Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/22/19 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    I found the time to do a little write up on underwater white balance that includes some of the techniques I use Hopefully this is useful to most people out there. I have focussed on GH5 picture profile but I guess other camera won't be much different https://interceptor121.com/2019/09/24/the-importance-of-underwater-white-balance-with-the-panasonic-gh5/
  2. 2 points
    Should you find a way to actually make a living off of selling underwater imagery - Keep it a secret! Because if you don't, then soon everyone else will have the the secret and it won't be a secret anymore and you will be back where you started. Inspiration and innovation is the mother of invention. Actually it’s just a mother.
  3. 2 points
    Hi, I want to share my latest video with you In winter I have been at the White Sea in Russia for ice diving and i was curious how the landscape and diving might be the rest of the year. Because i like the indian summer colors i decided to come back in autumn. My plan was to capture the autumn mood at the White Sea and create a story around a leave falling and sinking in the sea. On the spot it turned out that this story is not far-fetched, because leaves constantly flushed by the tides in the sea. So, have fun watching! globaldivemedia.com
  4. 2 points
    I do not think that "cropped sensor" cameras (I think this is any camera with a sensor smaller than FF?) will dye out. To the contrary, several people here state they prefer DX over FX Nikon systems, because of smaller overall rig and WA lens choices. Last week I was on an exciting UW-photo workshop at the Red Sea. The major goal was, of course, to learn photographic skills (hope it worked a little ), but a minor goal of myself was to compare the different camera systems by looking at the different images, how they are processed and talking to people. Before the workshop I was strongly inclined to acquire an additional FF body plus housing (Canon or eventually Sony with adapter, as I have already three Canon-EF mount lenses that I am using on my Oly EM1II MFT body by using Metabones converters). After the workshop this inclination is reduced, at the moment I see only little reasoning to go for FF and several against. Here are my (subjective) impressions: #1.: When viewed on labtop screens or the big HD-TV screen that was on the ship, it was not possible for me to judge, whether an image was acquired with a 1" compact or an FX Nikon D850 (at magnification to view the entire image. Of course, these screens are not good enough to see subtile differences). #2.: The only differences that I could see easily were with cave photos: Here the photographers with FF sensors could switch to high ISO and use short shutter speeds. The MFT photographers could easily compensate the ISO weakness of their cameras by longer exposure times (made possible by the superior image stabilization). At the end, however, the light beams captured with small sensors appear uniformely smeared, while (some) images captured with FF sensors (at high shutter speed) showed razor sharp light rays within the big beam, what is, of course, more beautiful. #3.: After dinner there was always the "image review", where every participant could submit two images that were critically discussed, also postprocessing was improved. Here I had the impression, that the "reserves" for post-processing (e.g. increasing the shadows, stretching dynamic range, clarity etc.) increase clearly with the sensor size, beeing the smallest with 1" compact and biggest with FF (APS-C, DX and MFT in the middle). With "reserves" I mean the extend a slider in LR can be adjusted, before the image starts to look "artificially" overprocessed. The differences are there, but they are not overwhelming. Alex Mustard, who organized and hold the workshop and held all seminars, said that a FF raw image that is acquired under critical conditions and not exposed to the optimum (e.g. low light in caves) will have less IQ than an image of the same subject, acquired to its optimum, on a camera with smaller sensor. #4.: Sharpness of the images: Regardless of the electronic poperties of a sensor, bigger sensors have the potential to yield sharper images, just because of the laws of optics (Huygen's principle, i.e. light behaves as a wave and it is intrinsically impossible to resolve an indefinite number of detail in a given area). This means that on a sensor that has 4x larger area (the relation of different sensor areas to MFT (1x) is as follows: Canon APS-C (1.46x), Nixon DX (1.65x) and FF (3.84x)) one can resolve, just by the law of optics, 2x the amount of detail (e.g. lines resolved per height of the image, what is often takes as a measure of sharpness), using the same lens at identical settings. This, of course, can be only seen when the digital resolution of the sensor is not rate limiting. In practice, however, image sharpness is mostly compromized by motion blurr (even when body/lens have image stabilization) and/or unprecise focus. Only with images without any motion blurr that are perfect in focus one might see better sharpness using FF (I doubt this would be possible to see on a normal screen without heavily magnifying the image). In summary there IS, of course, better IQ with FF cameras, but the differences are not gigantic... I also could see