Sea & Sea 210mm ARII dome with EF 8-15 on Sony Alpha 1

I've been mostly using the WWL-1b and just recently they WACP-C on the A1 and A7SIII, but need a set up for doing splits with the EF 8-15 fisheye. I already have the Metabones adapter working the way I want (in advanced mode) with the lens. So that leaves a dome.

Sea and Sea makes a lot of bold claims for their new 210mm ARII dome. They claim better refraction properties than glass, and a meniscus design. It looks like an interesting option for travel, especially considering we are already traveling with alot of heavy gear including the wet lenses, OneUW strobes and Keldan lights.

The Sea and Sea 210mm ARII promises an equivalent image quality to glass at a lower weight and easier travel size. Anyone have experience with this new dome?

12 hours ago, jplaurel said:

I've been mostly using the WWL-1b and just recently they WACP-C on the A1 and A7SIII, but need a set up for doing splits with the EF 8-15 fisheye. I already have the Metabones adapter working the way I want (in advanced mode) with the lens. So that leaves a dome.

Sea and Sea makes a lot of bold claims for their new 210mm ARII dome. They claim better refraction properties than glass, and a meniscus design. It looks like an interesting option for travel, especially considering we are already traveling with alot of heavy gear including the wet lenses, OneUW strobes and Keldan lights.

The Sea and Sea 210mm ARII promises an equivalent image quality to glass at a lower weight and easier travel size. Anyone have experience with this new dome?

interesting claim

Considering the actual glass is something like 7mm I am really not sure that a few mm of variable thickness make a huge difference to spherical aberration

Consider that spherical aberration is easily corrected by stopping down the lens while field of curvature is not

7 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

interesting claim

Considering the actual glass is something like 7mm I am really not sure that a few mm of variable thickness make a huge difference to spherical aberration

Consider that spherical aberration is easily corrected by stopping down the lens while field of curvature is not

I would be very interested in your impression of this dome from your typically more objective point of view. I wonder if we could get Sea and Sea to provide one for review. Because they are certainly not doing a very good job marketing these things.

1 minute ago, jplaurel said:

I would be very interested in your impression of this dome from your typically more objective point of view. I wonder if we could get Sea and Sea to provide one for review. Because they are certainly not doing a very good job marketing these things.

https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=130

Obviously much bigger

The idea is to focus converging beams to reduce spherical aberrations

Spherical aberrations is the reason why when you go over a certain field of view you have blurred edges

However in my direct experience the fundamental issue is more field of curvature than spherical aberration 

At least someone is trying something different