Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

The Gentleman's Underwater Bubble Blower Thread

Nikon 14-24 / Ruby 14-24

Nikon 14-24 / Ruby 14-24

Looking for practical field results with the Nikon 14-24 / Ruby 14-24 lenses. I have conflicting reports of image quality.

J-
 
Hi John- Which lenses are you referring to please? Thx Mauricio -
 
John,

Don't have images right now but that lens, being full frame and sporting a large front element that requires a very wide FOV in front of it to do justice to its rectilinear abilities, does suffer greatly behind a dome. Anything under 8" is useless of course, with 8" domes still needing diopters (I remember reading a review from Stephen Frink I think where he recommended +4 diopters and never going below F5.6) and I have obtained some decent results with a 10" dome with a +2, and have seen some stills shot with a 12" dome that looked ok. But while it is an amazing lens on land, it shows some severe aberrations underwater, and I have stopped using it altogether in favor of the Nikon 10-24, whose much smaller front element allows it to function better behind the smaller, curved areas of a dome AND is wider after all. If you comb the forums on Wetpixel, you may find some tests and reviews on it such as the one I'm talking about.
 
Rudi Herbert said:
John,

Don't have images right now but that lens, being full frame and sporting a large front element that requires a very wide FOV in front of it to do justice to its rectilinear abilities, does suffer greatly behind a dome. Anything under 8" is useless of course, with 8" domes still needing diopters (I remember reading a review from Stephen Frink I think where he recommended +4 diopters and never going below F5.6) and I have obtained some decent results with a 10" dome with a +2, and have seen some stills shot with a 12" dome that looked ok. But while it is an amazing lens on land, it shows some severe aberrations underwater, and I have stopped using it altogether in favor of the Nikon 10-24, whose much smaller front element allows it to function better behind the smaller, curved areas of a dome AND is wider after all. If you comb the forums on Wetpixel, you may find some tests and reviews on it such as the one I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

I haven't had any chance to shoot it underwater, but as rudi says it is an amazing optic. Our second or third Epic housing customer bought the Ruby and we had a chance to have a lens tech project it up against an UltraPrime 14. It was definitely as sharp and maybe a bit sharper than the ULTRA (hairsplitting) but it definitely had more contrast and less chromatic aberration at the edges - obvious even to the untrained eye.

My friend that had me build a PhantomFlex housing has the Ruby as well so I will see if I can borrow it for some testing in the next month or so. Or maybe get some footage from him. He shoots behind our standard 8" glass dome.

Rudi: why did it need diopters? the lens close focuses to well within the range of the dome virtual image or did it just perform better through the dome with the diopters. (to some extent diopters do the reverse of the dome so it may actually provide some correction.)
 
Nikon 14 24, its a spectacular topside lens. We use it with Optitek or A mount system. No one Ive met has got it sorted happily in a housing, those that have have managed some how to fit a Diopter on a stock lens (no idea how with the in build hood) and behind a 9.25 dome. Be interesting to see some images from it Underwater if it works. We are still sticking to Tokina 11 16 for the most part.
 
Mike,

The sharpness drop off at the edges is just too drastic, not a gradual drop but a sudden, abrupt transition, so with a diopter you smooth that up somewhat. Yes, the lens already focuses close enough that, when I tested on a RED and Gates, I had to go back to the PE 486 which is the longest extender Gates has to bring the lens back from the front of the dome. And then, with the loss of FOV from the diopter and it being a 14mm already, well, not worth the pain for me. But then, the Tokina 11-16 behaves in almost the same way as far as I can see in particular when shooting at an angle from the subject. Which is why, there I go again, I use the nikon 10-24, which boasts the sharpest corners I've seen from any lens behind a dome.
 
Tom,

What a great post! Thanks so much for taking the time to share your adventure.

Tom Hamilton said:
Greetings All,.......

....Relaxing back at home for a few, hope this post finds everyone well.

Cheers
Click to expand...
 
I neglected to mention this is a free service for Gates DEEP EPIC or DEEP SCARLET customers.

J-

John J Ellerbrock said:
As Jason points out, the new Dragon fan will interfere with the gear teeth on the Optitek ProLock. The teeth must be milled away, and it's a service Gates provides. Jacek @ Optitek says he can do this, too, but because the section to be cleared of teeth is specific we prefer doing the work.

We also have a new adapter gear for use with the Dragon fan in DEEP EPIC / DEEP DRAGON that clears interference with the Dragon fan.

J-
Click to expand...
 
What a great post! Thanks so much for taking the time to share your adventure.
Click to expand...

Thanks very much Will. I've received a lot of help and advice from the guys on this thread over the years, try to give back any way I can, hope some of that info helped.
 
It's being quiet for a few days in this thread so here's something from me. Pretty much the first thing I have worked on from my epic due to some family problems when I first got the camera. All shot in my backyard.

Cheers

 
yes, i think it will make a difference, especially combined with new color science...
(just remember, that's designed specifically for dragon, not MX)
 
You lucky duck, Simon. What a great backyard. :)J-
Simon Buxton said:
It's being quiet for a few days in this thread so here's something from me. Pretty much the first thing I have worked on from my epic due to some family problems when I first got the camera. All shot in my backyard.Cheers
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • Peter Kragh wAstronaut NBL.jpg
    Peter Kragh wAstronaut NBL.jpg
    95.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Bill Brassard NBL.jpg
    Bill Brassard NBL.jpg
    96.8 KB · Views: 0
  • Peter Kragh & Bill Brassard @ NBL.jpg
    Peter Kragh & Bill Brassard @ NBL.jpg
    98.2 KB · Views: 0
John J Ellerbrock said:
Possibly good news for bubble blowers.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?111400-Dragon-Flare
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that will solve our issue even though I'm sure it will help. The malady that affects the MX and Dragon sensors underwater is one of serious cross channel contamination, which would likely require both a different CFA (color filter array, in front of the sensor) and dedicated color science. That said, and as I told Jarred before, I will HAPPILY eat my wetsuit (a piece of it at least) and post the video on this thread if RED fixes this issue. It is now going on 17 months I think since we first started discussing the issue....

....and Paul, even though the glass is half full, it is also half empty, simple physics...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top