clear disadvantages of FF systems: Of course, the enormous size, especially when using the WACP, but also the big domeports that had to be used for rectilinear WA lenses. Second, the lens choices for very wide WA (the workshop was entirely on WA photography ): While many APS-C and DX cameras were using the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye as standard lens (I was using the Canon 8-15mm fisheye, adapted with my Oly EM1II MFT camera (=> at least as good, I think)), the FF photographers had to use 15mm fisheyes, sometimes with teleconverters, for comparable angles of views (there is no zoom fisheye available for FF that would cover a comparable range). Still I feel a little like testing out a FF rig, but this probably will not take place in the near future ("thumbs up" for cropped sensors for me personally). But who knows for sure? ... Wolfgang
  5. 2 points
    I think cropped sensor cameras are not dead for UW use. They compete to a certain extent with both the m43 and the full frame options. The cropped sensor cameras may not be "better" than M43 per se, but offer some lens choices, low light abilities and focus speed abilities that may outperform M43 and at the same time, while sometimes being far less expensive than full frame options and perhaps most importantly, offering good wide angle options without the need for mammoth dome ports. I have been using a D500 for a while but have not yet sold my M43 stuff. I find I get faster focusing, better low light ability, more ability to crop images and no M43 option compares to the 8-15 and 10-17 fisheye wideangle lenses. I don't so video so no comment there. If I could manage to do it, I would love to do a dive with the D500 and then repeat with the EM1, shooting similar subjects in similar conditions, and compare my results. Since I travel to dive, that isn't going to happen. On the other hand, I hear frequent speculation that the big manufacturers might be considering getting rid of cropped sensor cameras, and then of course, the situation changes. In the end, each format has benefits and downsides and we call make compromises depending on our own priorities.
  6. 2 points
    cardinalfish by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Double ended pipefish by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Flounder by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Jack in jelly by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr
  7. 2 points
    Look for any tiny markings or writing molded into the connector. I used to work for Molex, and all our connectors had the part number molded into them, but it can be REALLY tiny.
  8. 1 point
    Well there are many situations where you have to shoot in ambient light underwater: with large fauna like Manta Rays, if you are diving respectfully of these species protection, you will not use strobes. It is getting forbidden in many places conscious of these marine species protection strobes have a relatively short range, and natural light will often be the best option when your subject is a bit too far shooting in ambiant light will give a result that cannot be achieved with strobes, with good white balance calibration Here is an example where I find that ambient light is superior to strobe, during an encounter with a whale shark. I happened to take pictures in ambient light, while another diver was taking shots with strobes on the other side of the shark at the same moment. We were at 15 m, so pretty dark and poor light, both at about the same distance from the shark. With a Nikon D7500, I took a shot at ISO 100, f4.5 1/125 at 17mm with Sigma 17-70mm, here is the unprocessed JPG: The picture is overall underexposed, and with depth, totally lack any color. The other diver that you see in the picture took a shot with a Canon EOS 5D mark IV at ISO 400, f8 1/180 and 15 mm fisheye (not his best shot, he took much better shots, but this is one which he took about the same time as me) The strobes were not strong enough to light the shark. The key difference between the two shots shows in post-processing of the RAW files, in the ability to get more natural colors. Here is the picture taken in natural light, with some basic white balance processing and reframing: The background is a bit washed out, but Camera Raw and Photoshop manage to recover a natural white balance. However when trying to recover white balance from the picture with strobes, you get hot spots on the parts of the shark lit by the strobes. As you push to recover white balance on the overall picture, these spots turn bright red. This would require complex editing to adjust the white balance by zone. Well the backward compatibility with Nikon F lenses means that Nikon owners can upgrade to the Z50, keep their existing lenses, and buy Z lenses as they are produced. As Nikon has kept the ergonomics of the Z line very close to the DSLR's, this makes a very smooth transition to mirrorless. So for the OP Trimix125 who is a long time Nikon user, this is probably the best option. For non-Nikon users, the matter is more to find the camera brand which best match their tastes. So Nikon will be great for some, while others will prefer Sony or Canon. One thing is sure now: mirrorless camera is the future. The question is how quickly to adopt them? Again a matter of taste, between early adopters and others who prefer the platform to mature and improve before adopting it.
