New ZEN products for mirrorless housings

[victor]

Following with interest. Looking to spend money this summer but on what?

 

[jd950]

It seems odd that Zen is producing another dome in this size when the existing one (at least for M43/Nauticam mini) has a 3 month backorder wait. I've had one on order for a little while now (only about 4 weeks), but the dealer hasn't been able to give me an ETA. It makes me wonder if Zen will even keep making the existing dome for the smaller mounts if this one is basically superseding it in image quality. It'll also be interesting to see how much bulkier the port will be to pack if it has a built-in 25mm extension.

Now I'm wondering if I should cancel my order or change it to this new one or just do something else entirely.

At one point I was told the extended back-order was due to underestimating demand, and on another occasion that it had to do with the glass manufacturer. Reef has gotten the 170 domes in, because they sent me one, which I then immediately returned, because this product was being introduced.

I have often thought that there might be one place producing the glass for all or most of the domes sold by different brands, and that could easily explain delays as companies have to wait their turn. But I have no idea.

I could see both versions of the dome remaining available; I assume the size can be used for other brands of mirrorless cameras including Sony, Nikon and Canon and the original version of the DP 170 should be more flexible without the 25mm extension on it.

The Zen website seems infrequently updated and fairly sparse with information so like everyone else, I await further information about availability and performance.

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

The 12-40 lens with gear because of its girth needs to be installed from the front of the housing while the camera body is inside. The dome is then installed over the lens with little room to spare in the throat (the extension tube part) of the port. This is why a 25mm extension could not be made because the lock that locks the extension to the original port would not allow room for the lens to fit inside. The 170mm glass is used in several ports for both Nauticam Mini housing as well as several brands of DSLR housings. ZEN and Nauticam have both done a less than stellar job of describing how their ports are made. All are cut from a larger diameter dome radius in the 200mm to 230mm range. When Aquatica announced it E-M1 housing they also went into great detail about how the SW8 port is made, you can find a link in the attachment. ZEN and Nauticam do the same thing as Aquatucs but have never really explained it in any great detail so most think a six inch dome is just that when in fact it is a section or radius of a larger dome port. On the current Aquatica lens chart the Panasonic 7-14 zoom is not included I am sure they intend to support this lens.

When using the ZEN 170mm glass with the NEX cameras and the 12mm Ziess lens an extension can be used because no gear is involved. The lens still needs to be installed from the front of the housing with the extension in place and then the port is installed over the lens.

The vacuum seal system in my NA-EM1 housing gives me the extra peace of mind that the entire system is sealed when the port is installed over the lens.

http://aquatica.ca/en/products_dslr_ae-m1.html

---------- Post added May 21st, 2014 at 09:12 AM ----------

The new dome port with pricing has now been posted on the Reef Photo site.

Zen Underwater 170mm Optical Glass Dome Port for Nauticam N85 Housings with 25mm Built in Extension [dp.170.n85.ii] - $999.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros

 

[decidedlyodd]

So the dealer switched my order over to the new dome since it sounds like it's going to work better for my needs (7-14 f/4). He said there's supposed to be an official press release soon announcing more details.

 

[TheTrickster]

This is odd... and it needs clearing up by Reef Photo...!

it's going to work better for my needs (7-14 f/4).

All I'm hearing is that this modification/improvement was mainly for fitting the Olympus 12-40mm. (As its longer and fatter - Like Phil says: the lens wouldn't fit with a extension ring ) and that the additional 5mm won't bring any significant gains to the 7-14mm or 12-35mm.

I've spoken with Reef about the 7-14mm and they said:
"I don't think a 25mm extension is the solution. Boiling it down, the 7mm side is really just so wide that nothing short of a very large dome is going to be perfect; a small dome is a compromise here."

My understanding is that the DP170 is cut from a large dome - so a 'larger' dome is a mute point, as it shares the same curvature.?
I think we are looking at optimum lens positioning within the dome - or rather the position of the nodal point in the centre of the sphere the dome was cut from.... and from reading about older Nikon lenses and domes - a couple of millimetres makes a big difference.

I'm going to be a little cheesed IF the newer dome does indeed produce substantially better results with the 7-14mm, as I've laid down $1200 for the DP170 and 20mm ring already for 'getting better results'... and if the current 20mm extension fits the 7-14mm, then a 25mm would also..
but its not 20 vs 25 here - its 'what is the precise size needed for the 7-14mm to obtain the best results' as it could be 23mm or 26.5mm etc..

We need someone at Zen/Reef to test the 7-14mm at varying focal lengths and apertures with:

DP170-NM + 20mm Extension
DP170-NM + 30mm Extension
DP170-NM Mk2 (Builtin 25mm extension)
Nauticam Acrylic Dome 6" Dome

As see what the varying results are like.

 

[jd950]

This is odd... and it needs clearing up by Reef Photo...!

