Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/13/21 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    I've done controlled tests before comparing DivePro 18k lights vs. the Gates GT14s and Keldan Luna 8s (13k lumen model). The tests are somewhat complicated by the fact that the DivePros' output is concentrated in a ~90 degree cone, similar to the Gates GT14s, while the Keldans are closer to 110 or 120 degrees. Because of this, the actual amount of light for the Keldan that falls upon the subject ends up being half what you get from the DivePro and the Gates GT14s. The difference between the Gates and DivePros was not measurable in fstops. So.. I wouldn't worry too much about the cheaper 'chinese' lights meaningfully exaggerating their light output. Keldan certainly has nicer controls and better reliability. My dive buddies and I have experienced issues with DivePro cannister lights in cold water (4 degrees) where multiple units just stopped working for no reason. Clearly, the quality control and testing under challenging conditions could use improvement. But in my view Keldan made a serious mistake by using dome ports on the front instead of flat ports. A 90 degree beam is more than enough for video unless you're filming with a fisheye. I note that the X-Lights also use a dome port, which is silly.
  2. 2 points
    Hi everyone I just released a review of the X-Adventurer M15000 underwater video light. Go check it out below!
  3. 2 points
    This has been posted before, but here's an interesting article on using the gopro for simple underwater video production: http://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special-features/article/shooting-underwater-film-gopro-indonesia/ As mentioned, even with a housing mounted cam, you really don't want to be filming the whole dive though, sounds like a logistical nightmare to get something useful out of the footage, especially if not shooting with intent and snapping strobe-lit pictures during the dive... Going for roughly 10 to 30 second clips (+handles), and up to one minute max if you want to capture a specific behaviour in more detail, all shot in between your still shots, sounds more reasonable. Having a point and shoot cam at the ready on your housing means that wouldn't need to change anything on your primary camera setup for stills, wouldn't be using up its the battery (video really shortens battery life), framing should be relatively easy, and the footage is nicely stabilised. Image quality will surely be better on a DSLR, but it also depends on what you're going after in the end. Here's some basic tips on action cams for UW use that might also be of interest (I personally don't subscribe to everything said there, and really not a fan of the word "cinematic", but it's a good introduction to a less "action-focused" use of such cams, for those of us who don't really "want to be heroes") https://youtu.be/bujdeD-DKEs https://youtu.be/9gh2ll8kPvI The original post described wanting to: - shoot occasionally, if a rare encounter/behaviour shows up and DSLR lens aren't a good fit, then maybe capture a video at less than 25m depth - occasionall, record a family video when kids snorkel - occasional (maybe) shoot some vlogging videos In this case, why not play around with a cheap housing-mounted action cam (GoPro, Paralenz, Sony...) for maximum hassle-free flexibility, shooting in ambient light in between still shots, to get a feel of what you would be doing with the clips, and the post work involved for editing and colour correction. Then maybe going for lights which you can keep as you upgrade - and eventually, if you want to dig deeper, going for good video-capable compact or a direclty something like a GH5 or Sony MFT and sharing the still/video workload? Regarding wide angle GoPro-style cams and ambient light, it also depends on conditions, what you're filming and the kind of result you're going after. In many locations, unless you have dedicated video lights powerful enough for wide angle even in the shallows, you can get acceptable results by shooting in a flat profile (limiting the adjustments the camera will try to do in terms of white balance and colour profile on a gopro this is done by turning on ProTune). You can white balance in post, but not UW. Your footage won't pop without lights, but you can definitely avoid colour casts, and if the focus is on the behaviour or the experience, it can work. Beyond the flat colour + WB profile setting on the action cam, on the GoPros you can also manually set the ISO (or leave on auto with a set minimum and maximum ISO) and also shutter speed, but aperture is indeed fixed. Main issue with the GoPro 5 up to 9 is the increased distortion in their not-as-wide "linear mode" fov, compared to the GoPro4's medium fov which was fine. The distortion is probably used to the stabilisation processed introduced - it's quite ugly on the sides at the slightest pan and the change also killed the possibility of using close-up lenses efficiently. On the TG5/6 you lose the shutter setting in video, but can set aperture to some degree and can also manually white balance underwater - sensor size is identical on TG and GoPro, but as previously mentioned, unless going for closeup (macro) video with lights, I wouldn't really bother with the TG for video for its bulk, hunting autofocus, weaker colour science, stabilisation and poor battery life when shooting video... Shooting in identical conditions, I prefer the results I got native wb on a GoPro white-balanced in post gives better results than Olympus' UW manual white balance. This here is shot on recent GoPros, mostly in ambient light, in the shallows https://youtu.be/Ftsv6a_RS3k https://youtu.be/wrUyigQwXjM These are shot in ambient light in tropical locations, 0 to 20m range, UR filter, flat settings https://youtu.be/cBl5Wc0Fscw https://youtu.be/0hwZXf4v0aE https://youtu.be/1DmbOUKrOMo If shooting mainly in Australia's more temperate and darker waters, ambient light might not be so much of an option though... There's some really sound suggestions in this thread. I'd just add that it really depends on what you're going for with the video footage. If it's too complicated to simply use your DSLR setup as-is for such purposes, a (pair of?) housing mounted action cam - that you can get real cheap second-hand since these things are really tough - if set-up and used efficiently, sounds like a good way to get some footage to work on, and then building on from there, according to your needs as they develop.
  4. 2 points
    Hey guys! I had no idea about this forum until a member on FM told me about it. I am a photographer out of NC. I mostly shoot fishing and underwater work is some of my favorite. BrookieOverUnder by Dave Fason, on Flickr franky-15 by Dave Fason, on Flickr Untitled by Dave Fason, on Flickr -Dave www.davefason.com
  5. 1 point
    A bit of news, I just picked up a Sony a1 and all the buttons work in the controls work a7s3 Nauticam Housing. Except for the controls on the left top for Still frame rate and focus, Continuous, Single and DMF and Manual.I got the a1 for surface work not UW but just tried it for fun and was soo surprised. The same experiment with the a7r4 was not as successful in the Nauticam housing. I was on the way to test the a7s3 with 16-35mm in a 180 dome (Nauticam) for balance and buoyancy in this configuration. Bad weather prevented a real field test. But this configuration balances better than the WWL-1 with a flat port and 35mm prime in fresh water IMHO. I'm back in salt water in 2 weeks, was hoping to narrow down my flying travel field kit but maybe I'll take everything! UGH!
  6. 1 point
    Nauticam Housing Notes for the Sony: Sony on/off button on housing is more robust than the Olympus, and you don’t need to lift the housing switch up before removing the camera like you do the Olympus. Sony Nauticam housing tray does not overlap the camera battery cover, so you never need to remove it. Olympus tray has to be removed from the camera every time you change the battery. Sony is slightly easier to load tray into the housing, as it does not sit as deep in. The Olympus housing has a top ball mounting hole, which is where I had my focus light mounted. The Sony housing does not have this mounting hole, so I moved my focus light ball to the plastic hot-shoe mount on the lens port, which isn’t quite as rigid. Sony housing has more robust fiber optic ports on the housing, but you have to purchase Nauticam Optical Fiber Connectors ($27) to use standard fiber optic cables. Olympus housing does not require this. The Sony nauticam flash trigger has an on/off switch that must be turned on with the housing open. The Olympus doesn’t require this when using the kit flash to fire strobes. I used to prepare my camera the night before for early morning dives, including turning on the leak detector and vacuum pumping. The green leak detection led light doesn’t seem to draw much power, as I haven’t noticed substantial battery drain doing this. I’m not sure I can do this now, as the nauticam flash trigger will be on all night inside the housing (it has a blinking green light to signal that it is ‘on’). Will have to test it out. Anyone have experience leaving the Nauticam flash trigger on overnight? Most pictures you see of the Nauticam with 28-60 lens show the focus knob installed on the port. This is optional, so I left it off until I decide whether a manual focus gear is required.