  9. 1 point
    I shot M43 for several years and still have the the gear. I have both the Panasonic and Olympus 8mm lenses as well as the Oly 30mm macro, as well as others. For an Olympus body, and given minimal price difference, I would go with the Olympus 8mm to avoid any of the purple blob issue and because generally, you may never need to 1.8, but it is nice to have if for some reason you do. Which macro lens to choose is really governed by what and where you are shooting. Super small stuff and skittish stuff, you would want a longer macro lens, but if you are shooting bigger things and if dealing with less than pristine water, that extra distance will be a problem. Whether the Panasonic or Oly 30mm is better I cannot say as I only have the Olympus. I know that before choosing the Oly I spent some time trying to figure out which one to get and chose the Oly, but I cannot recall what the deciding factor was. The MWL-1 looks very interesting. Heavy and expensive, but interesting.
  10. 1 point
    In my opinion... It will give you the flexibility like a compact system where you can still choose between wideangle and macro even when you are already in the water. But, I will go for option 1... When I shot wide angle, I would want to have the ad much details as possible. Adding a mwl1 glass i front of the original Olympus glass will definitely soften or decrease the quslity of the image. Sent from my SM-N975F using Tapatalk
  11. 1 point
    Hey all! I've just finished a group of video tutorials designed for all levels of u/w photographers to speed up their editing workflow: -> tutorials.brentdurand.com/editing The videos (and companion articles) cover Presets, Collections and Target Collections, Watermarks and more. Are there other topics you'd like covered? Shoot me a DM if so. Thanks, and enjoy!
  12. 1 point
    This is my first time posting here and I am excited to share some of my images from last months trip to Bonaire. https://www.elsasserphotography.com/Galleries/Bonaire-2019 These are all taken with an Olympus Em1 Mk2 in the Nauticam Housing. Wide angle shots used the Panasonic 8mm FE lens, and the macro shots the Olympus 60mm. Post processing done in Lightroom and sometimes in Photoshop as well. This is my third trip with my new camera (previously used the TG4) and definitely have noticed an improvement in my images, but still would love any feedback from the amazing photographers on this forum!
  13. 1 point
    Hi- I'm Laurence Ransom from Greensboro NC and have been reading Wetpixel for about a year. I am a realtively new UW diver x 3 years and have just begun serious UW photography. Looking forward to learning better technique etc.. from this site.
  14. 1 point
    Hey guys, Sharing my first shot using Canon 7D and Tokina 10-17 fisheye. Its my first time to DSLR
  15. 1 point
    I had a LX100 (the first model) for nearly 4 years before moving to a GH5s. While I love the GH5s, I sometimes miss that the LX100. LX100 is really nice for video, good at low light, but underwater you need to go the expensive Nauticam road if you want full control (Ikelite and other are partial with manual focus notably missing on Ikelite). And for macro work, you will need the flip holder and lens diopters. Therefore I wouldn't call that bundle a best value package. Also the first model of LX100 was good at getting some dust on the sensor at some stage through the lens barel. The repair is expensive. I don't know but hope the problem has been solved on the LX100II .
  16. 1 point
    Since I started with cameras I though dome ports purpose was to restore the air field of view of the camera and that do so the centre of curvature of the dome had to be placed near the entrance pupil of the lens. Along the years I have started taking test shots of a ruler with an empty and full sink and I noticed in some cases considerable loss of field of view. I thought this was a trade off in those cases where the dome has to be kept to a reasonable size and you needed to avoid vignetting. Typically entrance pupil information for lenses is not provided by manufacturers and furthermore for zoom lenses this moves on the lens itself. Recently I have acquired a full frame lens where this information was available and I have noticed that the suggested extension by the manufacturer was not on the entrance pupil but further behind. This made no sense to me as according to theory once you determine the entrance pupil the real point if you consider a thick dome is actually with the lens closer not further away. I got curious about this situation so I started measuring the suggested position of the dome for a rectilinear wide angle lens I own. I then compared with the suggested manufacturer extension to find out the centre of the dome would be almost at the end of the lens. I then performed some tests to see if this was the entrance pupil and it was clear it was not and that the correct place was around 2 cm behind this point. I then enquired the manufacturer to understand why such long extensions are recommended and I found out that the design for a dome port is pretty much like this 1. Select a given dome port large enough to give decent results 2. Put the camera and lens at the wide and and the dome on a macro pilot with the dome inserted in water pointing to a resolution chart 3. Perform various MTF measuremens moving the camera to determine the needed extension that does not vignette In all cases I have checked this method gives a longer extension that the theory suggests this also means that the dome will actually loose field of view by definition. I am not sure I agree with this approach for a number of reasons 1. If the field of view is being reduced to achieve sharpness I would like to know what I am loosing 2. Placing the lens further away from the dome results in the dome acting like a lens so it is clear it will be sharper but this could be achieved anyway zooming in that actually moves the entrance pupil backwards in most cases 3. The tests are only conducted at wide end this may be fine for a prime lens but for a zoom lens there is no guarantee that MTF will hold as you zoom in Maybe I am being naive but if I buy a lens that has 100 degrees field of view and a dome I am expecting this to be more or less the same not to be cut down of an unknown amount based on how sharp are the corners of the image. Am I alone? How many people know that domes may actually NOT restore the air field of view and not of a small amount?
