f8 in m43.  I haven't seen any tests on smaller format systems to prove it one of the other.  A 150° field would be difficult to render with a rectilinear system and the tiny dome would create enormous problems on the MWL if it was working anything like a conventional rectilinear lens in a dome. 

ISO 640 at f14 is equivalent to ISO200 at f8, so it's not surprising you need to boost ISO on full frame to maintain a reasonable shutter speed like 1/160.  I normally shoot my Olympus at 1/160@f8 ISO200.  To me stopping down to need ISO640 would be a no go on m43,  They compete with full frame by being able to shoot wider apertures.  It may well be possible to shoot wider apertures on a m43 system but until someone tests it it would be an expensive experiment unless you can borrow a MWL. 

3 hours ago, mochikat said:

I have the MWL-1 and have seen the WFL-09S in action. My roommate on the Philippines Siren had the Kraken lens and was using it with her Nikon D7200 and 60mm macro, and the flexibility it offered convinced me to get one. At the time there was a used MWL-1 for sale here so I went with MWL-1 over the Kraken lens, and also for the benefit of the double flip. The size is similar but the MWL is better built and feels more solid. I have a few of my roommate's photos but I'm not sure the comparison is apples to apples given APSC vs FF, Nikon vs Sony, 60mm macro vs 28-60mm zoom used.

I'm quite happy with the MWL1 in general, took it with me to Komodo and Raja Ampat a few months ago, and it's great for dives when you ask "is this macro or wide" and the guides just say "can be both, whatever you want!" - which is most dives in the Indo Pacific. 

If you want to see examples of the MWL-1 (with Sony A7C, 28-60mm kit lens) you can look at Komodo and Raja albums: https://www.flickr.com/photos/184457560@N06/albums It was my only wide angle lens for those trips.

I am still quite new to the hobby and consider myself quite amateur, but have been very pleased with the images I've been able to get with this lens. I liked it much more than my old WWL-1 which I took with me in between to Sipadan to compare and often missed the flexibility + more dramatic field of view the MWL-1 gives (150 vs 130). 

The two downsides tho are when there is not a ton of light and when visibility is bad. When I got it the reviews said to shoot at f/16 or up for decent corners, I found I can largely live with f/13 or 14 - but even at f/13 I had to bump ISO up to 640, 800, even 1000. I also could not figure out how to light without backscatter in really poor viz - this is probably a skill issue - but I found it harder with the MWL1 vs my old WWL1. I'm not sure how much of this is because it's designed to work with a 60mm macro lens and the Sony 28-60 is not a macro lens. It does not work well w the only macro lens >60mm (90mm) in Sony's line up. You see vignetting below 60mm.

I am selling my MWL-1 w the double flip if you're interested, since I just picked up the shiny new WACP-C. 

Looking at your images Joanna, the backscatter issues look to me to be the same as what I see if my strobes creep too far forward towards the plane of the dome port.  I would think if the lens is 60mm it should make little difference whether the lens is a macro lens or not, I do note though that the port chart for the MWL lists the Sony 28-70 rather than the 28-60 for Sony full frame.  I guess you used the 28-60 in the same port you used for the WWL.  The quality does look pretty good.

On my recent trip I found the strobes seemed to move forward when maneuvering in current and you needed to be vigilant and pull them back behind the plane of the dome, possibly level with your tray handles.  I have plenty of rejects where the strobes were too far forward.  In poor viz of course you can reduce backscatter but probably not entirely tame it.

While for most images you would want as much as possible in focus (f16 and above on FF) I don't think the bluewater test shots at f5.6 (on FF) are of academic nature only. Depending on what you shoot e.g. in blue water this could be a valid option. That is why I'm curious if the MWL-1 behaves the same. With the 8-18 behind the 7" acrylic port (which is probably not perfectly positioned, I haven't done the math) I mostly shoot between f8 and f11. I think there is a pretty good chance that f8 on MFT would be fine and I could live with that quite easily. Considering the shots that @mochikatshared at f13, I'm fairly certain that at least f11 on MFT would look good. 