We need someone at Zen/Reef to test the 7-14mm at varying focal lengths and apertures with:

DP170-NM + 20mm Extension
DP170-NM + 30mm Extension
DP170-NM Mk2 (Builtin 25mm extension)
Nauticam Acrylic Dome 6" Dome

As see what the varying results are like.

Some of the issue is a question of how much edge sharpness one demands. I know Phil has said he is for the most part okay with the 7-14 in the current port offerings while some others, like Jack Connick, are not that happy with the edge sharpness of the current offerings (I think I am correctly stating these guy's opinions and if I am wrong I apologize and hope I will be corrected). For me, I have learned that I need to be careful about how I use the 7-14 because edge sharpness issues do bother me unless I can have water, sand, darkness or distant out-of-focus areas around the edges. As you noted, I don't think the new version of the 170 was intended to improve the 7-14 results but instead to accommodate the 12-40. I have been told that the interest in housing that lens exceeded the expectations of Nauticam/Zen. I hope but doubt that the port will change much for the 7-14.

I don't know that anyone at Reef/Nauticam/Zen is going to test and report on anything...for a few reasons. If so, that limits the possible testing to those who have the ports and are interested in doing the tests. Maybe Phil, but I don't know. These are expensive ports so not many folks are going to own both of the DP170 domes. I would love to see some results, but I fear it is going to be awhile and may be question of piecing together various reports from users, unless some of us want to lend domes to someone to compare them in a pool.

A final variable is the upcoming Olympus 7-14. It will be a faster lens and that alone is going to change the size and may change the game completely. At the moment no one knows the dimensions or anything else. I like my Panasonic 7-14 but I imagine I will "need" that new lens pretty soon after it is available. I would be delighted if it and the 12-40 will both work really, really well in the DP170.

In the end, though, I suspect the answer is that for really good edge sharpness, a 7-14 does require an 8 or 9 inch dome for best results, and I don't know if such a port will be made since I think most manufacturers assume anyone who chooses M 4/3 format did so due to price and size concerns. There are people around here who know a LOT more about this stuff than I do...hopefully they can add something to the discussion.

 

[TheTrickster]

As to the Olympus f2.8 7-14mm
I personally don't see the need of a 'faster' 7-14mm... I'm already planning to run mine at >f5.6 for video, so don't need faster! Not going to discount it just yet thou

As to bigger dome - its the placement of the lens within the dome - not just the size - as the 170mm is the same as a 230mm dome - is just a smaller section of it. As mentioned by Phil -> http://www.aquatica.ca/en/press_releases/sw8_press_release.pdf

But if you wanted to go with a 'Super Dome' you could use a Subal Dome and the Subal Type (3?) to Nauticam Mini port adaptor... I was tempted to go down this road, when I was still waiting for my DP170 to turn up..but two days of thinking about it - my DP170 turned up

Yeah me too - I'm only learning as I go, there is for sure more experienced users i.e. Phil! here.

Heading out with my 7-14mm tomorrow diving (in the DP170) - so I'll report back, as I'll spend some time having a play...

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

I am going to post images of the test charts taken by me in a rather nonscientific testing in the pool. I don't really like these tests because not much underwater is this flat and they tend to be a bit misleading and as much mental masturbation as pixel peeping.

The problem with the premise that a port and extension should allow corners as good as those taken with say a 12mm lens is a bit flawed. At 7mm this lens has a 114 degree angle of view, very wide for a rectilinear lens. This is the same AOV as with the Nikon 14-24mm zoom at the 14mm end of the lens. Both of these lenses have excellent corner sharpness and no vignetting at F/5.6 and up. Given the dome and extension combinations the M43 lens will out performs or matches the full frame lens in corner sharpness and at about double the cost for the full frame equipment. Bottom line is that I don't think you will find a rectilinear lens of any brand this wide that has much better corner sharpness regardless of what dome and extension combination you use. What matters is do you like the images you are getting with the lens.

#1 at 7mm, F/5.6, 20mm extension, 3'
#2 at 7mm, F/5.6, 30mm extension, 3'

#3 at 7mm, F/5.6, 20mm extension, 2'
#4 at 7mm, F/7.1, 30mm extension, 2'

#5 at 7mm, F/4, 20mm extension, 1'
#6 at 7mm, F/4, 30mm extension, 1'

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

These are the 12-40mm test images shot with the 30mm extension only since the 20mm is too short. Keep in mind that this port extension will not work with the 12-40mm zoom and the Nauticam zoom gear which are to large to fit into the extension from the front or rear of the housing. All are taken with the Olympus E-M1 as are the 7-14mm images above. Note that most were taken a F/2.8, this is a very sharp lens with great corner sharpness throughout the F/stop range.

#1 12mm, F/2.8, at 3'
#2 12mm, F/2.8, at 2'
#3 12mm, F/2.8 at closest focus.

#4 40mm, F/5.6, 2'
#5 40mm, f/2.8, closest focus.

 

[TheTrickster]

Phil, thank you so much for your efforts. Really appreciated.