  17. 1 point
    My opinion... I have both Olympus and Panasonic 8mm. Still having it. And yes, the Oly glass is superior, but not by heaven and earth. But u got F/1.8 when u need to shoot sunray in a cave... Not a necessity, but something nice to have. And no, u don't have to remove the lens in order to remove it from your housing. That's only for M.Zuiko 7-14mm F/2.8 PRO. Macro, my choice is Olympus 60mm F/2.8. Good working range with great Image Quality. Sent from my SM-N975F using Tapatalk
  18. 1 point
    Check out this underwater review of the Sony A7R IV, we had the chance to take it to Guadalupe Island and test it with the white sharks! https://www.bluewaterphotostore.com/sony-a7r-iv-review
  19. 1 point
    For the sharks, we were fairly far away from them, and we only tried it once, but the animal eye AF didn't work well. I think for this type of animal visibility and conditions will play a big factor. For blennies, we were using AF tracking and it worked fantastic. We didn't take any test video with the animal eye AF - we're planning on taking some more video later on this week. Check out some of our video footage here:
  20. 1 point
    I have made a personalised version of the Nauticam port chart with my choices and why that may be useful to some It is on google drive and can be downloaded from my site here https://interceptor121.com/2019/10/12/interceptor121s-cut-nauticam-n85-panasonic-olympus-and-bmpcc-port-chart/ Word of cautions while I am 100% confident on Panasonic body and BMPCC I am aware that Panasonic lenses have worst performance on Olympus bodies so I would check first for any problems
  21. 1 point
    Underwater photography is a bit of a wide concept. If you are talking about wide angle photography, you will not find in lights the same power you can get from strobes. I use lights, cause I make both video and photo with them, but from my (short) experience with my mirrorless, the difference is certainly in the range of several stops even if you use lights of 8 / 10.000 lumen. I can't talk about macro. Inviato dal mio ASUS_Z017D utilizzando Tapatalk
  22. 1 point
    Hello everybody, I just returned from a 3 week trip to Indonesia. My first week was spent in Lembeh with NAD Lembeh and had the opportunity to go on my first black water dives. Needless to say I quickly became addicted and didnt miss any dives. A quick review of my experience with NAD Lembeh. I will echo most of the reviews I have seen on the website regarding my experience, it was phenomenal. Although this was my first trip to Lembeh and thus have nothing else to compare it to I will say that I will not be staying anywhere else during any future visits. I had a nice room by the beach, bed was very comfortable and AC worked to perfection. The food was fantastic, and they were very accommodating since I am vegetarian. The dive boats are great with ample room for all on board. The staff carry all your equipment to and from the dive boat and set it up, including the camera. The camera room was very ample with lots of charging space. There are computers to edit/post but I did not take advantage of this service. Since I was in a room by myself I had my own dive guide/buddy/photographic assistant which was Andri. He was great, very patient and never in any rush to move on. It didnt matter whether we spent 30 seconds or 30 minutes in a subject there was never any rush. Here are a few shots taken during black water. Critique highly encouraged. Many more to come including during regular dives. Many more posted on Flickr. Larval wonderpus Blackwater-2 by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Blackwater-2 by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Larval mimic octopus, maybe? blackwater-7 by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr blackwater (1 of 1) by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Larval long arm octopus blackwater (1 of 1)-5 by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Larval Long Arm Octopus by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr blackwater (1 of 1)-6 by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr
  23. 1 point
  24. 1 point
    Hello all, I am breaking up my Seacam gear and selling it piecemeal. There are some nice Seacam items listed at approximately half-off new. Minimal wear on housing exterior, all other items in like-new condition, unless indicated. Pictures available on request.:) Shipping extra. 1) Seacam D800 housing: The housing went back to Seacam in Austria for a full rebuild last year and has one dive trip on it since then. While there, I had Harald replace the rear plexiglass window. I also had him drill and tap a hole on the top to accommodate the Seacam vacuum fitting, in the same location as the fitting on the D500 housing. Much more convenient than the fitting on the lower right side by the handle. Few small nicks on base. Handles scuffed. Does not include viewfinder, strobe bulkheads or control board. Standard Seacam handles Current list: $5987, selling for $1000 USD 2) Seacam Vacuum Test. Vacuum/moisture detector combined, with Seacam valve and pump, in neoprene bag. Current List $491, selling for $300 USD 3) Seacam Pro Viewfinder. Plastic mount slightly marked, glass perfect. Current List $421, selling for $200 USD (SOLD) 4) Seacam S10 Viewfinder. Perfect. Current list $1856, selling $850 USD 5) Seacam Macroport 90. Few superficial scuffs, glass perfect Current list $367, selling $200 USD 6) Seacam Macroport 120. Perfect Current list $367, selling $250 USD 7) Seacam Zoom Gear, Nikon 8-15mm FE Current list $226, selling $175 USD 8) Seacam Focus Gear, Nikon micro-105 AF-S Current list $265, selling $150 USD 9) Seacam Silver M8 ball adapter Current list $39, selling $20 USD 10) Seacam Wet diopter set Current list $913, selling $500 USD 11) Seacam small handles. Better ergonomics for regular hands without gloves. Current list $??, selling $25 USD 12) Xit 404 Quad ball mounts, lanyard attachment points, with ULCS dovetails x2 Current list $70, selling $35 USD each 13) UW Technics Seacam TTL control board. Rotary switch setting. (Compatible strobes: Z-240, YS-D1, YS-D2, YS-250, DS161, DS160. For usage with Nauticam fiberoptic cables or electric 5-pin cables.) Non TTL works as manual flash trigger. Includes 2 Nauticam fibre-optic bulkheads. Uses Seacam Hotshoe. Current list $750, Selling $400 USD I have bought and sold lots of gear on Wetpixel and have a great reputation. As always, my sales are honest and up front. Happy browsing:) ian
  25. 1 point
    very nice! thanks for sharing! Really like the movie
  26. 1 point
    I do not have a flickr or other account. Here one can view them at better quality: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4431096?page=2 Wolfgang
  27. 1 point
    Great pics! Can't wait to get back to Bonaire!
  28. 1 point
    Here are the files for 3D printing - I attach the files here: they were made with Tinkercad and are for the original Nauticam Zoom gear for Canon 8-15mm (and Tokina 10-17mm). One for 1x Smart adapter and one for 1x Smart adapter plus Kenko 1.4x teleconverter (as far as I remember this one need to be made a little bit shorter by abraser (or correct the 3D file)). For optimum fixing I treaded three tread for worm-screws into each adapter. These screws are used to fix the extension collar to the zoomgear. I also insert the files for the Tokina, just in case someone is interested. As far as I remember also these parts need a little bit of abrasing until they fit (and, of course also the worm-screws)... Canon8-15_1x_v4.stlCanon8-15_1x_K1.4x_v1.stlTokina10-17_1x_K1.4x_v1.stlTokina10-17_1x_v1.stl All of them work nicely in my hands, I let them print via the site below using the cheap standard material, but no guarantee... https://i.materialise.com/de/ Wolfgang
  29. 1 point
    That's the point I was making very little difference between m43 and APS-C with a reasonable gap to full frame and dynamic range is rarely needed, you are often stretching images for UW to bring up contrast. I am quite happy with my EM-1 II if I do the right things taking the shot, the results are excellent.
