The lens specs seem pretty compelling for a super-compact wide-angle setup. The close minimum focus distance, short overall length, and moderately wide AoV seems to suggest to me that it could be well suited to a very small dome - like the Nauticam 3.5 or 4.33. It seems like that could work well for diving where size is at a premium (either for drag or weight allowance), but rectilinear is preferred over a compact fisheye setup.
Surely someone has had a nudge with one, or could tell me why it wouldn't work (or would)?
23 minutes ago, freedivenz said:
The lens specs seem pretty compelling for a super-compact wide-angle setup. The close minimum focus distance, short overall length, and moderately wide AoV seems to suggest to me that it could be well suited to a very small dome - like the Nauticam 3.5 or 4.33. It seems like that could work well for diving where size is at a premium (either for drag or weight allowance), but rectilinear is preferred over a compact fisheye setup.
Surely someone has had a nudge with one, or could tell me why it wouldn't work (or would)?
More than likely it would work well, but in the same small dome the Panasonic 8mm fisheye would be better for most things with better corners. The Leica lens would perhaps be useful when you couldn't get closer to subjects.
I tried it with a small Inon dome meant for the Olympus fisheye; it works, but the corners weren't great. This shot is at f3.2 and cropped a fair amount- I was fighting a lot of current and kind of sprayed and prayed when I saw the trout. I only had it in the water for a few minutes and didn't have a lot of opportunity to experiment with different aperture settings; I'd like to play around with it more as I love the lens for topside stuff, especially the ability to shoot at f1.7. That feature loses its appeal underwater, though. Personally, I prefer a zoom for wide stuff- my first choice is the PL8-18 in a 170mm dome. Like the OP notes, the form factor with the 9mm is lot smaller.
I tried it with a small Inon dome meant for the Olympus fisheye; it works, but the corners weren't great. This shot is at f3.2 and cropped a fair amount- I was fighting a lot of current and kind of sprayed and prayed when I saw the trout. I only had it in the water for a few minutes and didn't have a lot of opportunity to experiment with different aperture settings; I'd like to play around with it more as I love the lens for topside stuff, especially the ability to shoot at f1.7. That feature loses its appeal underwater, though. Personally, I prefer a zoom for wide stuff- my first choice is the PL8-18 in a 170mm dome. Like the OP notes, the form factor with the 9mm is lot smaller.
The 9mm is a very small lens The best would be the 3.5” wide angle port but I am afraid even that one may have issues The dome wont work well is too far away from the lens pupil so it will pull at the edges as your images show
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks. I've been tossing up whether to get it for topside WA when hiking, so I guess I was hoping for another reason to convince myself
I may still, in which case I'll see how it does behind the 3.5 and report back
