Jump to content


Member Since 17 Apr 2006
Offline Last Active Mar 09 2012 09:53 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Olympus 770 SW

29 June 2007 - 07:00 PM

Just returned from a trip to Galapagos. My wife did a shallow dive to a maximum of 28 feet with the 770 - it leaked into the battery / card compartment and stopped working during the dive. Very disappointed.

Oh No! Sorry to hear that. Thanks for sharing too, I don't think I've taken mine past 20 feet or so. Good to know ;)

In Topic: Olympus 770 SW

14 June 2007 - 01:40 PM

I took these with the 770SW during a recent trip to Roatan. We were looking for Whale Sharks (didn't find any ;) ) and we ran into a pod of dolphins. Instead of grabbing my big rig right away, I just jumped in with this little camera and got some shots of them. Later on my buddy took one of me and the big camera too. I have to say i totally love this little camera, is great for everyday snapshots and perfect for boat, snorkeling, hiking, etc. It is so tough I have no reservations letting my three year old play with it ;)

FYI - shots have been color corrected and two of them are crops, but no major editing. Also, there was a lot of krill in the water.

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image

In Topic: Wide Angle FE and Rectilinear

12 May 2007 - 09:29 AM

Have you found it to be true that on the Nikon 12-24, use of filters or diopters need to be as thin as possible, especially for use at the 12mm end? Subal does not list a recommendation of a diopter for the 12-24, but sometimes what is recommended and what is being experienced in the field may be two different things? Alex, you like the 12-24, have you experienced any challenges with the 12-24 that you can share?

Opposingly, the Sigma 10-20 is recommended to have a +2 diopter. I've done a search here at wetpixel but was unsuccessful in finding a comparison of these two lenses (the Nikon 12-24 vs the Sigma 10-20) for performance or sharpness? If someone has a link that I am unaware of I can do some further research versus the risk of asking too many redundant questions.

loftus, have you lost interest in the 12-24 in favor of keeping to your 17-55 that fits that mid-range well. So whenever you want to go wider, do you simply always jump to the FE? Or do you find any desire to go wider than the 17 for rectilinear shots but lack an option that is sharp enough to fit your preference?

Is anyone out of favor of use of a prime like the 14mm or does its cost versus benefit struggle when there are these other options? (With film, the 20mm was nice, still is for film imho)

Thank you for your patience and advice Gentlemen, your input is greatly appreciated.

Here's a review of all the available (nikon mount) wide digital zooms: Wide Zooms

In Topic: Tulamben&Seraya

11 May 2007 - 01:24 PM

Wicked awesome!

In Topic: Lenses for Alaska to Vancuver?

07 May 2007 - 11:10 AM

I live in Seattle and my favorite year round lens is by far the 60mm. You should get somewhat better visibility up in BC but not so good at that time of year to fully take advantage of the 10.5.