Most affordable way to "go wide" the RX100?

[DesertEagle]

The UWL-28M52 worked a lot better on my Canon S95 than it does on my RX100. To get anywhere near decent corners I had to stop it down to F9.

A few weeks ago I was in Bali using the RX100 in a Polaroid (Meikon) housing. The UWL-28M52 is okay zoomed in a bit at f9. Anything lower than that it would be very soft in the corners. Unfortunately for me, my optical strobe connector decided that the RX100's pre-flash is too complicated, so no strobe. I shot some video with an Auto Magic Filter but the camera was stopped down to get reasonably sharp video. On the plus side, I brought a Watershot Pro housing for my brand new iPhone 6s. The video quality far exceeded my expectations.

Just a word about the Meikon housings. My Polaroid (Meikon OEM) housing had a control gland depressor come lose and fall off. I called Polaroid warranty support and spoke with an actual person. They gave me instructions to send the housing or repair. In a week I received a brand new housing.

 

[tamas970]

The rx is larger sensor, bigger lens diameter I am not surprised that the smaller m52 vignettes.

Warranty may work on the Meikons, though I would not trust my mkIV on a 150$ plastic thingy without vacuum system.

 

[Interceptor121]

The vignette of the fix lens depends on the hood as the lens is very wide horizontally. The Inon lens also vignettes on some housings in the corners as the lens is too far from the port. On nauticam housing both vignette very little with the smaller 28AD lens not vignetting at all with stabiliser off

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

The UWL-28M52 worked a lot better on my Canon S95 than it does on my RX100. To get anywhere near decent corners I had to stop it down to F9.

A few weeks ago I was in Bali using the RX100 in a Polaroid (Meikon) housing. The UWL-28M52 is okay zoomed in a bit at f9. Anything lower than that it would be very soft in the corners. Unfortunately for me, my optical strobe connector decided that the RX100's pre-flash is too complicated, so no strobe. I shot some video with an Auto Magic Filter but the camera was stopped down to get reasonably sharp video. On the plus side, I brought a Watershot Pro housing for my brand new iPhone 6s. The video quality far exceeded my expectations.

Just a word about the Meikon housings. My Polaroid (Meikon OEM) housing had a control gland depressor come lose and fall off. I called Polaroid warranty support and spoke with an actual person. They gave me instructions to send the housing or repair. In a week I received a brand new housing.

Strange, on my old Oly C5050 and Inon UWL-100, zooming the lens causes most of the image outside the center to become soft and streaky toward the center like I zoomed the lens during the exposure. I don't see that on the RX100 with the same wet lens, even though on my RX100 setup, the UWL-100 could be as much as 10cm further than the C5050. I attributed it to the nodal point moving further back on the C5050 when the lens zooms away from its widest setting, moving it out of range of the eye relief distance of the wet lens. I thought the RX100 would be worse given its much wider absolute aperture, but apparently it did not happen. Maybe the UWL-28M52's is just such case?

What is this gland depressor thing? Spring loaded button?

The rx is larger sensor, bigger lens diameter I am not surprised that the smaller m52 vignettes.

Warranty may work on the Meikons, though I would not trust my mkIV on a 150$ plastic thingy without vacuum system.

The plastic thingy would then be advantageous, given that it is transparent and you can see if water has seeped in. Plus you can always stuff a tampon in the open space to absorb any water that has seeped and give you enough time to abort the dive and save the camera, although the Ikelite housing would be better in such situation since it is a giant plastic box, thus giving you alot more of the empty space inside the housing.

 

[DesertEagle]

The dilemma is zooming AND stopping down. For shooting video with a Magic Filter it meant upping the ISO sensitivity. And Sony's white balance could use some improvement. For topside use I have been very happy with my mkI. And I was quite comfortable putting my year-old camera in a cheapie housing; the investment had already given me good returns. I don't really recommend the Meikon housings, but if I were to buy one it would be Polaroid-branded. At least I discovered the problem before my trip and got a new housing replacement quickly.

 

[mattia_v]

I'm happily shooting an RX100 (mark I) in a Acquapazza alu housing, which is lightweight and excellent. I use it with a cheap M67 to AD converter mounted, and use second hand Inon UWL and UCL 28AD wide and macro lenses. I do need to zoom in a touch to avoid vingetting (1.1 to 1.2 x zoom setting on the screen), and I have a spacer ring from Interceptor121 although to be honest, the converters I have (cheap 10 euro jobbies) actually don't need the spacer on this housing. I rented an Inon S2000 strobe when I dived the GBR earlier this year, and other than the learning curve I found it worked pretty well.

For topside stuff I have a Sony A7r and an Olympus E-M1, both of which would make fantastic underwater setups, but I feel the RX100 is enough for me right now, since I'm still learning a lot about both diving and shooting while diving. And in terms of image quality, it punches well above its weight, and yields a very compact travel setup. I'd be out 3-5 x the money and be shlepping at least twice the bulk if I kitted out one of the two other cameras for full underwater use, and I would have to choose between wide or macro instead of being able to switch on the fly.

A few shots (could do with slightly better editing, I've just figured out Lightroom's HSL panel works a lot better for color correction than DxO Optics, although the latter is unbeatable for lens corrections and noise reduction):

Macro:
Nemo! by Mattia Valente, on Flickr

Wide, far focus:
Big Fish by Mattia Valente, on Flickr

Wide, pretty close focus (ridiculously curious turtle who kept swimming closer while I just hung there):
Diving Down Under by Mattia Valente, on Flickr

 

[ggibson]

Great shots there, Mattia. We shoot very similar setups, hah. I also have the Sony FE mount for above-water shooting.

I see the Acquapazza housing has an optional 28LD Port accessory that gives you a bayonet mount for 3rd-party lenses. Is there a reason you went with the AD mount instead?

 

[mattia_v]

Honestly? A set of second hand AD wet lenses crossed my path

 

[ggibson]

Makes sense That is why I ended up going with the UWL-04 and UWL-28 lenses... I was able to pick both up for a pretty reasonable used price.

 

[mattia_v]

A quick little follow-up - I lent my camera to a very good friend who booked a last minute Maldive live aboard, and long story short - my UWL-165 is drifting somewhere between some Maledivean atols. I'll probably pick up another when I run across a good second-hand model, but I'm also looking at a UWL-100 28-AD and matching dome port which I can get for a pretty good price second hand.

Advantages would seem to be slightly better optical quality (all glass), better for over-under shots, the ability to at least choose to use external filters without the dome (pelagic diving), but also a slightly bulkier, heavier lens that's much heavier underwater. Thoughts? Or is the UWL-100 28AD a bit redundant for someone like me who mostly does stills? For around 280 euros (lens+dome+spacer ring) I might give it a shot anyway, if I don't gel with it I should be able to offload it for about what I paid...