WA lens opinions???

[highdesert]

Greetings -

I exchanged emails and conversations with the staff of one of the large, respected UW photography specialty stores (they are both brick & mortar and online). Subject was a WA lens for Ike/S90 setup. I know, I know, there's a bazillion opinions here already, but since I have never even played touchy-feely with any of the choices, and couldn't without a 15-hour drive, I wanted to know what experienced users of these lenses thought of the opinions of the store staff.

They said:

From their own tests, the only WA lens worth getting for the Ikelite housing threaded for 67mm is the Fisheye UWL-04. On any other WA lens available, there is "image softness" along the edges. They say to get the Fisheye and none of the other choices, since it's the only one with good image quality across the image (FWIW, they sell 3 brands of WA for this setup).

Further, they said the only Fisheye UWL-04 to get is the 67mm/52mm with the threaded step-down ring. This will give you some vignetting at full WA, but only takes a little bump of the zoom to eliminate it.

Regarding using the UWL-04 with the ST barrel type and adapter, they say,

"There is not a bayonet configuration that will work with your housing... well, let me rephrase that. It's physically possible but is a bad, bad idea. Even using the 67mm threaded version of the lens screwed directly to the housing, this lens will vignette. Adding the 'ST' bayonet adapters into the mix, makes that even worse."

"The zooming required to eliminate vignetting with the ST Adapter and ST lens is more than slight, and will erode a significant amount of the wide angle coverage."

So ... for those who have used any of the lenses out there (referring to the Ike W-20, Inon UWL-100, Fisheye Fix UWL-04), then:

1) What is your opinion of the relative quality of the image, to the edge of the image?

2) Does anyone use a bayonet WA lens plus adapter, and have you found a loss of a "significant amount" of the image?

Bottom line is, I would love the flexibility of removing/replacing the lens UW, using a lens caddy on my tray, but want to avoid the threaded mount if I can do so without seriously compromising the capacity of the lens. But since I'm never going to dive enough to get the experience to get the shots that are publishable, is the purported edge softness produced by some of these lenses enough to be concerned about?

So there you go ... any opinions? And sorry if this has been dealt with ... I've been trying to keep up with all the Ike/S90 threads, but neither my brain nor my computer can crunch the amount of data now amassed!

Thank you!

PS - Nemrod ... you are not required to answer if you so choose.

 

[Nemrod]

PS - Nemrod ... you are not required to answer if you so choose.

If you say so.

N

 

[slowhands]

As you know, Ikelite recommends its own 67mm screw-on WA adapter for its S90 housing, the W-20, but says others will mount.

External Accessory Lenses

The front of the lens port accepts the #6420 W-20 and other 67mm threaded wide angle or macro lenses without the need for an adapter. An external wide angle conversion lens increases angle of coverage so you can get much closer to the subject while still fitting everything in the frame. Minimal vignetting (shading in the corners) may be present in the widest setting when using an external wide angle lens. This can be eliminated by zooming in slightly.​

67mm threaded ports allow a broad range of WA attachments. They include:

any cheap drymount 67mm WA adapter; they work, until they flood. ($50)
70 degree FOV Airdome (Fantasea Bigeye, and identical lenses from Epoque, Dyron) at about $220 work well and don't vignette
100 degree FOV WA adapters (Ikelite W-20, Inon UWL-100 type 2, etc.) about $320, work well but vignette
130 degree FOV WA adapters (fisheye UWL-04) about $400, what the dealer recommended​

I nominate you to buy them all and give us a comparison report. Seriously if your retailer has already done this, and it is a credible dealer, why ask us? Good retailers try to give the best advice they can, because they want very satisfied customers who come back for more expensive toys down the road.

That said, I seriously wonder if exhaustive testing has been done with this particular housing, simply because the Ikelite is a low end housing, and most people play the add on game with more expensive toys like the FIX housing. The only published comparison report for this type of WA lens that I know of was done in 2004, using 67mm screw on wide angle adapters for the Olympus C5050 housing:
Cameras Underwater: Olympus PT-015 underwater housing and C-5050 camera. Test pictures.
Note that the Inon UWL-100 with dome was the winner in terms of width, but all lenses tested had good performance.

