I'm a relatively new videographer (picked up videography because of scuba), so forgive me if this question seems obvious.
I currently shoot with a Sony 16-50mm on an FX30 (APSC) with a WWL-1B. I find that often, I'm unable to fill the frame with a medium sized subject (1m sized subject, 4-5m away) and it is difficult to move closer, e.g. hooked into the reef, strong currents, or skittish pelagics, etc. My video lights (2x 18k Krakens) can (somewhat) illuminate the subject, but they fill only maybe 1/3 of the frame.
The obvious alternative would be to remove the WWL-1B underwater, but it's big, heavy, and most importantly, expensive. Thus, I'm looking to the Sony 18-105mm f4 for the extra focal length.
There's not a whole lot of information on this combination available, but I understand that taditionally, the Sony 18-105mm has been unpopular with divers due to it's large min focus distance, hence it's difficulty working with a dome port. However, the WWL-1B does enable close focus which I'm thinking would make this concern moot. At the wide end (18mm, 27mm FF equivalent, 45cm MFD), I'm pretty sure it would focus on the glass, while at the telephoto end (105mm, 157mm FF equivalent, 95cm MFD), I'm not sure if it would sufficiently reduce the min focus distance? If it does, it seems that I'd basically have a wide angle 110ish FOV at the wide end, and something roughly equivalent to a 90mm behind a flat port (27ish FOV) at the telephoto end, with very little trade off. If it does in fact focus to the glass at the telephoto end, it seems that it could be pretty good for close up/macro as well.
My questions are,
1. Does the logic make sense, or am I perhaps missing something rudimentary?
2. Is there any reason why this combination isn't more popular? Are there other tradeoffs that I'm missing?
I intend to buy the lens and ports to test out on my next trip, but that would only be in October. Unless I'm completely wrong of course.
I currently shoot with a Sony 16-50mm on an FX30 (APSC) with a WWL-1B. I find that often, I'm unable to fill the frame with a medium sized subject (1m sized subject, 4-5m away) and it is difficult to move closer, e.g. hooked into the reef, strong currents, or skittish pelagics, etc. My video lights (2x 18k Krakens) can (somewhat) illuminate the subject, but they fill only maybe 1/3 of the frame.
The obvious alternative would be to remove the WWL-1B underwater, but it's big, heavy, and most importantly, expensive. Thus, I'm looking to the Sony 18-105mm f4 for the extra focal length.
There's not a whole lot of information on this combination available, but I understand that taditionally, the Sony 18-105mm has been unpopular with divers due to it's large min focus distance, hence it's difficulty working with a dome port. However, the WWL-1B does enable close focus which I'm thinking would make this concern moot. At the wide end (18mm, 27mm FF equivalent, 45cm MFD), I'm pretty sure it would focus on the glass, while at the telephoto end (105mm, 157mm FF equivalent, 95cm MFD), I'm not sure if it would sufficiently reduce the min focus distance? If it does, it seems that I'd basically have a wide angle 110ish FOV at the wide end, and something roughly equivalent to a 90mm behind a flat port (27ish FOV) at the telephoto end, with very little trade off. If it does in fact focus to the glass at the telephoto end, it seems that it could be pretty good for close up/macro as well.
My questions are,
1. Does the logic make sense, or am I perhaps missing something rudimentary?
2. Is there any reason why this combination isn't more popular? Are there other tradeoffs that I'm missing?
I intend to buy the lens and ports to test out on my next trip, but that would only be in October. Unless I'm completely wrong of course.