  7. 1 point
    Here are a few photos comparing the size of the Nauticam housings. Olympus on the left. Sony on the right.
  8. 1 point
    Basically Action camera have fixed focus. The sensor is so tiny and the lens so wide that they work in hyperfocal. Everything is always in focus from 25 cm (5") to infinite.
  9. 1 point
    I've had the Sony kit for a few weeks now, and have been jotting down a few notes. This is not an equipment review but rather my experience moving from the Olympus OM-D E-M1 II in a Nauticam housing with dedicated lenses and ports/domes to the Sony A7C in a Nauticam housing with the 28-60mm kit lens, WWL-1B and CMC-1. Here are a couple of photos of the Olympus on the left and Sony on the right. The Sony has a Nauticam flash trigger mounted on the hotshoe.
  10. 1 point
    I would like to thank everyone for their replies here and perspectives shared, quite helpful. Massive special thanks to bghazzal for his reply that is not only comprehensive, but really answering my exact question, taking into account my specifics. Indeed, since my main pursuit is and will remain still photography, it will take precedence and i won’t want to restrict my photo artistic options by having setup a lens that will allow video. If i see spinner dolphins... guess what i will choose between photo and video I did try the TG6 videos this WE during shallow snorkelling, Great Barrier Reef, and footage seemed of decent quality, but these really were easy/ideal conditions. I straight away noted the battery life issue, and too narrow field of view (no housing, no extra lens). I will review the video examples shared with attention, but see myself most likely go with the GoPro7 option. I do shoot mostly in darker waters though (temperate Australia) so noted the IQ will suffer on a small sensor like the GoPro’s when light is missing. With my modest needs, i think this will be ok. One point bghazzal raised and that interests me is the autofocus performance. I suspect it gets more critical on a DSLR’s shallow DOF, and more forgiving/no brainer on a small sensor, especially if using a wide lens like the GoPro’s. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. 1 point
    I've seen several posts about X-Adenturer, Weefine, Kraken, BigBlue and DivePro lights added over the last few days. As always Keldan is the elephant in the room First of all: pointing out that they are Chinese doesn't mean anything per se. Today 90% of our equipment is made in China. An iPhone is made in China. In our context, Nauticam is a Chinese company (I won't go into Hong Kong's terrible issues with Mainland China). As always the devil is in the details. Our equipment goes in salt water and given the cost, in the long run needs maintenance. So in addition to finding a product with great features, it is important to find a company that will support their products over the years and at a reasonable cost and time. As someone pointed out, sending a lamp to China for service from the U.S. / Europe has costs and times unrealistic. So it would be preferable to find a company with dealers who are also able to provide technical assistance and follow their customers. Nauticam has a worldwide network of dealers who can solve most of the problems. You are forced to send the housing to Hong Kong only for complete service and the dealer always takes care of it. Going back to the underwater lamps mentioned above, just take a tour of their websites to realize that many of their models are eerily similar if not identical. Even USA/Canada based companies, have identical lamp models except for logo customization and a few details. Moreover a quick search on AliExpress will shows dozens more unknown brands with very similar models. Have you noticed that they all have the same type of switch? A button that controls the lamp through a sequence of presses. I agree with @ChrisRoss, IMHO this is the absolute most inconvenient way to use it underwater. In the long run I have had several problems with this type of switch. They state that the lights are guaranteed 100 meters but already around 60 meters the switch does not work well. So the question I have been asking myself for a long time is: who really makes these lamps? It seems to me that Chinese and Western companies re-brand and "remake" OEM lamps with specific names, marketing and features, etc. But in reality most of the underwater lamp lines are the same. TL;DR Anyway, I too have had a couple and still have two small snoot lights that I use for macro. Some models are unbeatable value for money but in my opinion the important thing is to choose a brand with a reliable local dealer who will provide support if there are any problems. My experience on that:
  12. 1 point
  13. 1 point
    I Mike On the attached photo you can see my BCD (on the right) and my wife's one on the left. She has a Scubapro Lighthawk BCD (a semi-wing) it is a quite nice BCD. Note that the only hose you see in each of them is the regulator second stage (the second hose is connected to the air2). My wife has the Scubapro air 2 for octopus + inflator of the BCD, I have a similar system but from DiveRite. The air cells are inflated, but if you look closer into the picture, you can see that there are almost nothing on the BCD to be in front and on the sides of us.
