Seeking Canon S95 Battery Life Feedback / Lens Question

[MauiScubaSteve]

but the UWL-105AD had to be zoomed to at least 50mm to eliminate vignetting so I sold it and never got to try it with the RecSea housing/dyron 67mm adaptor/10bar 67-AD adaptor. I do not think the UWL-105AD is worth using with an S90 or S95, regardless of housing or lens mount adaptor.

And yet in the test pics above, with the 105AD / Fix 28AD adapter, the cropped final pic has a very similar, if not smaller, size rock compared to both 100's final pic.

Perhaps (probably) the Canon housing / INON 28AD mount puts the 105AD farther away from the port glass than the Fix90/Recsea95 / Fix 28AD mount.

I would probably never zoom in with whatever WAL I chose, and just crop as needed in PS.

 

[Nemrod]

Perhaps (probably) the Canon housing / INON 28AD mount puts the 105AD farther away from the port glass than the Fix90/Recsea95 / Fix 28AD mount.

:

It does. But-------.

N

 

[dogdrjohn]

Actually the INON UFL-165AD and UWL-105AD both have the same rear projection distance from the mount face, so both were in virtual contact with the port glass of the Canon housing. If you look at the somewhat deceptive pictures FIX posted you will note that the vignette in the corners with the 105AD is a just a little greater than with the 164AD, but that the image of the coral head is significantly smaller in the un-cropped picture with the 165AD. That, of course, indicates a much wider field of view with the 165AD. I don't know why they cropped it so that the picture with the 165AD looks like a clone of the picture with the 105AD. I found the increase in FOV with the 105AD zoomed to eliminate vignetting was only marginally wider then the camera at its native 28mm.

 

[Nemrod]

What I am saying to be clear is that the distance between camera lens and rear element of the AD lenses is greater with the Canon OEM housing for the S90 than with the FIX90 housing. I cannot say if that is true of the various S95 housings but I would imagine that it still would be. The Ikelite had the greatest distance, the Canon OEM the next, the FIX the least. How the new FIX95 fits in the scheme of things is unknown to me but for the Recsea, for all practical purposes, it is the same as the old FIX90.

Less distance <--Recsea95/FIX90(FIX95??) -- Canon OEM -- Ikelite S90/S95 --> More distance


N

 

[Nemrod]

I don't know why they cropped it so that the picture with the 165AD looks like a clone of the picture with the 105AD. I found the increase in FOV with the 105AD zoomed to eliminate vignetting was only marginally wider then the camera at its native 28mm.

As I have said before and therefore my inspiration for the Great Summer Lens Shootout was that the FIX site you guys are looking at has some malarkey, horse manure, BS, magic, going on because I think I have proven the FOV on the UFL165AD is quite a bit wider than what is being shown there in that link. That set of photos is useful to a degree but as I said, it is not completely accurate and I have shown that to be true. Why is not accurate, , ask FIX.

I think they wanted their UWL-04 to clearly be wider than the smaller, higher quality, bayonet mount Inon UFL165AD. The truth is that the Fisheye UWL-04 is slightly wider than the Inon UFL165AD but the Inon is a sharper lens, especially up close IMO and focuses better and faster. The focus hunts sometimes with the Fisheye UWL-04, especially trying to do close focus stuff. Both are fine and work well. The Fisheye lens is also harder to clean and tends to hold saltwater in more crevices that are difficult to rinse out.

N