Nikonos UW15

The Sony full frame housing from Nauticam have an adapter to use Nikonos water contact lenses

I have a few questions for users with experience of this lens on full frame cameras

1. Aperture range -> the lens goes to f/2.8 and is equivalent to 20mm topside. How useable it really is at f/2.8 f/4? Especially f/4 seems very interesting for video

2. Hyperfocal distance -> does the lens work as a 20mm topside lens or there is other logic?

3. Working distance -> how close does it focus

I am thinking about this lens for video not for photos however I realise most users like @Alex_Mustard use it for photos and most likely have the answers

20mm is not a lot for photos but is almost ideal for video actually and the lens is rectilinear which is another plus

The Nikonos 15mm has the same 94 degree as a 20mm and focuses too 30cm. The lens does not work out of water it is a full water contact lens, Nikon did make a 28mm and 80mm for land use.

Regarding the 94mm AOV this was the gold standard for U/W photographers during the film days and arguably graced more U/W magazine covers than another film lens.

You may also want to consider the new Sony FE 20-70 F/4 announced yesterday. This new lens is a constant F/4 across the zoom range and also focuses at 25cm across the full range, so about 1:2.5 at the 70mm end. I suspect this lens will be ideal for video and stills use. It has all the latest Sony lens tech including the ultra fast focus motors.

Sony further announced its intension to release a 300mm F/2.8 soon to help cover the long end with 300, 400 and 600mm. 

Perhaps they will now consider the other end of the focal range and work on a fisheye. Canon and Sony have both filed pattens for at least four different fisheye designers in the 8-15mm range hoping they will finally release one of those designed. I agree with Alex that while current adapted 8-15mm designs deliver DSLR results a native fisheye zoom for mirrorless should set a new benchmark.

The new Sony lens is about the size of the 35mm F/1.8.

8 minutes ago, Phil Rudin said:

You may also want to consider the new Sony FE 20-70 F/4 announced yesterday. This new lens is a constant F/4 across the zoom range and also focuses at 25cm across the full range, so about 1:2.5 at the 70mm end. I suspect this lens will be ideal for video and stills use. It has all the latest Sony lens tech including the ultra fast focus motors.

Maybe just behind a dome.

Zooming it extends a lot!

A bunch of 24-70, 28-75 and 24-105's from Sigma, Sony Tamron and more are supported for 180 and 230mm ports. They all have about the same zoom extension and some are longer, I don't think this will be an issue.  

Sorry my fault.

I thought you were referring to its possible use behind a Nauticam wet lens. That's why I was pointing out the zoom extension.

1 hour ago, Phil Rudin said:

A bunch of 24-70, 28-75 and 24-105's from Sigma, Sony Tamron and more are supported for 180 and 230mm ports. They all have about the same zoom extension and some are longer, I don't think this will be an issue.  

 

I have a Tamron 17-28mm it works well topside for the use case I got it for. I have the 180mm port already and I am planning to take it underwater

Yet it won't work at f/4 like the Nikonos lens did

I have used the Tamron lens a bunch and reviewed it  in 2021 issue #UWP119 using both 180 and 230mm ports. I have replaced it with the Sony FE 16-35mm F/4 power zoom which is a better lens in every way for U/W work.

I have also used the Nauticam lens adapter for Nikonos film lenses. It is one of the older Sony specific products and filled a gap back when the Sony lens lineup was not so well filled out on the wide rectilinear end. I was not all that impressed with the results in the F/2.8 to 5.6 range and have never seem it used by anyone in the field. 

The Nikonos RS 13mm fisheye on the other hand appears excellent adapter to DSLR cameras. Modern rectilinear lenses are designed much differently for mirrorless than the older film lenses where the light could be captured at very oblique angles. I don't expect the corner sharpness at F/4 with the Nikonos 15mm is going to be all that much better than than a 16-35 at F/4 with a large dome. The upside for the Nikonos of course is the size but It would not out perform the WWL-1 with the 28-60mm.

The Sony FE 20-70 F/4 is an entirely different zoom range so not really apples to apples with the 17-28mm. 

2 hours ago, Phil Rudin said:

You may also want to consider the new Sony FE 20-70 F/4 announced yesterday. This new lens is a constant F/4 across the zoom range and also focuses at 25cm across the full range, so about 1:2.5 at the 70mm end. I suspect this lens will be ideal for video and stills use. It has all the latest Sony lens tech including the ultra fast focus motors.

That range sounds like a good all-rounder, and focusing a bit closer is a plus.

7 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

The Sony full frame housing from Nauticam have an adapter to use Nikonos water contact lenses

I have a few questions for users with experience of this lens on full frame cameras

1. Aperture range -> the lens goes to f/2.8 and is equivalent to 20mm topside. How useable it really is at f/2.8 f/4? Especially f/4 seems very interesting for video

2. Hyperfocal distance -> does the lens work as a 20mm topside lens or there is other logic?

3. Working distance -> how close does it focus

I am thinking about this lens for video not for photos however I realise most users like @Alex_Mustard use it for photos and most likely have the answers

20mm is not a lot for photos but is almost ideal for video actually and the lens is rectilinear which is another plus

check out this lens comparison on this very forum from 2014. https://wetpixel.com/articles/test-optical-performance-of-nikonos-15mm-flat-and-dome-ports

7 minutes ago, Humu797 said:

check out this lens comparison on this very forum from 2014. https://wetpixel.com/articles/test-optical-performance-of-nikonos-15mm-flat-and-dome-ports

I know that article it has some errors

Field of view is 94.38 degrees. The other lenses tested are 14mm so much wider and prone to issues

You need to compare the Nikkor 15mm to a 20mm lens behind a dome not to a 14mm lens which for sure will have more issues.

