The Panasonic 8mm Fisheye lens for micro four third is a clear winner for close focus wide angle however the lack of zoom and the really wide 180º cover mean that there are many subjects that will look tiny in the frame.
The next option in terms of width is the Panasonic 7-14mm wide angle lens however this requires a large dome for optimal performance making the set up expensive.
Is there anything else left if you don’t want to buy a wet lens and you already have the Panasonic PZ 14-42 X Lumix G?
Panasonic produces an add on lens DMW-GFC1 that is declared to provide 10.5mm equivalent and reduce minimum focussing distance to 16 cm all specs can be found here.
This add on lens can be used with the 4.33″ dome for the 8mm fisheye and the 30 extension.
I took a few test shots and the results are pretty good.
This first shot is at f/5 and is very sharp in the centre.
Fisheye Converter f/5
Getting a bit closer and stopping at f/8 the results are pretty good for an adapter that is less than £100 on amazon.
Fisheye Converter f/8
Barrel distortion is contained so this combination may be good for wrecks where the fisheye effect is a bit disturbing.
If you have the Lumix G Vario X PZ 14-42mm you may want to invest in this little accessory before getting the much more expensive 8mm fisheye even if the Nauticam 30 extension is required. Later on the extension can be used with the flat port 35 and the Olympus 60mm for super macro and the 4.33″ dome of course with the 8mm.
I think it is amazing how much can be obtained out of this lens if we consider wet diopters, wet wide angle lenses and this adapter before you need to get a second lens.
This lens could also work for video with the Panasonic GH4 at 4K however zoom is not recommended with it.
The Lumix G X 14-42 Power Zoom lens is designed for video with a silent motor zoom controlled by a slider that is quite effective to use.
The focal range in 4:3 format is 14-42mm which corresponds to 29-87mm in the standard 35mm format (the crop factor is 2.08 36/17.3 and not 2 how commonly thought in the classic 3:2 aspect ratio).
This lens is not exactly a best in class in terms of performance especially considering quite a bit of vignetting at wide end and distortion that anyway gets corrected nicely in camera for most. A detailed review is here http://www.photozone.de/olympus–four-thirds-lens-tests/765_pana14423556hd
You can see that this is lens is quite sharp at 2868 LW/PH to give you an idea the much more expensive Lumix 12-35mm reaches 3110 LW/PH though sharpness drops at corners to around 2100-2200.
Another interesting characteristic is that this lens performs best at f/3.5-f/5.6 which is close to the widest aperture as we will use this lens with the Nauticam flat port 35 this is all good news.
Nauticam Macro Port 35
The lens fits very nicely inside the port leaving space for small filters and close up lenses but not really a lot.
The lens does not really move much between 14 and 42 mm and reaches his longest at 14mm.
I have tried using a set of Inon diopters to see the degree of magnification you can get.
This shot is with an Inon UCL-165 +6.06 diopter.
Lumix G X 14-42 PZ @ 42mm with Inon UCL-165
The smallest frame width with this lens is 42mm however in video mode using the ex tele converter option this becomes a much smaller area achieving in fact super macro easily with the added benefit of larger depth of field.
If you are into pixel peeping you can see some chromatic aberration on the edges this is a combination of the lens and the wet diopter.
I also tried stacking an UCL-165 with the UCL-330 this achieves a capture width of 32mm so we are in super macro zone.
Lumix G X 14-42 PZ @ 42mm with Inon UCL-165+330 Stacked
Image quality does not get much worse but there are some internal reflections here on the white surface as the Inon lenses are not coated externally.
Finally I wanted to see if the Inon UCL-100 would work and it does achieving super macro without any fringing. If you want to use this lens for pygmy sea horse photography and do not want to get an Olympus 60mm this or the sub see 10 are the close up lenses to get, also the nauticam SMC is in the same range.
Lumix G X 14-42 PZ @ 42mm with Inon UCL-100
Now onto what is really good of this lens port combination and this is the versatility as you can attach the Inon UWL-H100 and get a very wide 18mm flat wide angle that is very sharp indeed as per previous images
Nauticam 35 Port with Inon UWL-H100 on Panasonic Lumix 14-42mm
Consider that this image is taken at f/3.5 and the ruler is in the corner at ISO 1600 and you can see that sharpness is more than acceptable.
More interesting is that for some reason with this lens you can fully zoom through even down to 42mm without soft corners.
I have no idea how this is possible but it works just fine.
So if you are a video junkie you can cover the whole 100 degrees wide to super macro with this lens the Nauticam 35 Macro Port the Inon UWL-H100 and the UCL-100. For video it gets even cheaper with the UCL-165. You can of course use the flat port to do nice fish portrait in the mid-range of the zoom.
I forgot to mention the zoom gear which is actually pretty expensive because of the complex spring design.
The total cost for the Nauticam 35 with zoom gear is $510 plus of course the lens itself $290 total of $800.
Inon UWL-H100 + LD adapter = $654
Inon UCL-100 = $282
Inon UCL-165 = $205
Wet Lenses Still total = $936
Wet Lenses Video total = $859
Let’s compare to getting an Olympus 9-18mm with 4″ wide angle port and the Olympus 60mm with 30 extension ring total price $2129.
Price gap for stills $393 but you now also have a mid range lens for portraits, personally I don’t really like the Olympus 9-18 behind that port comparing side by side images taken with the 14-42 PZ and Inon lens I am not sure the Olympus is any better and definitely needs diopters due to mushy corners. For macro the 60mm Olympus lens has the advantage of increased working distance but is a very specific lens that you would only use for really small stuff.
For what concerns video you would probably look at the Panasonic 7-14 and forget the Olympus 60mm the combination is worth $1800 which is a difference of $636. Again the issue with rectilinear lenses and dome ports is there and the 7-14 does not take diopters.
So if we were to use the lenses on land no doubt you would need additional glass but in water wet lenses can be quite cost effective especially if you use a micro four third camera for video.
Peter Rowlands uses a Panasonic GX7 with Inon UWL-H100 and dome successfully and I am joining that club now.
Stay tuned for more tests next to come will be the Panasonic Fisheye 8mm with the 4.33″ dome which is another essential buy for the micro four third cameras underwater, obviously for pictures and not video.
In a previous post last year I had mentioned that a move to an interchangeable lens camera was unlikely however seeing the latest generation of compact on the market also have a port system it is time to reconsider the options.
During the Christmas holiday Panasonic put up a double cash-back promotion which meant you could get a Panasonic GX7 with kit lens with £100 off the retail effective price.
On the web you could find the GX7 with the 14-42mm G Mega OIS for £449 and combined with the 20mm f/1.7 for £579. The 14-42mm is actually a good lens but knowing I had to get the Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm I opted for the 20mm f/1.7 a very bright lens that seemed good for occasional photos.
So I got myself the X Vario PZ 14-42mm and also the Lumix G 12-32mm Mega OIS as I thought I needed something midrange but did not want to spend a lot of money for the 12-35mm Panasonic and especially did not want to entertain a 6″ wide angle port.
Foliage Detail 12-32 mm
I actually think this lens has better IQ than the 12-42mm PZ
14-42mm PZ
The 12-32mm is the kit lens that used to come with the GX1 so is not a massively popular lens. A quick look at the Nauticam Port Chart confirms this lens takes the same macro port 35 of the 14-42 PZ, this port through a 30mm extension can be used to house the Olympus 60mm Macro. So went ahead and contacted Alex at Nauticam UK to get a quote on the housing. It turns out that there are no stocks of the NA-GX7 so had to wait until yesterday to receive mine.
I asked Alex to lend me a Nauticam Wetmate as I thought this could be used on the 35 port with the 12-32mm Panasonic lens in case the Inon UWL-H100 vignettes.
I was not quite sure of the physics of the wet mate so I got myself some close up filters in case there were focus issues.
The 12-32mm won’t focus in water with the wet mate until you add a +1 close up filter.
12-32mm with +1 diopter and wet mate on macro port 35
Once you get focus the image quality seems pretty decent despite being shot at ISO 1250 f/3.5. However this configuration would start having focus problem past 15mm so I put on a + diopter and tried again until 20mm or 40mm in 35 equivalent terms.
12-32mm at 20mm with +2 diopter and wet mate on macro 35 port
Quality is pretty good and the chromatic aberration are probably coming from the cheap diopter more than the wet-mate.