  30. 1 point
    Based on my personal experience dynamic range and to a good extent low ISO are not as important as color and tonal depth underwater because most of the shots are taken with strobes. Dynamic range is sometimes useful when you have the surface in the shot however for a sunburst the real issue is lack of shutter speed to be honest. 12 Ev of dynamic range are plentiful. I have been on the same boat with the Olympus and the Panasonic models and there is very little between them I would say Panasonic are more colorful and Olympus a tad less noisy but you rarely see the gap. The point I wanted to make is that the gap between MFT and ASPC is very little and MFT is clearly lighter on lenses, domes etc Full frame is a whole different game for ambient light and night photography however right now am going to buy a Laowa 7.5mm f/2 and try with noise reduction...
  31. 1 point
    Can the Nauticam WACP be fitted to a seacam housing ? If so what parts are needed to do this? I know nothing about Seacam and its parts. Can any of the Nauticam ports be fitted to the seacam housings via adaptors? I seem to remember reading somewhere this was possible. Thanks
  32. 1 point
    Some kind of Molex connector? Maybe some profile photos and face on might give more insight? You might be able to contact customer support at molex.
  33. 1 point
    Except Alex Mustard posted this in another thread about adaptors for Nauticam ports on Subal housings: I regularly use Nauticam ports (including the WACP) on my Subal housings (type 4 ports) - I use an adaptor from Saga
  34. 1 point
    My mother thought the same thing. She had out of focus macro pictures for at least two years while trying various solutions that didn't work. She has said that she wishes she had gone with the contacts option from the start.
  35. 1 point
    Unknown octopus species Octopus by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Octopus by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr octopus sp by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr octopus sp by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr
  36. 1 point
    Tokina 10-17mm is a fisheye lens. Fisheye lenses have huge depth of field at the cost of distortion. Your new 17-40mm is a rectilinear lens - it does correct the distortion, keeping straight lines straight, but this comes at a cost of depth of field limitations. Rectilinear lenses correct for field curvature - imagine that you're shooting a flat plane, and draw lines from your lens to the center of the subject and to the corners; depending on your distance to subject and angle of view, the difference in these distances can range from minor to very significant. Many lenses have aspherical elements in them that correct for this - while your nominal focal distance may be set to, say, 50cm, the effective focal distance at the edge will be much longer - this is how you can take a shot of something flat and have the entire image in focus. However, underwater, we're not shooting a flat subject - the refraction of light as it passes from water, into glass or acrylic and then into air works as an additional lens element that produces a curved image, where edges are closer to your lens than the center even if the subject is actually flat. Fisheye lenses have no problems with that, but rectilinear lenses need to be stopped down, so that they have sufficient depth of field to fit both the center and the edges/corners into it. Sea & Sea Internal Correction Lens is what is called a field flattener, counteracting this effect to a limited extent, but even with that add-on, shooting wide-open in domes only works if you don't care about corners (for example, if you have only water in the background and the subject fits in the center of the frame). I use a Sony 10-18mm rectilinear lens on an A6300 camera behind an 8" dome, and I keep it at f/11 most of the time.
  37. 1 point
    very nice shots, really like them!
  38. 1 point
    I’m of the understanding that a BMPCC6K housing is in the works. (From a comment I read on FB). The BMPCC6K is truly an interesting camera, I’m shocked how much more resolution it has over 4K. It’s has been shown to be a good couple stops better in low light recovery (see the Cinema5D DR tests) than the BMPCC4K but overall they are very similar in colour and DR if the exposure is same - nothing I’ve seen to be night and day differences. I see a lot of people buying the 6K to replace their 4K, but end up selling on, as it seems 6K is massively data intensive, for the end results to end up back on 4K timelines and 4K deliveries to YouTube / Vimeo etc. Alas I actually feel for underwater and my type of shooting the m43 mount size is a better bet. Can make use of the detachable WWL1, given you amazing versatility uw, has greater DoF at the same aperture etc. Not sure why we are all going FF for video (thinking S1H and the like) as for documentary / wildlife style shooting, I really don’t want to be anywhere near f2 or shallower, have hard enough time getting focus now. Really haven’t used it my as much as I had hoped TBH. Paired with my Inferno. It’s a joy in the water. if I’m honest the GH5 is a much more rounded system for the hobbyist and I should of been happy to stick with that (and it’s why I’ve also kept it) but man I wanted a play with raw shooting :-) Any questions, fire away. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  39. 1 point
    Gorgeous images. I’m heading to Moorea soon so hopefully these tips will help!! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  40. 1 point
  41. 1 point
    Sorry! I meant photo P8081277-Edit.jpg And NOW I see it! Not used to that perspective, so when we go there again next year I'll be sure to get that perspective. Thanks for teaching me to see. Tom
  42. 1 point
    I use a Sony a9 with their 28-70 and the Nauticam WACP. Results are fantastic!!! Sony's 28-70 is still sold as new lens. I'll be using this setup again this October with the tiger sharks.