  14. 1 point
    Underwater strobes at times are not triggered by their fiber optic cable. Several types of cables are available, and to determine which one carries the most light, I tested 4 different cables. Materials: The cables were one Toslink cable 4 mm o.d.,1 meter long (Fig 1 &2, upper left); two commercial 1.4 mm coiled multicore cables: one was labelled 1000 cores (bottom left), and one was labelled Multicore (upper right); the fourth cable (lower right) was a commercial 1.4mm coiled, single fiber cable. I used a piece of black foam rubber to hold the tips of four cables on a black background. The free cable ends were held together in front of a single bright light. I used a Nikon D500, 1/250 sec, variable f stop, for the photos. Results: It was a bit tricky to get the photos to show differences in cable brightness, as the points of light tended to appear the same, unless I played around with the f stop. The 3mm Toslink cable was the brightest, followed by the multi-strand cable, then the 1000 core cable, while the commercial single strand, coiled, 1.4 mm fiber cable was rather dim. Close up photo (as the notches are all on the same side of the lights, I suspect they are caused by some external artifact).. About 1 meter distance. Comment: These findings agree with previous Wetpixel posts that multifiber cables or 3 mm thicker Toslink cables transmit more light than single fiber coiled 1.4 mm commercial cables. The present findings are qualitative, and quantitative photometry would be better. However, the present photos show the Toslink cable transmitted the most light, followed by the multi strand cables. Conclusion: Better light transmission, toughness and low price indicate that Toslink cables, followed by multi strand cables, are a good choice to trigger UW strobes. Note: Toslink cables are available from Amazon, eBay and others as digital optical audio cable. References: 1. Erratic firing of the Backscatter Mini Flash, several excellent comments: use larger diameter f.o. cable. https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/66482-firing-backscatter-mini-flash/ 2. Dave Hicks comment. https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/66482-firing-backscatter-mini-flash/&tab=comments#comment-426656 3. Bvanant (Bill VanAntwerp) on homemade 613 fiber optic cables. https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/66482-firing-backscatter-mini-flash/&tab=comments#comment-426543 4. FO Cable Problem with strobe and Nikon z7 II. https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/67509-problem-with-strobe-and-nikon-z7-ii/&tab=comments#comment-426782 5. Excellent write up on DIY fiber optic cables, with useful comments by many Wetpixel contributors. https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/60564-diy-fiber-optic-writeup-with-parts/&tab=comments#comment-387130 6. Stuartv on fiber optic multi strand cables: https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/60564-diy-fiber-optic-writeup-with-parts/page/3/&tab=comments#comment-424488 =
  15. 1 point
    I am finally (sadly) parting with my trusty RX100V + Nauticam Housing. This is one of the best underwater camera's for the money. The focal length of the lens is perfect for scuba and works great with water optics such as the WWL-1 or WWL-C and CMC-1 or CMC-2. It's compact and takes amazing photos. Check out this instagram (https://www.instagram.com/seariously.travel/) for pictures taken with this camera (Virtually all the underwater photo's have been taken with this camera). It's definitely in used condition but everything works great and there are no scratches on the lens or either the camera or the lens part of the housing (you will notice some scratches on the window for the screen and on the camera's screen, but I've never noticed it when underwater). Below is a list of parts that I am including in the sale: Nauticam NA-RX100V Housing with Leak Detection - Paid $1,086.00 Nauticam Flexitray with Left & Right Handles and Nauticam Flexitray Mounting Balls -Paid $238.00 Nauticam LCD Magnifier + attachment rails - Paid $223.00 Nauticam M67 Port to Bayonet Mount Converter for Wet Lenses - Paid $92.00 Nauticam Bayonet Mount - Single Lens Holder for Arms with Custom 3d printed adapter to zip tie to Nauticam carbon float arm - Paid $78.00 Sony RX100V Camera - Paid $1050.00 (Now you can get for around $400-$500). 3x Sony NP-BX1/M8 Lithium-Ion X Type Battery - Paid $100.00 All this can be yours for only $1,100.00 (obo) will take Paypal, Venmo, etc... Pictures can be viewed here: https://photos.app.goo.gl/sVFwP5ufoQHSDebn9
  16. 1 point
    $159 is as much as a large Nauticam float arm; really not that much in the great scheme of things. A single Keldan 8X is over $2000.