I am quite happy with those results although I have to admit the wet mate with the 67mm thread is a pain to take on and off in water and also is not coated so scratches easily.
Nauticam has still to confirm if the 4.33″ dome port can offer full zoom with the 12-32mm, I suspect it will with the help of a +2 diopter. The alternative is the 20mm extension with the 3.5″ wide angle port, in future perspective this is interesting for wide angle macro photography but not so much right now so will go with the 4.33″ dome.
I also did some tests with the Inon UWL-H100 28LD, once again the Fix M67-LD adapter let me down the screws had melted into the aluminium despite the tender loving care and broken the adapter I could however take some shots without the hood before that happened.
Panasonic 12-32mm with Inon UWL-H100 at 12mm
There are some dark corners but all in all the result could be acceptable equivalent focal length in 16:9 is 16.5mm which is approximately 105 degrees.
There seems to be some variability and some times I would get black corners more. Considering I will switch to the Nauticam LD adapter that vignettes more this at the end is not so interesting. The image is also a bit distorted.
With the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm instead there are no issues of vignette even in 4:3 aspect ratio.
Panasonic 14-42 PZ with Inon UWL-H100
The camera focuses literally on the glass.
What is even more interesting is that the camera lens combination keeps sharp focus all across the zoom range all the way to 42mm or 84mm equivalent.
Pamasonic 14-42mma t 42mm with Inon UWL-H100
Fringing is contained and generally the image is sharp across the frame considering we are at ISO 3200.
I also did a test with the UCL-330 and using the Extended Teleconverter function available in video I could achieve 32mm width frame with the 12-32mm lens!!!
The other positive note is that this is a 1″1 pixel read without artefacts and moire so generally quality is very high.
I think the PZ 14-42mm with the Inon UWL-H100 and a single UCL-165 makes a fine combination to shoot all purpose stills wide and macro in one dive. For video I will have to determine if the UCL-330 is a better choice considering the extended tele converter feature.
A few other features of the GX7 that really make this camera a video machine include the flicker free video recording that allows you to fix the shutter speed if you had to press the video record button when you are taking stills. Normally the camera would work in P more and not respect any shutter rule, with this feature you are telling the camera to shoot in shutter priority.
The GX7 has also the capability of altering the gamma curve for contrast which is great and a number of picture style presets of which I recommend the Scenery one for underwater use if you white balance.
I did some low light comparisons with the Sony RX100 and despite two full f/stops advantage for the RX100 lens the GX7 still resolved more detail at ISO 3200 versus the RX100 ISO 800 which was a bit surprising.
The AVCHD implementation at 24 Mbps will be my favourite underwater mode unless I am shooting macro and is a full IPB codec unlike the IP only with no B frames that Sony provides. That must be reason why the image quality in video is better even at two stop higher ISO.
In case you are looking for the holy grail for Nauticam micro four thirds camera to do a bit of everything the Macro Port 35 and the Panasonic G X Vario 14-42mm Power Zoom are highly recommended. Probably the image quality is not as good as the Panasonic 7-14mm although in my opinion with the Inon lens the results are very similar to the Olympus 90-18mm with 4″ wide angle port. Macro again is acceptable but not amazing with wet lenses. I will have to test more I am concerned the UCL-100 may not work with this port. For a mid range lens the 12-32mm costs one third of the 12-35mm Power OIS and once I receive the 4.33′ dome I will do more tests, meanwhile an option is to use the wet mate that works until 20mm before you have to take it off. The 4/33″ dome should have better image quality but maybe I will be surprised there too.
Finally with the 30 extension you can transform the macro 35 into a 55 port ready for some serious macro with the Olympus 60mm so I think having only one flat port, an extension ring and one dome to cover fisheye photography, portraits, wide angle, close up and macro is not bad at all. And for video most likely is the only port you will ever need together with the Inon UWL-H100 which is expensive but every flexible indeed.
I will post more images of the rig once I have nailed all options in terms of lenses and arms.
It is official now the prices of the NA-LX100 are confirmed
in US $1,200 for the housing with flat port, $180 for the wide short port and $350 for the 3.5″ acrylic dome.
In UK £920 for the housing and flat port, £150 for the wide short port and most likely £290 for the dome.
