Panasonic 7-14mm with Nauticam 6" dome, and shortest focus distance. opinions?

[ksporry]

Guys,

I got an E-PL5 with Pany 7-14, and Nauticam housing +6"dome to fit. Now I did some reading online and it turns out that actually, this combination (Pany plus 6" dome) is not the best combi. I read that the 7-14 is soft in the corners (unsharp in fact), and that this was related to the 6" dome having the same radius as the nauticam 9" dome, which according to same discussions has the wrong curvature for the 7-14. Apparently the problem is mostly there at 7mm and wide open, and supposedly the problem should be significantly reduced from 8-9mm or more zoom and f8.0 or smaller aperture.

For the moment this is what I have and I will need to live with it. What I do want to confirm is, if zooming in indeed helps. I know a smaller aperture helps make the image sharper, this is common photography knowledge. I could understand zooming in to a certain point, but I would like to see some examples of both widest setting, as well as 8 or 9mm, at f11 or so, to see for myself if this is truly an issue. Does anyone know of this, and/or have any samples for me to view?

The other part relates to focal distance. So with a dome port on, the camera focusses on a virtual image created by the dome (I read about that effect already too). What I don't know is what the resulting new focus range is for this lens/dome combo. Could anyone tell me? Reason for asking is I'd like to do CF/WA shots with this combo, and most posts say this is difficult with this combo.
Any opinions?

PS I've been doing photography for the last 25 years or so, but never under water...

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

Hello Ksporry,

This is a subject that has been beaten to death on this site and others so if you have read already read the links I have attached disregard them. It is clear that the M43/7-14 combo is one of the best ultra wide rectilinear choices for underwater photography with the Nauticam or ZEN ports of about the same size. It is clear that larger port radius gives better image quality. It is also clear that ANY zoom lens will give better performance when it is moved a bit off the extreme ends of the zoom range and that ANY lens will give better results when you move a bit away from the wide open and closed end of the F/stop range. With 25 years in photography you would know that. To get an idea of how good this lens is look at the results of the twice as expensive Nikon 14-24 F/2.8 zoom designed for full frame cameras in the attached photo zone.de reviews. Then look at the Stephen Frink review for the Nikon 14-24 on full frame and on a D300 APS-C sensor camera. Even with the very large dome and larger F/2.8 the lens a 14mm, 114 degrees struggles compared to the 7-14 at 7mm, 114 degrees with the six inch dome port. I think it is clear that this is one of the best wide zooms you can use underwater. I see rumors that Olympus may release a 7-14 F/2.8 for M43 in the next year and if the new 12-40 F/2.8 is any indication of how that lens may preform we are all in for a treat.

Phil Rudin

Panasonic Lumix G 7-14mm f/4 ASPH - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict

Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED (FX) - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict

Digital Immersions: Pool tests for optimized corner performance on various wide angle lenses underwater

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/panasonic-planet/413982-panasonic-7-14-mm-3.html

 

[ksporry]

Hi Phil, thanks for that. I read the bottom link, will read the others now.
sounds like it's not so bad after all.
and yes, you are right, I know stopped down, and away from extreme ends, a lens performs better. I wasn't aware of the only 7-14, that'd be interesting!

 

[JackConnick]

Hello Ksporry,

This is a subject that has been beaten to death on this site ... think it is clear that this is one of the best wide zooms you can use underwater.

Sorry Phil, all due respect, but I have to disagree. The 7-14, even at 10-11mm and stopped down halfway is just ok in the corners. While this is a very good video lens and very good for more wide reefscapes, blue water, but would not be the best lens choice for CF/WA. The Oly 9-18, even though a bit slower, performs better and the 8mm FE Pany probably the best. Both shoot in smaller domes, the large dome of the Nauticam is not the easiest to use for CF/WA.

You are going to have to use 11mm or narrower and mid f/stops. stopping down further than about f/13 it actually starts to get softer.

Comparing it to the Nikon 12-24 is apples and oranges and the 12-24 is NOT an FX lens, and I agree on a D300 it's not a very good uw lens, due to not focusing close enough. This is true with most rectilinear lenses. Steve is a very good friend, but he's a Canon guy anyway. ;-)

I can show you shots with the $500 Sigma 15FE that are many times sharper, and are shot touching the dome.

Here's two m4/3rds examples: the 7-14 on a GH2 and the 9-18 on an EPL1.

11mm at f/14 is just usable, but not very wide.

GH2-8 by Optical Ocean, on Flickr

at 7mm f/11 it's very soft, but has a decent FOV.

GH2-12 by Optical Ocean, on Flickr

Oly 9-18, 9mm f/13 on an old E-PL1 is razor sharp and focuses much closer - really to the dome port. And this was using an inexpensive 10Bar semi-dome port, no crop.

Aquarium shots w-9-18mm-12 by Optical Ocean, on Flickr

Oly 9-18 at 9mm, f/10 the corners are slightly softer, but still very good.

Aquarium shots w-9-18mm-15 by Optical Ocean, on Flickr

Plus the 7-14 and larger dome port are pretty expensive. The Oly 9-18 is a bargain relatively.

Jack

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

Hi Jack,

We have been all over this and I apologize for the miss print regarding the Nikon 14-24mm zoom which is a 114 degree lens and the one I was referring to in the Frink test on full frame v. APS-C. We just need to agree to disagree and move on. As you and I both agree this is a subject that has been beaten to death and I for one think we place far to much emphasis on corner sharpness and not enough is placed on how much fisheye lenses distort larger subjects like whale sharks and wrecks.

Phil Rudin

 

[ksporry]

the frink post is kinda pointless as it doesn't include the 7-14. However this photo on flickr illustrates what some people seem to say about it: Pink sea anemone | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

By the way, did anyone try to use it with the 4.33 (8mm) nauticam dome with extender? Th eport is much smaller, and teh curvature of the dome is much bigger, and may solve that corner issue...

 

[sooke]

Wow, lot's of information here. I'm just gonna buy the Oly 9-18mm with Zen Pen dome for my EPL-5 , live with it, and keep my mouth in the fully upright and closed position.

 

[chris196]

Sooke,
I think that's an excellent idea. I have that Zen dome with the oly housing for my epl2.
I really love being able to use 3 different lens (9-18, 60, 14-42) without having to change the port. Very versatile.
In practice, I use the 9-18 or 60 macro 95% of the time.

 

[ksporry]

I might get that Zen dome myself for my Nauticam rig... I alreday have the lens and dome, so for now I'll use what I have, trying to zoom to 9mm and f11 and hope the results will be acceptable.
as a note, doe the Zen dome work with the pany 8mm?

 

[chris196]

Are you referring to the Zen Pen dome for the 9-18 or the 7-14? In either case it doesn't work with the 8mm.
Zen makes a dome specific for the 8mm only. They have it in 2 mounts, one for the PEN housings and one for the OMD housing.