Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. This has been the case for Micro Four Thirds for ages. There is no way to turn it off in Lightroom, but there are some RAW editors that can ignore those profiles (I think Raw Therapee might be one of them). Of course that will only work if Nikon works the same as MFT.
  3. From what I understand of the Z lenses, you have no choice. It's always On. It's built into them so, in theory, the Lightroom Lens Profile makes no difference. In fact if you turn it on, you will see that it just reports "Built-in". Even if you then select the Nikon option, what is produced is not the lens you are using. For example, an image I shot with the 24-200 lens reports its profile as "Built In". If you then select Nikon as the Make, it reports the lens is an AFS 105mm lens. Z lenses are not listed as an option. I'm sure there is a way of switching off the built-in profile. I just haven't sorted it out yet!
  4. Yesterday
  5. Your aperture underwater is generally chosen based on depth of field (macro) or corner sharpness (wide). It's not really going to change based on visibility very much. Remember that wide focal lengths start with a wide depth of field, so stopping down doesn't really do much to bring in more depth of field. But it does a lot for corner sharpness. It's not always correct to use aperture to brighten up an underwater image - too many other effects at play. It's much more typical to add light with strobes or increase ISO rather than open aperture for more light. The effect on corners is just too obvious to ignore if you don't stop down to some minimal amount which may be F8. Shooting underwater is a challenge,
  6. Yes, a little. Now the tank only looks 50% longer than the others!
  7. I'm pretty sure that is perspective distortion one would see at 14mm with any lens, even if that lens didn't have a lot of barrel distortion added on top. As for built-in correction, I have no idea. I've never tried using 'built-in correction' that I know of. I download NEF files and process them in Lightroom. I turn on Lens Corrections and leave those at defaults. Well, a correction would make it better, not worse. (Hence the term 'correction'?) Switching off a correction on a lens would almost certainly increase whatever barrel or pincushion distortion was already there, along with increased CD and vignetting. Personally, I rarely like to go wider than 24mm above water, and even that without humans in the picture, preferably. The perspective distortion at 24mm and wider really is unflattering for people. Topside with the 14-30. Hmm. Trying to think when I've shot it at 14mm above water. A wide lens like this is a specialized optic for me that doesn't normally get used unless I have a specific shot in mind. Or I'm indoors in a cathedral. (Which I have not been, yet, with the 14-30 as it is a very new lens to me.)
  8. 5-10m vis is pretty reasonable in much of the UK. Careful use of strobes is fine. As for aperture, well that depends on your lens/port and whether the subject matter in corners shows aberrations up badly. I tend to use f/11 as a miniumum with the Soy 20/1.8 behind a 200mm port but as I said, it depends. I also find the A7II better in terms of focus than the R.
  9. Thanks, Wolfgang. Much appreciated. My housing has been working fine; but it's been a few years since I did anything but clean the main O-rings, and was wondering about the button seals, considered taking all of them entirely apart. I read this article and was hoping I could get away with simply a drop of silicone fluid. https://meikon.com.hk/blogs/news/underwater-housing-maintenance
  10. I set the Distortion slider to -40 in your image and the corners look a little better.
  11. Sorry - stills. Yeah, I'm assuming that artificial light would be a non-starter. The water where we are tends to be quite bitty (algae, maybe?) which you can sort of tell is there but not see directly, if that makes sense? But would definitely show up under lighting. I guess as the support diver it's up to me to take along some v. large lights...
  12. Are you talking about video or stills? I think generally you will just have to bring enough artificial light for cold/murky water, although backscatter can be a problem, if you're not careful. Apart from that, general rules about aperture and soft corners for wide angle lenses still apply. Quite possible that you will just have to increase ISO to get the exposure you want.
  13. While I shot film with a Nikonos IV 'back in the day', I'm new to UW videography. This is my first UW video and it was something of a trial run for my new Gen 2 Paralenz Vaquita. I'm located in Texas and there's a former limestone quarry a few hours south that had a reputation for having good visibility. I'll be filming in the Florida Keys and Caribbean over the fall/winter. This is what I shot during my initial attempt. (default settings, color correction on, no lights) Diving the Blue Lagoon
  14. Hello, So, putting together a system for a Sony a7RII. Diving in the UK in cold green waters. Visibility is pretty poor. Obviously there's a limit to when you can actually take a photo, but assuming I can see a scene through my mask (let's say 5 - 10 m vis) is there a generally recommended minimum lens aperture for those conditions, to help keep exposure times (and risk of camera movement) down? I assume that because large apertures (low F) increase background blur, which isn't ideal for a wide angle shot, in reality it's a compromise between setting the aperture get the DoF you want, and exposure to then get the light, but I thought I'd ask just in case...
  15. Greetings. I've been diving since the 70's, but am new to videography. I've started with the new Gen 2 Paralenz Vaquita and a YouTube channel. Much to learn.
