Sony A6000 / A6300 meikon housing review

[Ashantiashanti]

I didn't get much replies from the other thread, so I will try here.

So now a question about lenses. I contacted Meikon and they said the following lenses fit:

Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS (Manual zoom available, set camera to autofocus)
Sony E 20mm F2.8 (Autofocus only)
Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS (Autofocus only)
Sigma 19mm F2.8 DN Art (Autofocus only)
Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN (Autofocus only)

Have anyone tried the different ones and seen a significance difference? For example the 35mm 1.8 is a great lens with wonderful reviews, but it might not do much of a difference in the UW housing. The reason for why I ask is that I recently bought the A6000 with the kit lens and the 35mm 1.8, and I am considering selling the 35mm as I have the kit lens.

Meikon also commented that the 19mm 2.8 is very popular with their housing UW.

 

[ggibson]

I think a lot of people like the 16-50 and 19mm because they are wider options for underwater shooting. The 35mm f1.8 is a nice lens for all-around above water shooting, but the magnification underwater makes it more like a portrait focal length. Most UW photography is ultrawide or macro, since you usually want to get pretty close to your subject.

If you're wondering about image quality, the 16-50 is the least of the bunch, but if you're shooting with strobes and stopping down to f8, there will be less difference. The others are all pretty well-regarded primes that are pretty sharp (maybe less so the 20/2.8, which is more popular for its size).

 

[H20doctor]

Good question ... i have only used the stock kit lens 16-50mm ... If those Lenses work and Fit in the Housing i probably will start doing research on them and the costs..
I can say the Kit lens 16-50mm works but its not a good lens .. and you have to have the camera dialed in to get decents shots with it ..
I do use an external Macro lens , when i shoot macro .... it threads on the Meikon housing , the same way the wide angle dome ports does.. thanks for the Update and post !!!

 

[Ashantiashanti]

I think a lot of people like the 16-50 and 19mm because they are wider options for underwater shooting. The 35mm f1.8 is a nice lens for all-around above water shooting, but the magnification underwater makes it more like a portrait focal length. Most UW photography is ultrawide or macro, since you usually want to get pretty close to your subject.

If you're wondering about image quality, the 16-50 is the least of the bunch, but if you're shooting with strobes and stopping down to f8, there will be less difference. The others are all pretty well-regarded primes that are pretty sharp (maybe less so the 20/2.8, which is more popular for its size).

Thanks a lot ggibson. I do plan on getting a strobe / light to get best colors possible. So taking that into account, would you suggest I stick to the kit lens, than using the Sony 35mm?

OR , would say the sigma 19mm would be a better bet than the sony 35mm for UW video/photo, and therefore I could sell the 35mm (which costs more than 3x as much as the sigma 19mm)

 

[akivisuals]

So I just bought a nice used a6000 w/16-50 and a Meikon housing for cheap to replace my old Oly E-PM1. I like the camera and have several Sony mirrorless cameras already but this is the first housing for a Sony that I've owned. I bought a Nauticam WWL-1 because ultimately that's what I want to use with a Nauticam housing for an a6500 but the a6000 w/Meikon is a nice, inexpensive stepping stone in that direction. The problem I've found is that the image vignettes pretty severely until you hit about 20mm. It's still wide, just not taking full advantage of what this wet lens can do. Also, the bayonet mounting adapter doesn't work on the Meikon housing so I'm stuck with just the one lens. It seems like I'm defeating the purpose of using an interchangeable wet lens by doing this. Does anyone use wet lenses with their Meikon? If so, which ones? I was planning on getting the CMC-1 to use also if it worked with the Meikon.

 

[H20doctor]

So I just bought a nice used a6000 w/16-50 and a Meikon housing for cheap to replace my old Oly E-PM1. I like the camera and have several Sony mirrorless cameras already but this is the first housing for a Sony that I've owned. I bought a Nauticam WWL-1 because ultimately that's what I want to use with a Nauticam housing for an a6500 but the a6000 w/Meikon is a nice, inexpensive stepping stone in that direction. The problem I've found is that the image vignettes pretty severely until you hit about 20mm. It's still wide, just not taking full advantage of what this wet lens can do. Also, the bayonet mounting adapter doesn't work on the Meikon housing so I'm stuck with just the one lens. It seems like I'm defeating the purpose of using an interchangeable wet lens by doing this. Does anyone use wet lenses with their Meikon? If so, which ones? I was planning on getting the CMC-1 to use also if it worked with the Meikon.

are you trying to shoot wide angle only with the sony / meikon set up ?

 

[akivisuals]

Nope. I want to be able to use the WWL and a CMC macro converter with the Nauticam bayonet converter but it doesn't seem to fit on the Meikon housing....

 

[Ashantiashanti]

A quick question about lighting:

I want to buy some UW light and these are my only current options:

Either the cheaper: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product...act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A2558Y5X3K7V67

Then place it ontop of the Meikon housing's shoe fitting.

OR, this strobe light attached to the top of the handle on the tray, but it costs 3x as much: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Evolva-Fut...ncoding=UTF8&refRID=1FF6WHTKCN1DB7F8JQ9X&th=1

I am afraid that the dome might shadow some of the light from the cheaper one. What do you guys think? 99% of all UW lighting I've seen are attached on arms on the handles. Is there a reason for why they are not attached on top of the camera casing?

thanks

 

[akivisuals]

I am afraid that the dome might shadow some of the light from the cheaper one. What do you guys think? 99% of all UW lighting I've seen are attached on arms on the handles. Is there a reason for why they are not attached on top of the camera casing?

thanks

Backscatter. If the light source is too close to the lens you're going to illuminate particles. Plus lighting coming from an angle is much more of a natural look than blasting your subject with an on camera flash.

Plus, if it's mounted to the cold shoe then you won't have as many options for placing the flash where you want it.

Backscatter in underwater photography, cause and prevention

 

[Ashantiashanti]

Backscatter. If the light source is too close to the lens you're going to illuminate particles. Plus lighting coming from an angle is much more of a natural look than blasting your subject with an on camera flash.

Plus, if it's mounted to the cold shoe then you won't have as many options for placing the flash where you want it.

Backscatter in underwater photography, cause and prevention

Thanks for the quick reply! However, isn't backscatter only mainly an issue with using flash? And not a constant light as I would while filming?