Oly C-8080 and WCON-08D wide angle Lens

[f3nikon]

The front element of the C5050 does not move either, but it still produces edge blurring as you zoom in with the WA adapter. I don't see why the C8080 will be an exception.

Please see the pictures below the first picture is not a 5050 but the same lens setup. Notice that the WA adapter is attached to the threads on the body (above the manual
focusing ring) the WA adapter and converter are fixed with the camera body. The lens can move independently from the converter.

The second picture is from a 8080 lens notice that the converter is attached DIRECTLY on to the camera lens itself on the threaded area above the letters "GBSDR..." This is simliar to a DSLR/SLR, when the camera lens move the converter goes with it.

I don't understand why you keep generalising edge distortion as "poor results of U/W "wet" converters like the Inons". As Wolverine's picture demonstrates they produce very good results when used correctly.

I can say nothing but praise for Tim's pictures and for all pictures. But adding more glass will degrade your pictures period. I am talking about over all sharpness, forget the blurred edges, that is another issue. I have always said to shoot with only the primary lens until you absolutely, positively have to use an add on.

This is the reason why rangefinder cameras have sharper focus when compared to
a SLR/DSLR. Due to the min. amount of glass found in a rangefinder camera, the SLR had to add more glass to make up for the area that the mirror occupies. That is why the rangefinder Nikonos 15mm U/W wide angle is hard to beat to this day.

 

[ssra30]

Here is my 2 cents on wetmount wide angle lens (I have not used one in a long time but oh well...). Regarding Inon UWL-100, it is optimized for 35mm and for C5050, it was really very useful. If you have to zoom the lens in, take the wetmount lens off first as it vignette pretty badly at any other focal length.
I agree that more add on lens will degrade picture quality so use it only when it is neccessary. When a whale shark came in, backing away from a whale shark to take the picture without wetmount wide angle lens will result in much worse picture than with wetmount lens and closer distance (I learned that the hard way ).
When Oly started to introduce camera with wider than 35mm lens, it introduces more problems for people who want to shoot wide angle underwater. Luckily since then I moved on from PnS
As far as prime lens vs zoom, prime is generally better optically, no disagreement on that. Nikkor 10.5mm and 16mm sure is sharper than 12-24mm but I do like the versatility of the 12-24mm when mated with proper domeport.
As far as adding wetmount lens on a fixed zoom lens like C8080, C7070, if the wetmount lens is optimized for the system (not the Inon UWL-100 deal), the picture quality should still be very good in the right circumstance. Afterall, you are shooting through lots of water already, not sure how many % more distortion a lens would add but if it is not optimized for the system then stay away (I gave up using 12-24mm with Sea and Sea compact domeport for that reason even though Sea and Sea claimed that the combination would work, different story with Subal big domeport though).
From the picture that Tim posted, I guess the Inon still managed to work reasonably ok but the range would be limited. In my experience when the wide angle lens/port is not quite optimized, you can still get away with it when the subject is at certain distance but when you move in a bit too close, vignette, barrel distortion, soft cornor etc becomes more pronounce (for example, 12-24mm with Sea and Sea compact domeport was reasonably ok if the subject is at least a meter away but trying to do any closer is a mess and adding diopter is even worse whereas with big Subal domeport, 12-24mm will work great even 6 inches away from the subject.
Well, that's my 2 cents (and throw in a couple of bahts as well), sorry for the ranting and probably not very much on the topic either

 

[ReyeR]

Please see the pictures below the first picture is not a 5050 but the same lens setup. Notice that the WA adapter is attached to the threads on the body (above the manual
focusing ring) the WA adapter and converter are fixed with the camera body. The lens can move independently from the converter.

The way the adapter is mounted on the C5050 may be the same as your example but the front element doesn't move when you zoom. So, as you said earlier

the distance between the camera's front primary lens and the add-on lens will stay the same, even when ZOOMING in and out!

holds true for the C5050.

The second picture is from a 8080 lens notice that the converter is attached DIRECTLY on to the camera lens itself on the threaded area above the letters "GBSDR..." This is simliar to a DSLR/SLR, when the camera lens move the converter goes with it.

That maybe so, explain to me how this will prevent edge distortion??

I can say nothing but praise for Tim's pictures and for all pictures. But adding more glass will degrade your pictures period. I am talking about over all sharpness, forget the blurred edges, that is another issue. I have always said to shoot with only the primary lens until you absolutely, positively have to use an add on.

I hear your point about "adding more glass will degrade your picture...". What I don't understand is why you keep posting links and examples of edge distortion DUE TO INCORRECT USE of wide convertors. What has that got to do with the point you are trying to make (about adding more glass and picture degradation)?

Many of us are using these 'wet' convertors and are obviously very happy with the results. If we weren't then companies like Inon, UN (Olympus), Sea and Sea and Epoque would stop making them. When used correctly (even you agree from the samples you have seen that) there is nothing objectional about them in terms of picture sharpness and colour saturation. The 'wet' wide convertor is probably my favourite lens underwater and I wish I had more opportunities to use it.

 

[f3nikon]

Thanks for the link, they even have cool stuff for my 5050

You're welcome, the Athena dome ports are a bit pricey(glass and aluminum), but are made from coated optical glass, not like the acrylic plastics from the other makers.

Looks like these guys beat us to it. They even tested the Raynox lens.

http://www.digideep.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2971&language=en

Dive Safe

 

[f3nikon]

More info on Athenas

http://www.athena-opt.com/

 

[RonFrank]

Hi Tim

The only comment I have is...good picture! Great job on the light balance! My question is have you tried taking the same picture without the add on lens?

http://www.digitaldiver.net/yabbse/index.php?board=2;action=display;threadid=13549

Dive Safe

Who cares if he used an add on lens, did not use an add on lens, or used a pinhole camera made of plastic.

The reality is that as a professional one quickly learns that clients are fickle, and the technical perfection so many equipment junkheads are searching for is rather pointless.

I've had a LOT of clients pick a technically inferior image over better shots for a LOT of reasons, mostly vanity, or foolishness...

The other thing to keep in mind is, R UW photo's buttering your bread? If so, the 8080 is not the camera to be using unless that is the ONLY thing one can afford. If so, one needs to be shooting with the BEST available tool at the pricepoint they can afford which at the lowest end IMO would be a DLSR like the D70 or Canon, or Oly.

I think the image looks great. Unless this image is getting reviewed, judged and rejected by editor's (who are also a rather fickle bunch, and go with names over image impact in most cases) I think this combination is working out well for him.

 

[f3nikon]

You know Ron, you just have to let it go. Have a great trip to Fla.

Dive Safe