  43. 1 point
    I just purchased a subscription to Lightroom so being a complete noob i plan on using some of your tutorials to learn. Thanks!
  44. 1 point
    I was hoping to get a response from the OP about what went wrong......only knowing that five minutes out of 4h was good doesn't help me suggest a better camera for him, nor even to support his assumption that the problem was the camera. Could have been camera shake, lack of sufficient light, composition, etc, many things that won't change with a different camera. Getting a new stove doesn't make you a better cook, unless the problem was the stove.
  45. 1 point
    I'm Cher from Hong Kong I'm an ecologist and designer/photographer/artist by training and have been working as a scientific diver in Hong Kong. I had to pick up dive photography for work and it turned into a great hobby to keep the job interesting on my many dives. Water quality keeps me to macro shooting most of the time. After shooting with a company owned Olympus TG-4 with just flashlights for a year and a half, I'm slowly building my own gear now as I'm starting to further my studies in marine ecology. I sometimes blog over at http://cherchow.com too! Here are some of the photos I've taken in the last year.
  46. 1 point
    Thank you for your recommendations, dreifish. Everything make sense now. I will follow your recommendations in the future. Regarding picture profile, I used standard, plus I did some color correction, but did not change saturation. By the way, I checked your YouTube channel, and watched many of your films about Raja Ampat and Komodo, and was very impressed. I wish I could create something close to it one day. Great films! Thank you again, Val
  47. 1 point
    A short video I did when in the Philippines in October of 2017. Shot using a Panasonic GH5 w/ 14-42mm lens in a Nauticam Housing. WWL-1 port and +10 (surface, +3 UW) diopter. This one features a trip to see Thresher Sharks off Malapascua.
  48. 1 point
    Hello Photographers I would like to share with you my story with YS-D2 Strobe , i have this Strobe form one and half years light used , it was so perfect with me , last time when i was diving i have a problem the strobe level control come out of control it was firing only in full power even when i adjust the control level to low power , at home i change cable and mode but still same problem ( only firing full power ) . i send email for Sea&Sea Company to tell them my issue if they can repair the strobe but until today i did not get any response from them , and i send email for the shop i buy it from he tell me the Strobe not under warranty any more , and cost for repairing this problem will be close to for the new one cost , he recommended to me buy new one. i come depressed after his email, for last chance i take the strobe for local camera shop in my country the technician say he need few days to check the strobe after 5 days they call to tell me they need to change small electronic part and interior O-ring the cost will be ( 40 $ ) . after repairing i check it at home was working very well and use it now in more than 15 dives it's working perfect Strobe before repairing Strobe after repairing
  49. 1 point
    Humans are really stupid animals.... We should enjoy what we get to see, and we have the luxury to fix these moments for others. Beeing an instructor, it was allways a have to do for me, to show people a bit about the underwater world, and to tell them how lucky we are, simply to have a chance watching this real. I have seen divers / photographers watching a scene, and while swimming away kicking the animal from ist original place.... Divers, taking a pic of a pygmy in a fan, and kicking the next fan with their fins, so if there was a pygmy, it would have thought this will be the end of the world... For the "best shot" putting animals to places they would never go... And riscing the live of that poor thing... It looks on land, like there is only me, than me and than, after a long break maybe something else... Under water without witness, it can be even worse... So ist our job to save of the underwaterworld as much as possible. To tell people what stupid things they were doing, even when this means to get unfriendly answers. Who else than a photographer archieves things there??? If you visit some places for years, you see the changes. And we can document it, and tell the people why... Sorry for the Long message, but i think ist time to give the "blue" part of the planet a bit back of what we take.... Regards, Wolfgang
  50. 1 point
    Humans are insane! I've seen do it in Indo with the flamboyant. I think the main focus point has to be: Education. PADI and any other agency, instead to brainwashing students in buying equipment, should have at least one chapter focus in Marine Bio. Because that is what divers are gonna see! We need to educate'em in the first steps of diving! and, just to answer: not biggie at all!



  • Newsletter

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