12 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

Looking at your images Joanna, the backscatter issues look to me to be the same as what I see if my strobes creep too far forward towards the plane of the dome port.  I would think if the lens is 60mm it should make little difference whether the lens is a macro lens or not, I do note though that the port chart for the MWL lists the Sony 28-70 rather than the 28-60 for Sony full frame.  I guess you used the 28-60 in the same port you used for the WWL.  The quality does look pretty good.

On my recent trip I found the strobes seemed to move forward when maneuvering in current and you needed to be vigilant and pull them back behind the plane of the dome, possibly level with your tray handles.  I have plenty of rejects where the strobes were too far forward.  In poor viz of course you can reduce backscatter but probably not entirely tame it.

Thanks Chris, yes that was one big annoyance also - if I tightened the clamps too hard so it doesn't shift in current it was hard to adjust the lights as I get closer or farther from what I wanted to shoot, but if I don't it moves a lot in current!

But the bad viz situation I am talking about is when I have to shift the lights so far back (almost behind the handles) and turn the lights so far out to avoid backscatter, I end up with a deadzone in the middle (for example, when shooting a big seafan). There is no room to pull the lights more inwards together sideways because of the handles and the floats (I had the Nauticam mega float S attached). I spent almost an entire dive (think it was Balbulbol Pinnacle in Misool - we probably had 2-3m of viz on that one) just trying different lighting positions and could not find one that worked. Welcome any suggestions

2 minutes ago, mochikat said:

Thanks Chris, yes that was one big annoyance also - if I tightened the clamps too hard so it doesn't shift in current it was hard to adjust the lights as I get closer or farther from what I wanted to shoot, but if I don't it moves a lot in current!

But the bad viz situation I am talking about is when I have to shift the lights so far back (almost behind the handles) and turn the lights so far out to avoid backscatter, I end up with a deadzone in the middle (for example, when shooting a big seafan). There is no room to pull the lights more inwards together sideways because of the handles and the floats (I had the Nauticam mega float S attached). I spent almost an entire dive (think it was Balbulbol Pinnacle in Misool - we probably had 2-3m of viz on that one) just trying different lighting positions and could not find one that worked. Welcome any suggestions

2-3m vis is always going to be a challenge, one good solution is to give up and shoot macro .  But seriously the principle with lighting is to not illuminate stuff between camera and subject, but if the vis is really poor you'll still pick up stuff right next to the subject and behind the plane of the subject.  You could try extreme CFWA getting right on top of small subjects in those conditions perhaps?

Do you mean the INON mega float S?  I have those and I have a long clamp between the float and non float arm which allows them to fold closer together - the plain non float arm can sit parallel and touching the float.  this is the long clamp I have:

  https://www.scubapix.com/arms-clamps-trays/72503-standard-clamp-long/

@mochikat Do you have any samples with the MWL-1 at f4 or f5.6? Doesn't need to be a good shot.

On 1/9/2023 at 3:50 PM, hyp said:

@mochikat Do you have any samples with the MWL-1 at f4 or f5.6? Doesn't need to be a good shot.

I don't, most is f/9

F9 would still be the most wide open I’ve seen from the Mwl-1. If you have a series where you stopped down afterwards it would be even better. 

I have now bit the bullet and bought the Weefine WFL-09s to use with my Panasonic GX8 in Nauticam housing. First bathtub test shows that the lens seems plenty sharp even at f8, possibly even f5.6. Sharpness still seemed fine at f4 in the center so depending on the subject this would be ok. 

However, my biggest problem is that it is so large, that you cannot flip it back on the flip adapter without hitting the housing. Because of that, it doesn't actually lock in place, which for a lens like that, is in my opinion a dealbreaker. I guess one could use it on some kind of bayonet system, although I think Nauticams own Bayonet doesn't have adapters for third party lenses. 

I am going to return the lens, because it doesn't offer the convenience that I was looking for. I guess I'll just have to keep deciding before the dive whether I'll use the 8mm fisheye or a macro lens. Still considering the Olympus 12-50 in the 4" dome with flip adapter as a kind of do it all solution, but it's not really that wide and the image quality probably won't be that good.