Port and lens planning

[Barmaglot]

For either, I will need to be very careful of flare but I am used to that with my old Inon UFL165AD on my FIXS90 which is still in occasional service for those things it is pretty darn good at.

I actually don't recall getting much in the way of flare with that thing - certainly less than with UWL-09F.

 

[Nemrod]

I actually don't recall getting much in the way of flare with that thing - certainly less than with UWL-09F.

I assume you quit using it after going to a port/dome for the 10-17?

Before I can give it a proper test I will need to get some machine work done. Never easy now that I am retired. Maybe I can get it done when I get back before my next adventure. Waiting on a few other parts for my NA-R50 anyways so no big hurry.

 

[Barmaglot]

I assume you quit using it after going to a port/dome for the 10-17?

Way before that. I started with a fixed-port SeaFrogs housing (the purple translucent one), then they released the interchangeable-port Salted Line A6xxx housing and I moved to that with a 10-18mm lens, then I got a good deal on a used UWL-09F and moved to that, and finally last year I got an A6700 and set it up with a Tokina 10-17mm.

 

[grantmac]

So I've got a hold on where I'm going for ports to start (the macro for kit lens) and I'll look out for a used wet wide lens then some sort of bayonet adapters for that and my macro diopter.

Now I'm considering flashes. Again, all this is very much intended to be budget/used. I'm mostly interested in macro and CFWA in poor vis.
I THINK I want to drive the strobes manually and trigger them with fiber because that seems the most simple while being most interesting from a technical standpoint.
I've robbed a strobe from my ancient Sealife DC1200 to get a feel for the concept and I have that functional (on dry land so far).

Which brings me to the question:

Why not a pair of Sealife sl963? I know Sealife is hobby grade in general but I've been super impressed with the video light I have from them in terms of efficiency and robustness. The sl963 is made to deal with preflash, it's currently produced/supported and the used market is pretty cheap.
Immediate thought is no factory snoot or focus light. Am I missing anything else obvious?

 

[Barmaglot]

They're roughly similar in overall output to Inon S220s, although the Inons have a wider beam. They also seem to have a proprietary mounting system for SeaLife's flex arms, although I believe adapters are available. SeaLife in general seems to be very USA-focused as a brand, with little presence in other markets. That said, while I don't have personal experience, I don't think they have enough power to shoot wide-angle with an APS-C camera - you really want something along the lines of Sea & Sea YS-D3 or Inon Z330 for that. Compacts shoot at wider apertures and can make do with less powerful strobes, but the larger the sensor, the more strobe power you need.

 

[grantmac]

Does strobe power also relate the particulate and overall visibility?
I'd be shooting close focus WA because of the visibility. Very unlikely to shoot something like a reefscape or wreck.
I don't mind their mounting system but yes they can also adapt pretty easily.

 

[Nemrod]

IMO, no. To shoot wide angle the strobes are usually positioned far out and behind the dome thus favoring more power. For CFWA I pull my strobes in closer but still behind the dome to get as much light as possible since with my S220 strobes I am power limited and the usual wide angle affairs need f11 and higher often to clear up corners. The WWL is a notable exception, YRMV.

@Barmaglot, Help . I got the SeaFrog/Weefine air lens on my NA-6400. Hmmm, well, not sure what to think. Sometimes it will focus, other times it will not, made worse by zooming the 16-50 lens, especially closer shots. Flare is pretty bad, worse than my old FIX/S90 with the Inon UFL165AD, but can be controlled by watching the lighting and observing in the VF. Contrast is fairly low due to lack of coatings. I was using center focus selection, maybe need to change focus type? I am threading direct to the port. You were able to get consistent focus with the air dome lens?

So, tell me more about your results? Not giving up on it yet but this is a lesson, never count on something new on a trip until it has gotten a pool test. And learn how to use the lens and what it does and does not do well.

I am going to say, placed on a scale of 1-10, the Weefine air dome is a 1 and the Nauticam WWL-1 is a 10 and everything else wider angle I have used on this and other cameras is somewhere in between. This lens may find a home in my repertoire of tricks but it is no replacement or substitute for the WWL-1 (sharp, clean, snappy focus, tons of contrast, superior color saturation and virtually no flare). I guess that is the difference between $150 and $1500 . The WWL is just on another level and thus not a fair comparison if I could just get focus and zoom through, arrrgggghhhhh.

At this point I am going to give the Weefine stuff a no recomendation. But, let me try to figure it out when I get home and get in the pool, not wasting anymore dives with it now unless there is some trick or suggestion to get better focus results..

 

[Barmaglot]

Not sure what to say; at the time I didn't have strobes, and it was my first foray into underwater photography, so the results were fairly meh, but I don't recall having any issues focusing.

Obviously a $100 wet dome is not going to match the quality of a $1500 lens. Note, by the way, that SeaFrogs has nothing to do with Weefine. The latter offers WFL01 which is similar in quality to AOI UWL09, and is marketed in North America as Kraken KRL01, but it also costs close to $1k.

 

[grantmac]

I had the camera in for a dive yesterday with just a video light. Immediately realizing I need some sort of bayonet mount for the macro diopter, that was to much juggling.
Also realized that CFWA is likely how I want to be shooting a lot of the time and so I'm at a crossroads.

I could get the very well regarded Sony 10-18 F4 behind a dome or even the factory wide surf port for now.
Pro: slightly cheaper, seems a good lens topside.
Con: I'm stuck shooting wide all dive.

Or add a wet wide lens. Currently considering the Inon 95xd plus dome because the native bayonet mount is well thought out and the dome is user replaceable. Also Inon seems to support their products down the road.
Pro: can shoot macro and CFWA on the same dive. I believe the lens can be used topside without the dome but that seems cumbersome.
Con: bit more money.

 

[Nemrod]

Not sure what to say; at the time I didn't have strobes, and it was my first foray into underwater photography, so the results were fairly meh, but I don't recall having any issues focusing.

View attachment 898754

View attachment 898755

View attachment 898756

Obviously a $100 wet dome is not going to match the quality of a $1500 lens. Note, by the way, that SeaFrogs has nothing to do with Weefine. The latter offers WFL01 which is similar in quality to AOI UWL09, and is marketed in North America as Kraken KRL01, but it also costs close to $1k.

Interesting. I do get focus sometimes, not consistent. Wiill investigate furhter. The lens I bought was the one you linked to, it is a SeaFrog product. This began with me saying there were no air domes for restoring FOV for the Sony kit lens (or Canon) APS-C and this was suggested. At this point I am going to revert to my former statement. I do need to do some more testing. It may be me and my weird camera. I just wanted an air dome to fill the gap and restore FOV with the 16-50 lens. Lighter, more compact and less FOV than the WWL. The OP was I thought asking initially for similar. I cannot recommend this SeFrog air dome lens at this time. That may change. It was worth a try and not giving up just yet .