Hi there,
I currently own the Sony RX100 VII, Nauticam housing with flip holder and CMC-2 macro converter.
I did some testing (on land) and my results for 200 mm focal length are approximately:
Smallest Subject: 16.0 - 17.0 mm
Working Distance: 68.0 - 78.0 mm
According to Nauticam's SMC-3 data sheet the specs for the RX100 VII are this:
Smallest Subject: 16.0 mm
Working Distance: 91.0 - 103.0 mm
There might be some measurement inaccuracy with my values, so assuming both macro converters give me the same magnification while having roughly the same working distance, is there any point in getting the SMC-3 in addition to the CMC-2? Will I get better image quality with it or what is the point of this lense for compacts?
Nauticam suggests using the SMC-3 from 90 mm up to 200 mm, so I would still need to bring the CMC-2 for 50 mm to 90 mm.
While I would like to go for the best image quality possible, having the comfort of only using one macro converter is appealing aswell.
Appreciate your help and explanation!
I currently own the Sony RX100 VII, Nauticam housing with flip holder and CMC-2 macro converter.
I did some testing (on land) and my results for 200 mm focal length are approximately:
Smallest Subject: 16.0 - 17.0 mm
Working Distance: 68.0 - 78.0 mm
According to Nauticam's SMC-3 data sheet the specs for the RX100 VII are this:
Smallest Subject: 16.0 mm
Working Distance: 91.0 - 103.0 mm
There might be some measurement inaccuracy with my values, so assuming both macro converters give me the same magnification while having roughly the same working distance, is there any point in getting the SMC-3 in addition to the CMC-2? Will I get better image quality with it or what is the point of this lense for compacts?
Nauticam suggests using the SMC-3 from 90 mm up to 200 mm, so I would still need to bring the CMC-2 for 50 mm to 90 mm.
While I would like to go for the best image quality possible, having the comfort of only using one macro converter is appealing aswell.
Appreciate your help and explanation!