  17. 1 point
    New package deal for the gh5 housing and camera body along with extra o rings etc. Was 3000 usd, now 2300! Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
  18. 1 point
    I don't have one myself, but I've seen a few people use this bag on day boats, and it looked like a very good solution.
  19. 1 point
    Thanks - I remember seeing these as well. Looks like they have quite a few models now: http://www.fisheye-jp.com/products/light/light.html Fisheye is also Japan's official Nauticam dealer / service centre, hence the products - but I definitely agree, most small Japanese companies are a little mysterious, even when you speak the language - they just seem to always do things their own way Recently there was some news on the Japanese UW grapevine of a new video RGBlue light aimed at professional productions, the RGBlue BlackBody (sic, ehrm...) VM2, said to give up to 20,000 lumen at either 4200K or 5000K, and all that for roughly 4,900 euros a piece: http://www.rgblue.jp/ja/products/blackbody/
  20. 1 point
    Many years ago I had a pair of Fisheye FIX lights. Light quality and build construction was really good. I see that some lights are still sold by big uw photo & video stores. They are more focused on small lights for macro work. The company remain a little mistery to me. They have their lights but they sell Nauticam housings and other gear too.
  21. 1 point
    The quality question and readiness to pay for it really depends on how critical the failure is. If I would dive a hundred bio dives per year and I would have one or two failures (and throw the lights into the bin), perhaps I would not mind this and I could even purchase couple of spare ones just to have available when needed. But, a significant amount of my dives are such that there might be just a once per season or even once per lifetime chance to dive and shoot the scenery. In such cases I am very willing to pay whatever sum (within my reach) that gives me good enough confidence that the lights will work when needed, flawlessly and predictably. Example one: once-in-a-lifetime chance to dive the Finnish flagship WWII destroyer at 80m depth, a grave of 300 soldiers. The coordinates of it are a strict state secret and punishable by minimum 6 months of prison even if one only attempts to leak the coordinates. The approximate location is somewhere in the open seas between Finland, Sweden and Estonia. After years of research and working with a number of key navy officers we were granted permission and coordinates to check that the wreck was still in a untouched condition. Nobody had scuba dived this wreck before, and maybe never will again because the coordinates were on a 8" floppy disk. Example two: progressive dives and setup dives to shoot a cave up to 860 meter penetration. I had already studied this cave a year earlier and then called together a team to spend a second week diving just this cave and penetrating each time a bit further. It was the effort of altogether six persons spending a week to get this shot, plus all diving and travel expenses. If the total cost of this expedition is in the range of tens of thousands of euros, why should I risk failure by saving a thousand euros on the lights? Really, why?
  22. 1 point
    I think it is unreasonable to throw 50$ ali express lights in the same pot with lights from Kraken/Weefine et.al. Of course at some point that logic breaks down. I still own my Weefine light (bought 3 years ago) and I am happy with it, but I am not a hardcore user with hundreds of dives a year. I think these lights are popular enough with brands that now have been around for long enough to warrant testing. As I said, I don't doubt that the Keldan lights are better, but I don't think they are that much better unless someone can actually prove that they are. I would be honestly curious to see an objective comparison. Right now all we have is opinions and we all know how much those are worth...
