Jump to content


TimG

Member Since 19 Jun 2004
Offline Last Active Today, 09:15 AM
-----

#360496 Wearing B/C on airliner

Posted by TimG on Yesterday, 08:37 PM

If you do, please post a photo......


#360232 Nauticam Carbon Fibre Float arms

Posted by TimG on 18 April 2015 - 01:19 AM

I was interested by the comments from eyu and Richard (the trickster) not the Stix floats.

 

I bought my Stix floats off a colleague of Ryan's when he visited KBR in 2010 - so then they were second hand. I must have done about 700-800 dives with them and haven't seen signs of post-dive compression or lack of buoyancy. Maybe I've just been lucky with them. They have probably never been below 32m but they are often in the 25m-30m range.




#360204 Car wax for your camera housing??? Whaaaa

Posted by TimG on 17 April 2015 - 03:40 AM

I've used Salt-x in the past.

 

I can't honestly say that I could see any difference between using that and warm water and white vinegar. And the white vinegar is easy to find in the supermarket and it's cheap. You can put the difference in price to a nice bottle of wine which you can drink whilst you clean your housing. 




#360096 Betty Bomber - Truk

Posted by TimG on 15 April 2015 - 07:18 AM

Wow, amazing that it is natural light. I'm impressed!




#360044 Betty Bomber - Truk

Posted by TimG on 14 April 2015 - 10:19 AM

Nice video, Dustin

 

Yeah, divers in shot can be a mixed blessing. I shoot stills and with a fisheye lens on my camera, "bike riders" or those who dive with their legs bent constantly at 90 degrees from the knee are a real pain! Stop it, you people!

 

My partner has become an excellent model: hanging-in the water-column, legs elegantly elongated, lovely green eyes looking at the subject, gently exhaling a stream of perfectly rounded bubbles... and bingo, into view hoves Mr or Ms Bike Rider. ARGH. 

 

We have thought about putting together a PADI Specialty Course: Underwater Modelling. It's tempting to make it compulsory. At least then we can get perfectly poised divers in shot.

 

(Sorry, not trying to hijack your post)




#359988 xenia crabs: two for the price of one

Posted by TimG on 13 April 2015 - 06:50 AM

Thanks a lot guys, you've given some great ammunition. If only I had not just ordered a new BCD and air integrated computer . . . clearly my prioritization of life support over imaging needs a rethimk!

 

Tsk. After all we have done for you too..... how selfish  :crazy:

 

Have fun with the new gear!




#359831 Are you happy you changed from DX to FX?

Posted by TimG on 09 April 2015 - 07:52 AM

Hi NEWreckdiver

 

A couple of thoughts on your (excellent) spreadsheet: I wouldn't assume an 8" dome with the Nikkor 16-35. I found I had to go with the 9" on my Subal system at significant extra cost and weight.

 

One way of cutting down on cost and weight is to switch from a 16-35 to a 15mm (Sigma) or 16mm (Nikon) FE. No need for an EXR, no diopter and 8" dome work soft sure. And either the 15 or 16mm is cheaper than the 16-35.




#359813 Should i get a fisheye?

Posted by TimG on 09 April 2015 - 03:32 AM

Meanwhile as Trickster gets his coat, Alex is lost for words, Storker wrestles with First World Problems... an FE lens dealer in deepest Norway is wrapping a package... Mirrorless???? Ha! Sigma or Nikon? Cat amongst pigeons

Just get it ordered, Storker. Mrs Storker will never hear about it from us....


#359663 first lightroom edited photo. critique, please.

Posted by TimG on 05 April 2015 - 09:55 AM

LOL! Yeah, one of them.... or both.  :fool:   Sorry! Lightroom Killertips anyway, A real good source of info and techniques.




#359494 Are you happy you changed from DX to FX?

Posted by TimG on 01 April 2015 - 10:16 AM

 

At the same time, I am drawn to the full frame option like a moth to a flame... 

 

Does anyone have any additional advice or thoughts for me to consider?

 

Heather

 

I think you have said it all, Heather: Moth to a flame. We all are. Why should you escape, eh?  :dancing:

 

The only other advice I might offer are the words of Dante (not the Brazilian footballer one) on the entry to hell: "Abandon hope all ye who enter".

 

Underwater photography is a slippery slope to an empty bank account, hours of editing, weeks of frustration and moments of utter delight. 

 

Welcome to Wetpixel, Heather 




#358550 D7200 is here. Different enough?

Posted by TimG on 05 March 2015 - 08:16 AM

I am expecting D7100-D7200 to be a smaller step than D7000-D7100, but don’t know yet. Hoping it fits too - see nothing to suggest it won’t at this stage. 

 

Is this the triumph of wishful thinking over experience, Alex?  :lol2:




#358549 Thoughts on pricing in the forums

Posted by TimG on 05 March 2015 - 08:14 AM

Tough question. I think a lot depends on a number of factors: age of the item, robustness (so for example a robust ULCS strobe arm will reduce less than, say, a strobe); whether the item is still in the current manufacturer's range (so is it the D7100 or the D100); wear and tear; popularity of the item.

 

On balance, if I get 50% on a housing I'm happy (ish!). But I'd hope to do better than that for an extension ring or a filter. So I'd say a 30%-40% reduction is not unreasonable for many items.

 

But that's just my experience 




#358313 Are you happy you changed from DX to FX?

Posted by TimG on 26 February 2015 - 12:45 AM

 

 

This is not a FX/DX difference, it is a camera/housing difference. In fact, popular Canon FX cameras do not have pop-up flash, so you cannot use TTL with optical fiber unless you use a micro-strobe, which is not the easiest/cleanest way (and it won´t use the exact eTTL protocol).

 

Thanks for that, David. Sorry, I'm not familiar with Canon and was referring to moving from my Nikon DX to FX. Clarificaction appreciated!




#356265 Nature with diver type shot - feedback?

Posted by TimG on 04 January 2015 - 07:05 AM

Speak quietly of such issues, Stoker. I don't want my buddy hearing this......   :innocent:




#356259 Nature with diver type shot - feedback?

Posted by TimG on 04 January 2015 - 04:54 AM

Hi Storker

 

Yeah, that helps for sure.

 

Next thing: you can see the beginnings of some backscatter above the beam of the torch and the left side of the rock. This may show up better (unhelpfully!) in a larger scale image. You might like to see if you can spot these out with LR or PS.  

 

When you are out in the water again, you might like to try targeting the strobes away from "open" water and directly onto something you want to light - in this case, I'd suggest the deadmens-fingers and not the diver. Another tough bit of WA photography with models: getting some light on the model without introducing backscatter and while lightning the interesting underwater bits. It's all a bit trial and error I find - just getting the balance between strobes, ambient lights, interesting bits of reef etc. And getting the darned model to keep their eyes open and exhale JUST at the right moment.

 

:aggressive: