Blurry image using the Sony MPK-URX100A w/wet lens on the original RX100

[DazedAndConfuzed]

I have a RX100 that I have been using with the Meikon housing and a Inon 67mm wet lens/dome. The camera lens' flex cable was getting was losing contact where it folds, I propped open the camera case slightly to ease the bending of the flex cable, but the thin Meikon housing was getting squeezed at depth, causing my "don't touch the lens setting" camera setup to shut down at random times during the dive. With a big trip coming up at that time, I got the Sony MPK-URX100A housing, thinking Sony finally made a housing for this camera, so it would not have as much compromises as some cheap housing like the Meikon.

What I didn't realize was the lens sat off center. I thought the only issue is that I will get vignetting on one side, which can easily be resolved by zooming in until I don't see it anymore. But on the trip where I first used the housing, which was a couple of years ago, I noticed one side of the image was all blurred, rendering almost all my pictures flawed. Unfortunately, I only noticed it after downloading all the pictures once I got back. I didn't bother with the camera on my last short dive trip. But with my upcoming trip, I am back to this situation again. I bought the flex cable a while ago, but never got to change it out on the camera. But if this is how the image, there is no point fixing that camera.

So did anybody else have issues like this? Is it the wet lens projecting an image to the side of the camera's lens? I thought the full sized wet lens should have a larger image field to work with compared to the compact wet lens.

Here are a couple of examples, with side of the image blurred:

Bottom blurred:

Left side blurred:

 

[Barmaglot]

Unfortunately the decentering is a known issue with that housing. IIRC it affects RX100 and RX100M2; models III through V have a slightly different layout that the housing is primarily built for. You will have to either upgrade the camera, or shoot through flat glass without add-ons.

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

I was just going to stick with Mk I, as it has terrible macro and white balance range (not sure how much better that Mk III got). If I was going to upgrade to anything, it would have been the Oly TG series (was waiting for the TG-7, which unfortunately was not worth the wait).

 

[Barmaglot]

AFAIK the 9900K white balance limit was removed in either RX100IV or RX100V. You can't set it manually, but it will take a custom white balance reading and display '>9900K'.

Macro can be shot with close-up lenses; it's decent on the 28-100mm (I and II) and 24-70mm (III-V) models and excellent on the 24-200mm ones (VI and VII), although the latter require a different housing with interchangeable ports (Sony doesn't have a native one).

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

AFAIK the 9900K white balance limit was removed in either RX100IV or RX100V. You can't set it manually, but it will take a custom white balance reading and display '>9900K'.

Macro can be shot with close-up lenses; it's decent on the 28-100mm (I and II) and 24-70mm (III-V) models and excellent on the 24-200mm ones (VI and VII), although the latter require a different housing with interchangeable ports (Sony doesn't have a native one).

I have to go to RX100VI or higher to have all the shortcoming fixed? The only time I use my cameras is on dive trips, so I don't know if I want to shell out that much money for a p&s where nobody every look at my pictures. I might have just switched to the TG-6, if I didn't already gotten the Sony housing (and my 67mm lens.).

I was looking at the RX100III just to fix the lens centering issue, but might have to move up to RX100IV to at least fix one issue (white balance). Gotta see how much those are.

I usually keep my wet dome lens screwed on all the time, as swapping or removing lenses is a burden unless I am on a self guided dive and have all the time to set up the camera. Now I just carry my old panny p&s, w/o wet lens, where it shoot macros down to near the lens port and have a quick underwater mode where it beats the Sony's 9900K limit.

 

[Barmaglot]

You could just return or sell your Sony housing and look around for a Nauticam or Recsea for the original RX100. Old as it is, it shouldn't be too expensive. Looking at Wetpixel classifieds, I see one that was given away for the cost of shipping last September.

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

You could just return or sell your Sony housing and look around for a Nauticam or Recsea for the original RX100. Old as it is, it shouldn't be too expensive. Looking at Wetpixel classifieds, I see one that was given away for the cost of shipping last September.

I bought the Sony housing a couple of years ago and used it on one trip, so don't think I can return it.

I usually leave my gears untouched after a trip, and only go back to it a few weeks before the next trip. That's when I realize all the issues I had. Maybe I will scour the classified for RX100 housing going forward, but I doubt I will find a solution for it before my trip. I guess I can post a WTB, since I presume many people have them lying around, unless all those alum housings were compatible with all versions of RX100.

 

[Barmaglot]

Nauticam housings were all specific to a single camera model; the only cases where more than one can be accommodated is V/VA and VI/VII. A WTB ad can indeed be helpful, as I would guess most owners don't entertain the possibility of someone wanting something this old, so they don't bother posting a sell ad.

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

Nauticam housings were all specific to a single camera model; the only cases where more than one can be accommodated is V/VA and VI/VII. A WTB ad can indeed be helpful, as I would guess most owners don't entertain the possibility of someone wanting something this old, so they don't bother posting a sell ad.

I wonder why Nauticam housings were so specific to each model while other mfg could have housings that spans multiple models. I see the dial on the V shifted slightly compared to III/IV. A rubber ring turning the dial from the top could turn off-center by a few mm and not a difference. Also, the diff between III and IV seems negligible. The rear buttons might stick out more by a couple of mm, which, when the IV housing came out, could compensate for that slight difference in depth between the 2 cameras. (these are all from visual comparison of images, not actual handheld comparisions).

 

[Sharkygill]

I recently upgraded to a mirrorless after shooting my RX100 in an Ikelite housing for several years. My RX100 gear is no longer of use to me so if you'd like to upgrade your housing and perhaps some gear send me a PM and we can work somthing out.