WACP-C Prototype experiments part I

Thanks to @Alex_Mustard I have started my testing of the WACP-C prototype aka WWL1-DRY

The first lens to go through is the tamron 17-28mm that did not vignette at 26mm despite my extension was 5mm too long. Image quality is far superior to the Sony 28-60mm already like this and will get better with a shorter extension

https://interceptor121.com/2023/04/07/wacp-prototype-experiments/

For you pixel peeper here is a field of curvature test shot at f/5.6

I’d definitely accept that image quality of the Tamron lens is better than the Sony 28-60mm on land. It is great that you are testing options that we can all benefit from.  The sharpness and punch of the shots are so much better than the same lens behind the dome.

What I learned when testing lenses behind the WACP, was I had to carefully check both for centre frame sharpness and edge of frame performance. With Nikon I tested lots of lenses that were better on land and thought I was going to make some great breakthrough only to actually find them worse behind the WAPC away from the centre of the frame . Many of them were sharper in centre frame and worse at the edges. 

I also feel that few would want to give up the zoom. As all WWL and WACP users would comment, these lenses get used on big animals and schools of fish the most. Where the ability to zoom is perhaps the most useful feature for getting the best shot.  
But most importantly, keep testing. It is very valuable to everyone, to know what options there are.

34 minutes ago, Alex_Mustard said:

I’d definitely accept that image quality of the Tamron lens is better than the Sony 28-60mm on land. It is great that you are testing options that we can all benefit from.  The sharpness and punch of the shots are so much better than the same lens behind the dome.
What I learned when testing lenses behind the WACP, was I had to carefully check both for centre frame sharpness and edge of frame performance. With Nikon I tested lots of lenses that were better on land and thought I was going to make some great breakthrough only to actually find them worse behind the WAPC away from the centre of the frame . Many of them were sharper in centre frame and worse at the edges. 
I also feel that few would want to give up the zoom. As all WWL and WACP users would comment, these lenses get used on big animals and schools of fish the most. Where the ability to zoom is perhaps the most useful feature for getting the best shot.  
But most importantly, keep testing. It is very valuable to everyone, to know what options there are.

The 17-28mm was a fall back plan
I think the 28-75G2 will not work equally well at least with this lens may be better with the larger WACP-1
The intention is to get a lens that works in the 28-40mm range which is more or less 130-90 degrees
Longer frankly is not really needed I have looked at all my WWL-1 shots they are all 14-20 which is corresponding to this
Surprisingly the lens worked at 26mm not sure the production lens will
This is experiment phase I there is II and III planned and they are zooms


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@Interceptor121 Thank you for sharing your experiences. I am curious to know why you've written off the 28-75 G2 at this point, and also wondering if you've considered the Tamron 20-40 given what you've stated above? I was actually considering testing one or the other of these lenses with the WACP-C that I have on order. 

[mention=34353]Interceptor121[/mention] Thank you for sharing your experiences. I am curious to know why you've written off the 28-75 G2 at this point, and also wondering if you've considered the Tamron 20-40 given what you've stated above? I was actually considering testing one or the other of these lenses with the WACP-C that I have on order. 

23 hours ago, Alex_Mustard said:I also feel that few would want to give up the zoom. As all WWL and WACP users would comment, these lenses get used on big animals and schools of fish the most. Where the ability to zoom is perhaps the most useful feature for getting the best shot.  

But most importantly, keep testing. It is very valuable to everyone, to know what options there are.

For me this is the most important statement. The more technical approach to photography does usually not translate in better pictures. 

For me this is the most important statement. The more technical approach to photography does usually not translate in better pictures. 

That didn’t mean what you implied at all!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

22 hours ago, BobbyV said:

@Interceptor121 Thank you for sharing your experiences. I am curious to know why you've written off the 28-75 G2 at this point, and also wondering if you've considered the Tamron 20-40 given what you've stated above? I was actually considering testing one or the other of these lenses with the WACP-C that I have on order. 

Update on the 28-75mm G2 

today I got the adapter ring I was after and unfortunately the lens vignettes at 28mm just a bit but you can see it therefore this lens is more for the WACP-1 someone else will have to check if that works

Maybe the Sigma 28-70 could be the better choise? Its smaller than the tamron and might work better but the image quality is not up the the level of the tarmon. But these should be on pair after F5.6. 

15 minutes ago, JYk said:

Maybe the Sigma 28-70 could be the better choise? Its smaller than the tamron and might work better but the image quality is not up the the level of the tarmon. But these should be on pair after F5.6. 

I do not think the sigma is not a better choice because it extends more than the tamron so it will have less zoom range available and in addition is not a great lens on its own especially on the edges

The tamron 28-75mm G2 with WACP-1 should be able to do 28-50mm however with the lens back from the glass I am unsure about the image quality

Generally it looks like big format 28-70 or 28-75 lenses are not a good fit for the WACP-C but wider lens zoomed work well judhing from the results of the 17-28mm that does not vignette at 26mm.

It must have to do with the lens design and where the entrance pupil is located