  16. Craig, is that distortion as a result of the lens being zoomed to 14mm, or is it the result of the built-in Lens Profile Correction that Nikon have incorporated in the Z lenses? I'm finding that issue with another Z lens - the 24-200 - topside. This is also creates weird elongations at the edges of the image. I'm not sure how (or even if) it's possible to switch off that correction. If it is, it may well have interesting results for using the 14-30 underwater! I've tried various settings in Lightroom but havn't found a way yet to eliminate it. Have you tried the same setting topside and see what result you get?
  17. The WWL-1 and WWL-1B also work well with the Marelux housings for Sony with the 32 port. Be aware that with the WWL-1B you will need to shave off about 5/10mm of the blue release lock to make it work on the shorter Marelux housing.
  18. Actually, one of our last trips to Lembeh (3 years ago) was to Dabirahe Dive resort (very little availability anywhere during the New Year season), it was *awful.* Food was extremely poor, and the walk to the top cabins made Anilao look "flat" by comparison. The resort is now closed (which is good)...
  19. @Lostandconfused You named several of the best dive locations in SE Asia. For Anilao the best (IMHO) is Crystal Blue, for Lembeh I (now) prefer Lembeh Resort (I enjoyed Kasawari quite a bit, Lembeh Resort is better. just as Kasawari was better than Kungkungan years ago). Wakatobi is world class... (going back for our fifth trip next summer). Have you looked at the Atlantis Resort in Dumaguete? Puerta Galera was a bit of a dump, but their location in Dumaguete is entirely different. I was there right before the pandemic and was surprised by how good the diving was. Everyone will tell you that you will get tired finding frogfish on their dives (and you won't believe it until you experience it). The reality is... you will likely see more frogfish diving there than any other location (and it could be by orders of magnitude more... #not kidding#). Time of year matters... but they are there. One small (maybe 1 meter long) coral outcropping had a giant frogfish near the base, two smaller frogfish perched higher up, and 3 tiny frogfish in the sand around them. The guides weren't even surprised... Virtually anything you can find in Anilao you can find in Dumaguete, just in different numbers (variety of nudibranchs is smaller however).
  20. Hi Dave, I use this fluid here and apply it once a year to all buttons, levers, etc... : https://www.unterwasserkamera.at/shop/catalog/en/product_info.php?info=p6154_d-d-top-secret-o-ring-fluid.html I think it helps... Wolfgang
  21. I'm curious about the performance of macro to wide lenses on MFT. Most of my diving is typical holiday diving where you never really know what you're going to see and there is rarely an opportunity to repeat dives. On dives where I have absolutely no idea what I will encounter I currently use the Olympus 12-50mm lens in the special Nauticam port with a a Saga +10 on a flip adapter. This gives me reasonable macro but the wide end is pretty disappointing, both in terms of IQ and in terms of being wide enough. I've contemplated getting the MWL-1 or KRL-09s to solve that problem, by having a dedicated macro lens that will also give me a 150° close to fisheye view. I also enjoy wide angle macro so this might be the perfect fit. However, most reviews I have found and most sample images were shot on full frame. Both Nauticam and Kraken emphasize that the lens needs stopping down to F16 on FF, but it is not clear how this translates to crop sensors. On land, the DoF on FF f16 would match f8 on MFT. Generally I'd be fine stopping down to f11, after that I would run into trouble with my small S&S YS-02 strobes. F8 would be preferable. I will keep my Fisheye and rectilinear WA, so please let's not make this into a specialised lens vs Jack of All trades discussion. I know I will get superior IQ with my Panasonic Fisheye (although I'm not so sure about the wideangle) and I will also lose the ability to do split shots and I will keep bringing those lenses when I know what awaits me. The question is, how much worse is it really for general wide angle shots? So I'm looking for people who have shot one or even both of the mentioned lenses on MFT. How is corner sharpness when stopped down to f11 and f8? How sharp is it in the center and corners compared to the Panasonic Fisheye (I use the 4.33" acryllic dome). Sample images would be much appreciated, especially high resolution images. If anyone has used both (in this case even just on FF) I would also be interested if the Nauticam lens is really that much better at 1k€/$ price difference. The glas dome compared to acryllic is a pro, but it also needs an additional float collar, so if they are on par in terms of IQ I can't see myself investing in the Nauticam lens.
  22. Here's an example of what I mean. How long is that scuba tank up in the corner? I have not applied distortion corrections on this.
  23. I had this same issue and found the corner distortion can be fixed with the distortion slider in LR. With the S&S Internal Correction Lens fixing the corner softness, and the LR distortion slider fixing the corner distortion, I get pretty decent corners at 14mm.
  24. I've read that it's a good idea to periodically put a drop of silicone lubricant around the shafts of the various actuator buttons on a housing to keep the o-rings in good shape? Is this true? Any recommendations for a silicone lubricant? Thanks for any comments, Dave
  25. WWL-1B is only good with Nauticam housing, I tried it with Seafrogs and 28-60mm and there is vignetting unless you zoom in which defeats the purpose. I swapped the 1b with the original WWL and got the foam collar for it, there is no vignetting with this setup and it takes just a tad more space than 1b.
  1. Load more activity

Sponsors

Advertisements



  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...