Which means we can now update the GH4 comparisons for 4K
Super Wide
Panasonic LX100 $899 NA-LX100 $1,200 with Short Port $180 and Wet lens Inon UWL-H100 $522
Panasonic GH4 with 7-14mm and 6″ dome $2750 housing and port only plus camera and lens $2,399
The max field of view of the two options is almost the same however you can’t zoom the LX100 due to the zoom lock on the housing.
LX100 $2,801
GH4 $5,149
Price Difference $2,348
Mid range
Panasonic LX100 $899 housing $1,200 3.5″ dome circa $350
Panasonic GH4 with 12-35mm and 6″ dome $2750 housing and port Camera and Lens $2,399
The LX100 is wider in 4K at 26-81mm vs 28-81mm of the GH4
LX100 $2,449
GH4 $5,149
Price Difference $2,700
Close Up
Panasonic LX100 with NA-LX100 rectangular port $2,099
Panasonic GH4 with 14-42 and 35 macro port $1,815 housing and port $2,680
The GH4 will have more magnification due to the longer focal length with the same diopter.
LX100 $2,099
GH4 $4,495
Price Difference $2,396
The gap is still significant even with the price increase ranging between $2348 and $2700.
I still have some concerns on the 3.5″ acrylic dome for the LX100 as I am not sure about focus distance. If this port works with the full zoom it is definitely the most appealing for video but we will need to check this out.
On Christmas day Nauticam has released the NA-LX100 housing for the Panasonic DMC-LX100. It is priced at ¥168,000 which is 50,000 more expensive than the last NA-RX100 III.
If this translates correctly in $ and UK prices it means $1,399 plus tax or £895 including VAT for UK.
Here is the original link in Japanese on the fisheye homepage
NA-LX100 with flat rectangular portNA-LX100 Rear View
Prices for the short port for wet lenses and the dome port have not yet been announced but we know that the dome can use the camera at full zoom and that the short port. The US price of the flip diopter for the rectangular port is known and is $220.
Which means we can now update the GH4 comparisons for 4K
Super Wide
Panasonic LX100 $899 NA-LX100 with Short Port and Wet lens $2,000 circa
Panasonic GH4 with 7-14mm and 6″ dome $2750 housing and port only plus camera and lens $2,399
The max field of view of the two options is almost the same however you can’t zoom the LX100 due to the zoom lock on the housing.
LX100 $2,899
GH4 $5,149
Price Difference $2,250
Mid range
Panasonic LX100 $899 with 3.5″ dome circa $1,699
Panasonic GH4 with 12-35mm and 6″ dome $2750 housing and port Camera and Lens $2,399
The LX100 is wider in 4K at 26-81mm vs 28-81mm of the GH4
LX100 $2,599
GH4 $5,149
Price Difference $2,550
Close Up
Panasonic LX100 with NA-LX100 rectangular port $2,299
Panasonic GH4 with 14-42 and 35 macro port $1,815 housing and port $2,680
The GH4 will have more magnification due to the longer focal length with the same diopter.
LX100 $2,299
GH4 $4,495
Price Difference $2,195
The gap is still significant even with the price increase ranging between $2200 and $2500.
There is still an option to use the GH4 with wet lenses although this has only been tried with diopters to date it is technically possible to use a wet wide angle lens.
This week I have been in contact with Nauticam that have given me some final details with regards to the NA-LX100 housing that will be released in the next weeks and is already available for pre-order in Hong Kong.
The housing is confirmed to have a changeable port system the default is the rectangular flat port as in the image below.
When shooting 4K the Panasonic LX100 focal length is 26-81mm which means that in water the default port will give a range of 35-108mm due to water magnification. This is however negated by the increased working distance so don’t get too excited about macro.
Panasonic LX100 Flat Port
There will be a flip diopter for the rectangular port as a separate accessory. Due to the limited zoom of the LX100 a strong diopter with power of at least +10 in water is required for macro.
The other option displayed was a mini dome port.
Nauticam LX100 Mini Dome Port
Nauticam has confirmed that this dome is 3.5″ wide and unfortunately there is no provision currently for a flip diopter for this port.
