Jump to content


Member Since 24 Mar 2008
Online Last Active Today, 12:49 PM

Topics I've Started

Zen 230mm Glass to 90m

10 July 2015 - 01:08 AM

I know the Zen 230mm glass dome is rated to 60m, have any of you taken it beyond this?  I have used the sea and sea 7" glass dome to 80m, when it is rated to 60m.  I have a trip in a couple of weeks and 1 of the wrecks is at 86m.  Have you used this dome at these depths?

Zen/Nauticam 230mm glass dome depth rating?

25 June 2015 - 03:52 AM

What is the max depth rathing of the Zen 230 optical glass dome?  I dont see it on their website.  What is the max depth you have used it at?  Is it ok to 70m?  I beleive it is the same glass as the Nauticam 230mm, and Nauticam rate their dome to 40 M!!!





Best solution for a balanced macro rig

18 June 2015 - 02:33 AM

As the title suggests I am wondering what solutions people are using for balancing/bouyancy control of their rig when shooting macro. I have been shooting u/w slr for about the last 8 years, but typically shoot w/a.  When shooting wide angle I have used to date a 4" ikelite arm, in conjunction with an 8" ultralight bounacy arm for each strobe (z240s).  I've used this set up over the last 8 years for w/a on the d70, d300 and now d800 and it works for me for w/a.

When shooting macro in the past it was with the 60mm and sea and sea standard port.  Now on FX I have moved to the 105VR, with a more compact port (less bouyancy) and have started to use the nautical smc.  Wooooww, it is negative in the water when I used the  4" ikelite arm, in conjunction with an 8" ultralight bounacy arm for each strobe, and very front heavy.  I see that there are solutions that fit foam on the port 9 (which I guess would solve the front heady issue) and other floatation arm systems. 

What are you using?  How well does the floats on thye port work?





Which Nikon 60mm on FX

27 April 2015 - 12:54 AM

In a bit of a dilema. I have owned the nikon 60mm f 2.8 D for about a decade and have loved that lense on DX. A couple of months ago I noticed a huge lump of fluff had managed to get on the inside of the rear element.  On hearing that getting these things taken apart to get cleanied can be more than the value of the lense I decided to have a go myself.

I got the lense apart, but in doing so I severed a ribbon cable that is the communication between the camera and the lense, aaaaaahhhhhhhh.  I put the lense back together again and it functions manually.  I have the focus gear so focus is not a big issue, however I cannot change the aperature u/w which is a pain.


Now to the choices.  I moved to FX last year and have the 105VR for macro and super macro, and the Sigma 15mm FE and nikon 16-35 F for wide angle.  Do i get the nikon 60mm f 2.8 D or the G to compliment what I already have?  I hear the G has 1" less working space, but perhaps this is not such an issue as if I wanted to shot macro I can use the 105VR.  It is more for medium size fish/amphibians Im thinking about.


Toads - which lens

16 April 2015 - 04:52 AM

Intend to go diving on Sunday in one of the lakes here in Switzerland.  Not normally a great deal of life to shot in these lakes, a few pike, perch etc, howvever there are toads around at the moment and will try to get some images of these guys.

The question is which lens?  I have a D800, nikkor 60mm, 105VR, 16-35 f4 and Sigma 15mm FE, macro port, 170mm optical port and 240mm FE port.


For close ups the 60mm would seem like the obvious choice, however I busted the AF/aperature elctronics by breaking the ribbon cable when I removed the rear element to clean. AAAAAAaaaahhhhh.  It had a major piece of fluff inside for some reason.  I have yet to try to fix it, if it is even possible.  I can still use it with manual focus, but cannot change the aperture UW.


So might give the 105VR a go.


For wide angle I have the 15mm FE for years, and love it.  It pairs up nicely with the 170mm dome for close focus on FX.  Unfortunately I dont have a 1.4 TC which if I had would definitely be my choice for wide angle.


I only have the 16-35VR F 4 a few months and have not tried it for CFWA.  Will I be able to get a tighter image with this lens than the sigma 15?  Especially considering especially considering I would be using the 240mm dome port.  I could in theory use the 170mm dome, and make do with the reduced corner quality.