  23. 1 point
    Thank you for reaching out, I've bought the kit
  24. 1 point
    Starting to look forward to retirement and "post covid" traveling. We have done a fair amount of diving throughout the coral triangle. We love Lembeh, Raja Ampat, Solomons, Micronesia, even took a day to look at property in Bali. The ideal spot is somewhere we can Shore Dive! Just roll out in the morning and dive. We love Asia and have spent enough time there to know the realities of life in these areas. Once again we think Bali first but what spots are we missing??? Ideally...Shore Diving, not ALL muck diving as much as we like it. Water has to be warm, the better half wears a 6mm in 80 degree water. Some form of Villas for long term rent. Yes, I want AC and a dipping pool. Walking distance or short car/scooter ride to the store and some simple restaurant fair. We are older so don't need the crazy nightlife and bars. Any ideas? Of course always happy to hear about the dream vs. reality.
  25. 1 point
    Great review! I remember seeing these on Aliexpress for less than $500 a year ago and I thought it was too good to be true. As of this post, they are listed at $670, which is still a great value if the claimed lumens are accurate. Too bad about the blue filters cutting too much light. Based on your experience, they appear to be completely unusable.
  26. 1 point
    Two characteristics most touted by underwater lamp manufacturers are Lumen and CRI. The lumen is a measure of the total quantity of visible light emitted by a source per unit of time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(unit)). Although by now we are all used to lumen to make our comparisons, it would be more correct to use Lux (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lux). Put simply and with some approximation, the lumen measures the light emitted, the lux the light that actually hits the subject on a specific area. I know it is a difficult subject. Maybe @adamhanlon and Alex talked about it in some WP Live episode. We find out the difference in meaning between lumens and lux, when we realize that a small 1000 lumen macro lamp, concentrating all the light on a nudibranch, is able to get us to work at F16 while, at the same distance & ISO, a 10,000 lumen lamp with a 100 degree reflector can't light it enough. In our LED lights, the amount of lumens emitted depends on the characteristics of the LED module itself, the temperature and basically how much current is supplied to it. Each LED module has a datasheet with these values. Unfortunately 99% of underwater lamp manufacturers declare the lumen value simply by copying the factory data of the led module at the maximum possible current. Nothing could be further from the truth. The electronic circuitry and batteries of a lamp are rarely if ever able to provide those values and no manufacturer declares and measures the actual lumen emitted. Amen. Another important value is the CRI, on the meaning of which I will not dwell (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index). What I wrote on lumen, applies here as well. At best they quote the data of the manufacturer of the led module used. If you read the last paragraphs of the Wikipedia entry you will realize that the CRI is a much discussed and not very reliable measure for LEDs. Measuring the CRI of an underwater lamp as a finished product is not easy and I don't know how many manufacturers use specific equipment to measure it. My experience is that with the exception of Keldan, the lamps I tried had strong greenish or yellowish tints (Mediterranean waters). As I wrote in a previous post: My Panasonic GH4 and GH5 used in AWB (ok, I confess) with the old 5000 lumen keldan led module had a pixel perfect color rendition. With the new COB Led I have remove a slight yellow cast in post.
  27. 1 point
    Big Blue 2600 lumen with adapted Backscatter OS-1 snoot. Complete assembly. Front view of snoot adapter. Nylon retainer bolts Big Blue and snoot adapter, rear view. Groove forward of retainer bolts to accept snoot rubber retainer fingers. Snoot wide open, f/8, iso400, 1/80sec, range 10cm. Target circles 10, 20, 30, 50 cm diameter. Red beam with above conditions, 1/30sec Snoot aperture 5mm, f/8, iso400, 1/20sec, range 5cm for optimum beam focus on target.