In the past it has been noted that the closer you mount the lens to the camera lens, the better the optical performance at the edges. Ikelite sold a short port for its G9 housing that limited the range to 120mm but got the WA lens real close and worked well. Regarding that port:

The #9305.92 Flat Port ( $100 ) replaces the standard housing port for effective use of 67mm threaded external wide-angle lenses. This shorter port only slightly limits the camera's normal zoom range (limited to approx. 120mm). Port removal tool is included. Use of wide-angle lenses may require zooming one to two stops to eliminate vignetting. A significant increase in angle of coverage is still achieved after zooming.​

I recall do-it-yourself articles for shortening the port on the Canon housing too, same idea.

 

[Nemrod]

This is kind of funny, a lot of responses huh. Not as if I am the only person on the planet that actually owns all of those lenses, the 10Bar AD/67mm mount, both pieces of the ST mount, 52mm/67mm stepping ring and a 52mm/62mm DIY flush stepping ring for close mounting with the 67mm ST mount adapter and has used them on a 67mm Ikelite port, but, what do I know ..

N

 

[j1rubin]

I have the same set up and purchased the ikelite W-20. I would have preferred a fisheye from the recommendations on this forum, but heard that the options were somewhat limited with the ikelite housing. I have not been dissapointed with the setup and it is not even comparable to not having a wa lens. I have no experience with any others so cannot comment on them.

 

[highdesert]

This is kind of funny, .... but, what do I know ..

N

What do you know??? Probably just about all of it. Which is why I made my tongue in cheek comment about you not being required to respond. And why did I do that? Because you have been bombarded with, "Hey, Nemrod, what about (insert one of a million questions to you here)?" So I thought I'd give you a break, and not do the "Hey, Nemrod ..." line. But hey, what do I know?

 

[slowhands]

This is kind of funny, a lot of responses huh. Not as if I am the only person on the planet that actually owns all of those lenses...

I know you are laid up with a broken leg and had to put off your review of all those lenses. Hope you get well soon. And of course, in your copious spare time, maybe you could share what you already know about all the choices, or simply list the past postings where you have already done so.

There are so many choices available it is bewildering, and all claim to be the best. So hearing from everyone with experience would help. The best would be a roundup of all the tested ones, pros and cons. Hopefully they would make it a sticky thread upstairs, and we would not have as much confusion.

 

[Nemrod]

Seriously I put most of it in the FIX mega thread and a briefer and perhaps less disjointed version here:

View topic - The Great Summer 2010 Wet Lens Shoot Out!|Underwater Photography Guide

True, I used my FIX but I shot these lenses also on my Ikelite 570 and to a lesser degree on my Canon 570 and took enough measurements of various housing to confidently say that the results are applicable, within reason, for all housings and cameras of similar geometry. "Similar" being no more than a few millimeters difference in lens positions, similar camera lens diameters, port geometry and zoom ratios. I can quickly get myself into trouble if I extrapolate too far, what worked on the FIX90 requires one more notch of zoom on the Ikelite (with S90) to eliminate vignetting is my best guess.

Thing is, when you have a retailer, who you trust and from whom you are buying the equipment, sometimes best to mind them, that way if it don't work you can remind them of your previous discussions.

I believe our friend dhass has proven the Ikelite W-20 lens works well, this lens I have owned and know it is similar, very similar to the Inon WAL100, so similar that what works for one should work 98% for the other. I also believe that dhass has used the UFL165AD on his Ikelite and S90 and I know several others have as well.The ones I know of have used the 10Bar adapter. I am not recommending that combination for the Ikelite.

Mr. Pufferfish owns the Ikelite and S90 and has a UWL-04 lens, I am not sure what results he has gotten, I do recall initially he was disappointed but later worked it out. That said, I think most people would be happy with the Ikelite, Ikelite W-20 lens and S90. For the Fisheye UWL-04, my measurements indicate zooming to 35 to 40mm would be needed to eliminate vignetting with a resulting DFOV of around 110-120 degrees.

I guess I am feeling a little overly sensitive the last few weeks due to various things, such as my stupid busted leg and it's not healing at my required, self imposed rate. So forgive me for being a ja more than usual.

N

 

[BSOD]

If you do decide to get the UWL-04, and need it for an upcoming trip, make sure you order it with plenty of lead time. I tried ordering one about 3 weeks before a trip, figuring that was plenty of time. It wasn't. It was backordered everywhere, despite none of the sites listing it as such.

Really irked me since if I knew it was in that limited supply everywhere, I would've ordered/gotten on a list sooner. Figuring it would've been really helpful here

 

[j1rubin]

Here are some recent pics with the S90/Ikelite Housing/Ikelite W-20/Sea & Sea YS 1 strobe.