Sony A1 and WWL-1 Tests and Analysis

Finally finished the write up after my pool sessions

https://interceptor121.com/2023/03/11/nauticam-wwl-1-on-sony-full-frame-what-to-expect/

Thanks for the review. I was cautious of the WWL1 or WPAC because of the Sony 28-60 which is just a kitlens and has issues when it comes to high MP sensors. 
Maybe in the future there will be better lenses which can be paired with the WWL1 WPAC to get better results.

51 minutes ago, JYk said:

Thanks for the review. I was cautious of the WWL1 or WPAC because of the Sony 28-60 which is just a kitlens and has issues when it comes to high MP sensors. 
Maybe in the future there will be better lenses which can be paired with the WWL1 WPAC to get better results.

if you read the write up carefully that is exactly the point. The 28-60mm may be a great kit lens for the A7C but it not a lens that gives justice to the A1 or A7R series camera to be frank

When I was testing the edges I could not get them sharp even when I was focussing on the edge itself both topside and underwater this indicates an issue with the lens itself not due to the water contact optic

I would really like to test a WACP-C as now I have a set of props that really tell the truth about close focus work but I do not have one.

If I had one I would do exactly the same procedure to see how much the dry mount makes a difference to the IQ. It is possible that it improves the IQ broadly but not necessarily improves the edges. How much remains to be determined.

On a positive note the WWL-1 does not suffer full frame syndrome. The lens is afocal so sensor size is relatively important as at some point everything is in focus anyway

One thing that I'm still curious about (although this curiosity is largely academic; I have no plans to move to full-frame) is how does a 24mm f/2.8 G + WWL-C stack up against a 28-60mm + WWL-1. On the one hand, the G-series prime should have better performance than the kit zoom, but on the other hand, WWL-C is simpler lens than WWL-1. I guess it should come down to which one of those is more of a limiting factor on the final image quality.

One thing that I'm still curious about (although this curiosity is largely academic; I have no plans to move to full-frame) is how does a 24mm f/2.8 G + WWL-C stack up against a 28-60mm + WWL-1. On the one hand, the G-series prime should have better performance than the kit zoom, but on the other hand, WWL-C is simpler lens than WWL-1. I guess it should come down to which one of those is more of a limiting factor on the final image quality.

12 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

I would look at the sigma instead

You mean Sigma 24mm f/3.5 DN DG + WWL-C? Aside from $50 lower cost, what is its advantage over Sony 24mm f/2.8 G? Regardless, this loops me back to my original question - while there's a significant amount of test data available for WWL-1 and WACP-1/WACP-C with Sony full-frame, I haven't seen anything for WWL-C, which makes me curious as to how it would compare.

You mean Sigma 24mm f/3.5 DN DG + WWL-C? Aside from $50 lower cost, what is its advantage over Sony 24mm f/2.8 G? Regardless, this loops me back to my original question - while there's a significant amount of test data available for WWL-1 and WACP-1/WACP-C with Sony full-frame, I haven't seen anything for WWL-C, which makes me curious as to how it would compare.