  28. 1 point
    I just completed a review of the X-Adventurer M15000, used in the tropics with ambient light filters. You can check it out below
  29. 1 point
    Whow - I just watched this episode and can only say that I am impressed! I knew, from the forum here, that old Nikonos fisheyelenses can be converted to fit on modern cameras. I hear for the first time, that also rectilinear RS WA lenses can be used (and restructured as explained in the video). WA at f 2.8 at highest optical quality - so THIS is impressive. The WACP goes in similar directions (both in principle, weight and price), but good IQ at f 2.8 seems out of reach and the restructured lenses seem to be far smaller and lighter... Wolfgang
  30. 1 point
    Hi all, I'm Brian, moved to UK a year ago (right before COVID) and looking to up my UW photo skills. I've been shooting an Olympus TG-4/6 for a while now, but recently bought a housing and other bits for my Nikon D850. Itching to get back into the water and check out UK diving and start using the new toys. Brian
  31. 1 point
    In November I managed to steal an adventure from and otherwise difficult 2020. After getting Covid-19 tested, keeping a temperature log and donning two masks, I ventured to the Socorro Islands for the first time with the GH5 on the Solmar V. I head read all the report of camera housings getting taxed going through customs, but we got the green light when tapping the button and all was good! Spent 8 days aboard the Solmar V with masked crew and divers. The crew was happy to be back at sea again after being shut down for months. I was happy to be back in warm water. Below is the video of the adventure.
  32. 1 point
    Fantastic Video. Thank you for Sharing
  33. 1 point
    I adapted a Backscatter OS-1 optical snoot to my Z330 using a standard 4" PVC pipe coupler (sched 40) and machined ABS snoot connector. Snoot offset 0.5" from center, snoot attachment 2" from Z330 hood threads. Mini lathe required. The nominal 4" PVC coupler, when cut in half, gives a section 2" long with a 3.875" ID raised lip that fits snugly on the Z330 after a bit of scraping with a razor blade. The pipe coupler seats against the raised threads of the flash to keep the axis of the snoot square with the flash. Nylon screws at 3 points around the diameter hold the assembly snugly in place without marring the Z330 surfaces. Testing with a Sony a7Riii and 90 mm macro in a Seafrogs housing range to target 15 cm, OS-1 aperture 5 mm, range to target 7.5 cm.Fiberoptic trigger signal via UWTechnics fibroptic in TTL mode. TTL appears to control illumination over f5-16 although not as precisely as with wide angle. Sorry for the mixed units. PVC pipe adapter with machined ABS snoot connector, indexing nylon screw and nylon retaining screws. Groove at rear of slightly tapered connector accepts lips of snoot for firm attachment, as with the Backscatter Mini Flash. All parts fabricated with a Mini Lathe. Flat circular PVC glued to PVC coupler with standard cement. Black ABS snoot connector bolted with 4-40 from rear. Target location and framing light. Target rings 10, 20, 30, 50 mm diameter. Flash illumination. Target rings 10, 20, 30, 50 mm diameter.
  34. 1 point
    On this dive trip aboard the Wellingreng - we saw it all - from the Blue Ringed Octopus to the Ornate Ghost Pipefish. The video is pretty epic ... https://www.marksadventures.com/raja-ampat
  35. 1 point
    I knew a Canadian dive photographer (James Mathias) who spent 6 months a year in Fiji. One time he charted the entire N'AIA liveaboard. I met him on another N'AIA trip. One day he looked up from his log book and announced the next dive would be his 400th, in Fiji. He was pretty selective in his diving and photography. He skipped a number of dive sites on the Liveaboard as not good enough. At that time he was still shooting a Nikon F5 loaded with Fuji Velvia film. He did not finish a 36 exposure roll that week as he would only take a shot that he thought would better one he already had.