The 3.5″ acrylic port is probably the most versatile option for the Panasonic LX100 and I am a bit puzzled of why the flat port is offered as a default. The mini dome seems perfect for all round reef use when there are no really small critters and medium size fish.
Nauticam has also a super wide option that utilizes a short port with a 67mm thread. This takes the Inon UWL-H100 from what we have heard and also a new lens Nauticam has designed.
The zoom will be locked so the lens will stay at 24mm limitedto circa 50mm which means with the wet lens this is a 16-32mm wide lens in water, I am not sure however that zoom in will be a possibility with the Inon lens but will be possible with the Nauticam lens as far as I understand.
Nauticam LX100 Wide wet lens
So what is the strategy for Nauticam and this housing?
It is quite clear for me that the Panasonic LX100 has the same 4K capabilities of the GH4 the same IPB codec and processor. It falls short of cinema options but costs half of the GH4 body.
So for your perusal those are the equivalent options
Super Wide
Panasonic LX100 $899 NA-LX100 with Short Port and Wet lens $1,700 circa
Panasonic GH4 with 7-14mm and 6″ dome $2750 housing and port only plus camera and lens $2,399
The max field of view of the two options is almost the same however you can’t zoom the LX100 due to the zoom lock on the housing.
LX100 $2,599
GH4 $5,149
Price Difference $2,550
Mid range
Panasonic LX100 $899 with 3.5″ dome circa $1,300
Panasonic GH4 with 12-35mm and 6″ dome $2750 housing and port Camera and Lens $2,399
The LX100 is wider in 4K at 26-81mm vs 28-81mm of the GH4
LX100 $2,200
GH4 $5,149
Price Difference $2,950
Close Up
Panasonic LX100 with rectangular port $2,000
Panasonic GH4 with 14-42 and 35 macro port $1,815 housing and port $2,540
The GH4 will have more magnification due to the longer focal length with the same diopter.
LX100 $2,000
GH4 $4,355
Price Difference $2,355
So the performance may be better but the price difference is very high.
The total cost of the Panasonic GH4 plus lenses housing and port is around $6,640 but the LX100 stops at a much more modest $2,400 without the wet wide angle lens. This still does not include flip diopters adapters and lens worth another $800+ but gives an idea that the total will be around $3,200 for the whole set.
You can get a complete 4K underwater video rig around $4,500-4,700 including tray, video lights and all the rest which few years ago would have been unthinkable.
Like the LX7 the LX100 has a multi aspect sensor. This means that the diagonal field of view does not change in the various aspect ratios.
The camera is a micro 4:3 so the sensor size is half of a full frame sensor at 18×13.5 mm. However only part of this is used by the camera more specifically 13.7×10.3mm are actually used in the same aspect ratio.
Resolution 4112×3088 in 4″3 format
When the aspect ratio changes to 16:9 although the diagonal field of view remains the same the horizontal pixel count increases
Pixel count at 16:9 Aspect Ratio
Now we have 4480 horizontal pixels and 2520 vertical so the horizontal field of view is wider than in the 4:3 or 3:2 aspect ratios.
This means that at normal 1080p the camera will perform like a normal 3:2 sensor at 22.9mm. All of this to say that the LX100 like the LX7 are wider in movie mode than the Sony RX100 Mark III despite the lens is declared at 24mm in both cases as when we go to 16:9 the Sony crops the sensor and goes to 25mm whilst the Panasonic cameras stay at 24mm. So even at 4K 16:9 the LX100 will be marginally worse than the RX100 Mark III at 26mm vs 25mm. Note that the crop is 2.56x at 4:3, 2.47x at 3:2 and 2.38x at 16:9.
We don’t have details about wet lenses yet but for the solution with a dome like the Ikelite housing or the Nauticam mini dome we are talking about a maximum field of view of 79.52º at 4K which is acceptable for most cases.
The challenge like with the Sony RX100 Mark III is at telephoto end were 81mm in 4K is quite little. Panasonic has however the option of the iZoom that was pretty useful with the LX7 and that crops down to a ‘normal’ 1920×1080 which promises to be pretty good with a 2x digital zoom with scaling.
In DxoMark sensor test the LX100 scored the same of the RX100 Mark II and III with a minimal improvement in low ISO.
