Jump to content

Paul Kay

Member Since 27 Nov 2003
Offline Last Active Sep 12 2016 03:00 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Help identify this housing- general introduction

21 March 2016 - 09:21 AM

Hi Jimm


Firstly Nikonos 5 cameras are fine - they have known weak points but these can be managed. For example there is a plastic cover in the middle of the wind-on lever. If its still there prise it off (its stuck down) and check for rust - the plastic glued in bit retains water and consequently you can get corrosion problems under it. Well looked after cameras will probably be missing the glued in bit as their owners will have removed them. If the camera is fine (from the case it looks to have travelled) then once its serviced (try Kevin at www.aquaphot.com (Essex based) - very good and well worth talking to as he really knows Nikonos cameras) it should be fine for a good time and if you maintain it well you shouldn't have problems - they work well if looked after. Same goes for the lenses - both are good and the 35 with Subawider, whilst not stunning can be surprisingly effective..


The Morris Flash (I vaguely remember a Toshiba connection but I may be wrong) is old and has probably lost a bit of power so is worth checking out - not serviceable these days I'd suspect as its simply too old and I doubt that spares still exist. Nikonos SB105s are still to be had at fair prices - good units and reliable.

In Topic: Seacam Prelude for Nikon D750

05 December 2015 - 12:53 PM

I have sold several Prelude housings to scientists who have specific requirements of their equipment and for whom minimal controls are actually not a problem. Their budgets don't often allow for high end cameras and the Preludes fit their requirements very well indeed. As photographers its all too easy to assume that owners of underwater housings automatically require access to every control and that they will use them all but in reality this is not the case. Actually toughness and reliability (especially where students are involved, working in cold and often difficult conditions to whom the housing is just another tool to be used to capture information) are very important attributes too - sometimes far more important than full control access.

In Topic: Why I Love Macro

12 August 2015 - 02:07 AM

On a recent trip we referred to this as 'by catch' and it can be fascinating to discover the unexpected and occasionally rare species lurking but unseen before viewing the photo. 

In Topic: Is Social Media Creating Unrealistic Expectations?

10 August 2015 - 10:47 AM

I've got pretty mixed emotions about the tech view. On one hand, I - almost ideologically - claim that it isn't the gear, it's the photog who takes the pic. You don't need a 5000+€ Leica to take the pics HCB took. And HCB is one of my favorite photogs in history.

HCB was often photographed with his Leicas and they weren't cheap (and are a lot more now - HIS I mean!).[Nor are his prints - I went to a London gallery showing signed HCB prints not that long ago - I think that they started at £9k which makes the €5k camera a bit of a bargain]. Its not the gear but having gear that you are satisfied will do what you want it to, and which you are familiar with, and both know and understand, really can help. This isn't the same for every photographer and to some extent the cost may not of intrinsic relevance to the photograph, 

In Topic: Is Social Media Creating Unrealistic Expectations?

08 August 2015 - 02:36 AM

I was in Bonaire a while back and chuckled to hear an underwater photography centre owner (who shall remain nameless) advise a client that "there were no bad underwater photographs. That's what Photoshop is for". OK.....

For the exponents of ETTR he is partially correct (I certainly have innumerable bad underwater photographs which no amount of Photoshop work would remedy). We really like putting things in boxes and assuming that every underwater image should look good on the LCD (box one) is as poor a suggestion as assuming that Photoshop can correct all the others (box 2). Reality is, as it usually is, far more complex. I have shot a lot of material in low vis over very soft mud and contrast often remains (extremely) low regardless of any lighting set-up I've tried. Photoshop allows sufficient contrast increase and colour modification to produce realy very acceptable images (in fact I and a friend have used such images to prove at least one fish ID has been incorrectly described). The images taken in these conditions look very flat on the LCD as they are bound to.....