I actually have a 17-28mm and soon will have a Nikkor 15mm so will run my own tests

The nikkor essentially is a 15mm lens that only works in water, when submerged it has a multiplication of 4/3 so becomes 20mm

It balances the distortion and has low chromatic aberration so will product an extremely clean image.

However a 20mm modern lens especially prime will have an extremely high resolution and require a smaller dome due to the field of view of 94 degrees. My plan is to use a 180mm dome and I am pretty sure it will be ok actually but at f/16 while the Nikkor will work at f/4 f/5.6 just fine which is what makes this lens very interesting

15 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

I know that article it has some errors

Field of view is 94.38 degrees. The other lenses tested are 14mm so much wider and prone to issues

Yes, you're right. But the takeaway is that the Nikkor 15mm is a damn good lens. I have one, along with the Nauticam adapter, but I have yet to put it to the test with mirrorless.

Have you seen this: https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/12/05/the-sony-a7r-underwater-with-the-iconic-nikonos-15mm-lens-by-scotty-graham/

1 minute ago, Humu797 said:

Yes, you're right. But the takeaway is that the Nikkor 15mm is a damn good lens. I have one, along with the Nauticam adapter, but I have yet to put it to the test.

Have you seen this: https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/12/05/the-sony-a7r-underwater-with-the-iconic-nikonos-15mm-lens-by-scotty-graham/

I know a few people that have it. What is most interesting for me is the video capability as 20mm rectilinear is really great

Likewise pictures with divers but frankly for photos I do not think the manual aperture manual focus is really the way forward and will keep shooting a canon 8-15mm

Just adding my two cents here... I've been using a Nikonos 15mm with a Sony a7C setup and it's been exquisite... The 20mm equivalent FOV is more narrow than what's most popular these days however IMO it gives a much more natural look to photos, almost like you're not underwater. It's hard to describe, but the "look" of photos from this lens are unique and very pleasing. It works awesome for hyperfocal use and if shot at f/8, you can pretty much set it and forget it. My favorite uses for it are video and natural light reefscapes. Perhaps above all, it's insanely small. Won't make much of a difference if you've got a whole lighting setup, but if you forgo strobes, the setup is smaller than anything else of this quality. There is one significant caveat - because of the way the Nauticam adapter functions (not attached at all to the camera body), it is possible that when mounted up, the focal plane of the camera is ever so slightly too close or too far from the lens (the manufacturing tolerances on the Nauticam housing/adapter are simply not tight enough to match what's required by lenses this wide). In my case, the camera body was a tiny bit too far away from the lens, which meant that the lens couldn't focus to infinity. Using digital calipers, I discovered that it was only off by 0.5mm, but that was plenty to make the lens way less functional than I wanted. Fortunately, all I had to do was manually file down the front of the camera plate by 0.5mm, and now the setup works flawlessly. The lens is totally usable wide open - there's some vignetting and the DoF is pretty shallow, but it's tack sharp even at f2.8. Corner sharpness is way better than any rectilinear / dome combo I've ever seen. Video looks awesome because of the sharpness and near-total lack of distortion. The fact that all of the underwater scenes in Avatar 2 were shot exclusively on this lens should speak for itself... If you're willing to invest some time and effort to make sure your flange distance is spot on, it's 100% worth it. I'm including an example shot from The Bahamas to demonstrate.

I have done 3 dives with the Nikonos 15mm lens (on the Sony). I have owned the lens from new and used to use it on the Nikonos V in the past. Here are some photos:

It has been fun to use it again and I like how small it is. Focusing is easy enough - use viewfinder magnification, peaking is useless with wide angle. I definitely feel I shoot it differently (being able to see through it) than I did when using it with a viewfinder (on the Nikonos V). I make use of the close focus more, too, with the Sony, being sure of the focus - which you never were with the Nikonos V. 

My main reaction is that the lens is really not very wide. To me it almost feels mid-range. This is not because of the lens, it is just because we are used to wider viewing lenses these days. 

The lens is sharp and produces rich colours. It is very good, but I don’t find it any better than WACP. The claims that this is the best lens of all time are a bit exaggerated from my experience. But it is certainly very good and I enjoy using it, even if it isn’t the easiest way to get a shot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s this lens was marketed as the Rolls Royce of underwater optics. But when people ask about using it for stills photography these days, my usual response is to say - would you choose to use a 1980s Rolls Royce these days!

I like it very much as a people lens and because it is so small I am likely to continue to travel and shoot with it - occassionally!

Alex

I agree with the doctor [mention]Alex_Mustard [/mention]
Today there are many 20mm rectilinear lenses that will be as sharp and have autofocus however need a dome

I can see the uw15 as video lens the benefit is when you have current it has less drag
For photos plenty of options


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On 7/12/2023 at 5:23 PM, Interceptor121 said:

Today there are many 20mm rectilinear lenses that will be as sharp and have autofocus however need a dome

This is definitely true, but I highly doubt there are any that have comparable corner sharpness at smaller apertures like f4 and f5.6 especially. Given how usable the lens is even at f4 (other than being a little more tricky to focus on closer subjects due to narrower DoF), for natural light reefscapes at least, you're gaining 1 or maybe 2 stops of light. Depending on your shooting style, that could be a huge deal.

This is definitely true, but I highly doubt there are any that have comparable corner sharpness at smaller apertures like f4 and f5.6 especially. Given how usable the lens is even at f4 (other than being a little more tricky to focus on closer subjects due to narrower DoF), for natural light reefscapes at least, you're gaining 1 or maybe 2 stops of light. Depending on your shooting style, that could be a huge deal.