Which in shorts leaves to the conclusion that unless you need 4K the Panasonic LX100 is not going to be your wonderful underwater camera however if you can process the 100 mbps IPB files that the camera produces, the result when scaled down to 1080p has got so much more quality compared to other 1080p cameras.
The lack of the ND filter compared to the previous LX7 is a miss, but Panasonic though that at f/16 there are anyway the 3 stops so performance will not suffer, we disagree with that as surely diffraction will be substantial at f/16 and we rather have less depth of field near the surface than more.
Let’s face it, the LX100 is half the cost of the GH4 if you use the nauticam housing and this is before the GH4 has added lenses and ports, the GH4 will give you richer color and probably 2/3 step ISO improvement and much more if you use an external recorder but the LX100 is the 4K camera for the consumer and we are looking forward to a full operational housing from Nauticam, Recsea or any other!
I have recently received a number of messages asking me why I am not upgrading to a micro 4:3 set up.
There are several reasons why I am not doing that even if my photo rig is nearly as heavy as a micro 4:3 or even a DSLR and have to do mostly with video not with stills.
I will try and touch on the key points in this post, please remember those are subjective and by no mean a criticism to other people that use 4:3 set up for video.
Note: my perspective is one of a typical non professional user that has limited time to get the best shots. This is not an absolute point of view it is clear that if you are a ‘pro’ and have much more time to spend to get few seconds of footage many considerations do not apply.
Composition
The way I have learned to love underwater video is the composition opportunities that it gives. My main source of inspiration is John Boyle and his book that remains the only valid handbook for what I am concerned even if it is a little old.
One of the classics of underwater video is the sequence: wide-medium-close-super close. On a micro four third in order to have good quality you would choose a macro lens or a wide angle lens, both those choices will prevent a number of shots you either do close and super close or wide and medium and maybe close but not super close.
With a camera with a fixed lens with a range of 28-100mm and wet lenses you can cover the whole spectrum of shots although you may need to swap lenses during the shot the possibility is there.
Optical Quality
Some users try to use one lens to catch all, usually the choice is a Panasonic 14-42mm or an Olympus 12-50mm. However this is not as exciting as it seems in the first place. I have run some comparisons on the optics on DXOMark assuming the 4:3 are on a Panasonic GH3 that really is a mini SLR you can see the results by yourself
Comparison Panasonic 14-42 vs RX100II vs Olympus 12-50
The RX100II gives better quality than both those lenses and especially it does it at f/1.8 versus the f/3.5 of f/4 of the other lenses.
The RX100 does have issues of distortion and chromatic aberration at the edges because of the extensive correction but is overall sharper at wider aperture. This is very important for video that is shot at ambient light.
Wet Lenses
You can add M67 lenses to the Panasonic 14-42 and the 35 macro port (am talking about Nauticam ports here) the results will be worse than the RX100 as the starting point is worst. There is no M67 mount to use the Olympus 12-50mm lens, I will try to see if the flip diopter can do that without vignette but still this gives only 24mm against the 18mm of the RX100 with an Inon wet lens.
Video Quality
The only cameras that are decent are Panasonic as Olympus video is pathetic. However only the GH3/4 have anything better than a compact in terms of recording formats. The new Sony RX100 Mark III with 50 mbps 24/25p seems almost equally interesting.
Stabilisation
Micro 4:3 cameras do not have in camera stabilization in video mode and most of the lenses (the 14-42 is an exception) do not have optical stabilizers to contain costs. It follows that close ups are shaky and even wide angle has jumps.
Conclusion
With all the considerations above it follows the only real set up would be a lens with a stabilizer, the only available that can also shoot close up with a wet lens is the 14-42mm Panasonic. However this lens seems to have worst optical quality than the on-board lens of the RX100II (I have checked some real life shots myself). The only benefit left is the higher bit rate recording format and this is only if you go on a GH3/GH4, with higher recording formats available for the RX100 Mark III and with an announced Panasonic LX8 with potential 4K I personally do not see a reason to jump on the 4:3 wagon for video. I do believe though that if you take mainly stills there is a compelling reason for 4:3 as you can have one camera fitting almost everything and smaller to pack than a DSLR (but not that much and forget about 200-400mm f/2.8 tele lenses).
Interceptor121 Photography & Video Workshops 