Wet lenses for a c5050

[scuba spark]

I purchased a c5050 about three years ago and have slowly improved my skills. I've found that I really enjoy macro photography but can't get photos I want. I'm having problem getting good shots of the really small critters, especially the more skittish ones. I can't seem to get close enough to get them to fill the frame and end up having crop and enlarge pictures to get the results I want. With only having 5 mp to work with, that doesn't always work out too well.

Are they still making macro lenses that fit on the pt-015 housing? If they are, is it worth sinking the money into a few lenses or should I think about upgrading to a modern setup, probably a dslr. Other than the issues I'm having with macro shots, I've really like the camera so far. It's got plenty of options and I've been able to take some decent shots with it so far.

 

[herman]

The Inon 165s will fit on the PT-015 housing, as will any 67mm lens. You will want 2 of them but be aware your skills will need to be really good, you have less than 1/2 inch or so of depth of field with them.

 

[scuba spark]

Thanks for the info Herman. I'll look into the Inon lenses, I'll probably try to pick up a wide angle lens as well. I can't say my skills are good yet, but hopefully I can take a decent picture with them after some practice.

By the way, how are the results with just a single lens? Is it possible to switch from using two stacked up to just one mid dive or is that a decision that must be made before getting in the water?

 

[ce4jesus]

Yes the Inon's are the way to go. There are two types of lenses, 1 bayonet mount and the other a screw on. If you stack them, the 2nd will be a screw on type. Be careful on sandy bottoms...a few pieces of sand on the threads and they can become stuck together. Also, the Inon's will only improve your magnification and your DOF will become paper thin. Your working distance won't change with that camera...the closer you get the better so skittish little guys may remain tough to shoot even with the lens.

 

[KidK9]

I have an Inon screw on wide angle that I would like to sell if you are interested in purchasing.

 

[jlyle]

Like others have said, get two Inon 165's and stack them. One lens adapter is about the same as using the camera's supermacro mode, so it's a waste of money to buy just one. Using the macro adapters isn't easy, dof is extremely narrow (think credit card narrow), autofocus is hit-and-miss. But more important in your case, you will have to get closer to the skittish fish to use the lens adapters, not further away. If you want more working room, you need to buy a dslr.

These were taken with my old c5050 & two Inon-165's:

 

[Prop Joe]

Just ordered this:
Inon UWL-100 Type 1 Wide Angle Conversion Lens [ino.158] - $329.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros

And this hopefully will come before I leave (back ordered):
Inon Dome Lens Unit for UWL-100 [ino.165] - $389.00 : Reef Photo & Video!, The Underwater Photo Pros

Any one ever shoot a 5050 with a lens like those above?
I leave in a week. Couple of days doing Isla Mujeres whale sharks:
Welcome to Whale Shark Festival 2009| Isla Mujeres, Mexico
then down to Coz for normal diving.
Getting worried with DOF comments...

 

[jlyle]

Back in the days when I used the 5050, I also shot with the UWL-100, but without the dome. DOF isn't a problem with wide angles like it is in macro.

 

[RockyHeap]

While in macro mode, just use some zoom on your lens if you need to fill the frame more.

The AD Inon bayonet wet mount system is much more foolproof than a 67 mm threaded system. See my sig for what I use, I almost always use the wide angle lens it never leaves my housing, but the new 165 degree fish eye is incredible to play with. awesome.

 

[Nemrod]

I have both the Inon 165AD fish eye and the Inon 100WAL with dome. It is really difficult to choose a favorite. The 165 is more compact and the bayonet mount is easier to deal with and more fool proof. The 165 is lighter and less expensive. It has a plastic dome with optical coatings. In my opinion the 165 has a tendency to flare more with direct light than the 100WAL with dome. I think the 165 may be sharper edge to edge and has a slightly wider useful FOV. There is more defined "fisheye" effect as well. Focus right to the dome.

The 100WAL with dome is huge, chunky, difficult to thread on, EXPENSIVE and AWESOME, less flare, all optical glass construction (thus it's size and weight). While there may be slight image degradation to the corners I think there is less light fall off than with the 165FE. Both have fisheye distortion which is apparent in corners in that objects are smeared out, simply no way around that with this type of lens, ultra wide angle lenses distort objects especially in the corners of the frame.

If your camera will accept either, between the two given that the 165FE is less expensive it has to get the nod. I fabricated an adapter which allows me to use both on an Ikelite 67mm port with my 570 cameras.

I was going to sell the 165 but changed my mind, another cool mini camera will come out for which it will be perfect and then I would have to get another so I will keep the one I have. For video I like the 165 best. The Canon 900IXUS might be a goer with this lens. The 165FE does not like large zoom ratios or large lens elements, it must be mounted as close to the primary lens as possible to prevent vignetting.

N