OLY mft Wide/Tele Lens Choice

[Warmwater Wank]

Well, the OP just wondered about a better general purpose moderate zoom than the 14-42mm. No domes, no 8mm, just a better way to go for all around dive pics than the 14-42mm. I have a dual gate Sub-See setup for the standard port and schlepping a dome port and more lenses to the S. Pacific is not gonna happen, much as I would love to be able to.

Domes and fisheyes need way more practice time than I can get on one or two dive trips a year. I am not at all denying Jack's comments but it's wishes and fishes for me. ("A man has got to know his limitations." ~~Dirty Harry) If there are no reasonable options for a sharper "bridge" zoom then I'll live with the 14-42mm, it's not like it gives horrible results.

As an aside, the 9-18mm in the flat port is a bit of a barking dog. I know the physics and I know the right dome would solve it but reality does intrude. I can spend hundreds for a bridge zoom, not thousands for a really great FE solution. Ratz!

Thanks for the input gang. One last thing. I did talk with a pro in Indonesia last December, trying to buy his 12-50mm EZ. He said he didn't want to sell it and was surprised I had heard it was so-so quality. MFT comparisons aside, does anyone who shoots this lens in an Oly housing have any thoughts about it's quality? // ww

 

[Furnari]

Shot it for awhile in the oly flat port. It was...just ok. Not really any better than the 14-42, IMO. After a couple of months, I upgraded to a refurb 12-40 (on sale for 640 from time to time on the oly website). I'm much, much happier with the quality. The flat port for it is nice (and you can use a wet diopter). Maybe sell some plasma?

 

[Warmwater Wank]

Hey Furnari. Yeah, this came up last time I asked and indeed for what I like to do the 12-40mm Pro would be the best route. About the port change. Wasn't the deal something along the line of needing not just a new port but an adapter too or that the zoom ring was pricey? Lacking any knowledge of Oly ports, does the port for the 12-40 work for the 60mm macro? I'm thinking if I have to sell plasma for all this I'll be a few quarts too low to dive...// ww

 

[Furnari]

Ah- thought that your question sounded familiar- how's it going? The adapter is 70-110, depending if it's on sale, and the zoom gear is another 70. The 60mm works fine, although it sits further back in the port than in the normal flat port. I tested the combination, and you can shoot something about an inch across. Just shot the 12-40 today in Washinton, but with a 170mm dome- I love that combination even better, but you're talking about 300-400 more than the flat port.

I was in the same boat as you as far as trying to go cheap with the 14-42 or 12-50, but I'm glad I splurged on the 12-40. Underwater photography is worse than hookers and blow when it comes to burning money.

 

[vsc]

I tested the combination, and you can shoot something about an inch across. Just shot the 12-40 today in Washinton, but with a 170mm dome- I love that combination even better, but you're talking about 300-400 more than the flat port.

Can you comment on the difference in results between the flat port and dome with the 12-40?

 

[Furnari]

I just updated this thread:
12-40 Dome port possibility for OMD housings

That may answer some of your questions. I think the dome is the best one port solution for the 12-40, but you give up performance on the long end. You also can't use a diopter, which I need to explore further on the flat port.

 

[Warmwater Wank]

Let me come at this a different way. Instead of replacing the 14-42mm how much improvement am I going to see shooting the 9-18mm in a dome? Not being very happy at all shooting it in a flat port it might be money well spent if a dome let me shoot the 9-18mm getting noticeably results. Of course corner sharpness is my main problem and yep, a dome will help that as well as grab more of the scene. Other than Jack's suggestion on a Zen, what other domes would make me happier with the 9-18mm and be reasonable on the budget side? // ww
Oly 9-18mm f/16@1/60 w/ flat port Bunaken sponges

 

[Furnari]

AOI makes an acrylic mini dome for about $200, but you'll need a PEN to OMD adapter, which will run you another 100-150 dollars- same with Zen. I haven't heard much about their ports, but their price is attractive. If you can go bigger, the same 170mm domes used with the 12-40, 8mm, and 7-14 should also work with a shorter extension. My Inon dome vignettes with the 2" extension ring, but should work fine with a 1" extension (although I haven't tried it). Corner performance is improved with the bigger dome, but the smaller domes are noticeably better than in the flat port. The flat port is fine as long as you don't have anything in the corners.

 

[Storker]

Not being very happy at all shooting it in a flat port it might be money well spent if a dome let me shoot the 9-18mm getting noticeably results. Of course corner sharpness is my main problem and yep, a dome will help that as well as grab more of the scene.

I don't know about any of the Olympus ports, but the 9-18 has mushy corners behind the Nauticam 4" semidome. It can be fixed, though.

AFAIK, mushy corners is a quite common issue with many rectilinear (super)wides in a dome, since the dome projects a curved virtual image pretty close to the close focus limit of the lens. You can sort of hack that by using a dry diopter/closeup lens - preferably an achromat - on the lens. That brings the virtual image further from the close focus limit of the lens, and you'll get noticeably crisper corners. You'll lose a little FOV, though, but IMO it's not so much that it annoys me.

I use a 52mm Canon achromatic closeup lens on my 9-18 (behind a Nauticam 4" semidome) and I'm quite happy with the results. Noticeably better than before I got the closeup lens. Later, I've splurged on the 8/3.5 and a dome as well, but the 9-18 is a better allround lens for me, so I tend to use it just as much as the FE which is more of a specialized lens, IMO mostly suited for wreckscapes and CFWA.

 

[Warmwater Wank]

Thanks Storker. I followed that previous thread on diopters and mini-domes (demi-domes!) so I sorta get it. As I understand it, a low strength diopter helps correct on corners but still has acceptable if not perfect infinity focus. If the stars align I may be able to get a used Zen 9-18 dome. I am holding out the possibility it would not only improve the UW performance of the 9-18mm I have but maybe even let the 14-42mm work a tad better. I shoot a lot of macro compared to WA but would hope to change that if I can get improved results with the 9-18mm. Thanks for the reminder on the diopter biz! // ww