  36. 1 point
    For my Sony A7RIV in Nauticam housing I use: Mostly a Nauticam 140mm dome port with removable shade; and Occasionally a Subal 200mm dome with a Nauticam/Subal mount converter
  37. 1 point
    Nice work Stephen! I like the combination of top side and underwater footage. You have inspired me. Regards, Peter
  38. 1 point
    I watched the segment with great interest, a thoughtful discussion by Adam and Alex as usual. I tried it out on a couple of files from 2012, taken with my trusty old D2X. 12.2 megapixel files which up-rezzed to 40 something megapixels. They looked really good and I saw no real artefacts. Alex discussed how this was a game changer, in that a lower resolution platform, such as a D300 could become relevant again. This is an exciting concept for sure, but it ignores the fact that resolution is not the only criterion for "progress" in camera design. I currently own a D850, previously D2X, D3, D3X, D800, D810 etc and the march of progress has been undeniable. Not only with respect to resolution, but more importantly, autofocus, and dynamic range of the sensor. These attributes are not part of the Super Resolution algorithm, and are probably much more important that raw resolution. Low light performance and diffraction may be other matters though. I think for photographers just starting out, this may represent a great way into the hobby; buying older gear and housing for a fraction of the price of 'bleeding edge' gear. It might also slow down the arms race to better and newer gear each time a new camera is introduced, if the main improvement is strictly resolution. However, I feel that the D850 is currently at the top of the heap all round. It is hard to imagine much more improvement coming the way of DSLR technology. I am happy to stick with what I've got, and likely will NOT replace this camera in the future. It really seems to be a near perfect tool for the endeavour. Mirrorless may be a completely different matter:)
  39. 1 point
    Please tell us how you identified what was wrong and what you did to fix it, so the rest of us can benefit from your experience. Cheers!
  40. 1 point
    I use the Oly 9-18 as smaler solution if the Oly 7-14 with the 180 Dome is to bulky. I used it in Nauticam & Oly housing. And I like it still as the Smal solution. Works fine and it is even possible to make Splits. If you can wait, Olympus will release a 8-25 F4 this Year ...
  41. 1 point
    Hi everyone, I'm a a diver from germany who wants to try to learn how to take better pictures. I'm still at the very beginning of my journey but I hope I will find some good inspiration here :).
  42. 1 point
    Hi Chris. Just general stuff, reef shots etc....obviously not macro. I know the 8-18mm is probably the more quality lens and the 8mm fish-eye is preferable to many who don't want the recilinear image but I actually like the little 9-18mm Olympus and am just trying to establish whether the 7-14mm is a step up in quality, especially given that I have a Lumix G9 camera inside an Ikelite Housing and large 8" Dome Port.
  43. 1 point
    I have the Pana 7-14mm and my wife the Zuiko 9-18mm. We both use it behind Zen DP-170. 7mm is already so wide that the corners are not good with the 170mm dome (the DP200 is recommended for 7mm; Zen DP170 and Nauticam180 are too small. ). 9mm is better (Very similar IQ to the 7-14mm @9mm) and you can zoom out to 18mm, instead to 14mm only. Probably the Pana 8-18mm is the optimum in case you want to buy a new lens (for this lens you need the Nauticam 180 domeport), but the Zuiko 9-18mm is already very good (and goes with both Zen DP170 and Nauticam180); I would stay with 9-18mm and use the Zuiko 8mm fisheye for real very wide angle... Wolfgang
  44. 1 point
    I've been an avid diver my whole life. Exotic travel and U/W photography is my hobby. I've traveled to 88 countries - and been in all the SEAS from the Arctic to Anarctica. And just now joing Wetpixel. Mark
  45. 1 point
    A little bit of a contrary opinion, but I much prefer the Oly 30mm. I shoot an M1 in an Olympus housing with their dedicated macro port. Yeah, you give up some magnification due to the port size but it focuses so much faster than the 60 that my hit rate goes up considerably. It's my default night dive lens because- in the PNW- you never know what you're going to get, from fish portraits to nudis to what have you. Plus, it's a cheap lens- no reason not to pick it up and do some experimentin'.
  46. 1 point
    Thank you all for insightful feedback on equipment and technique. You brought forward some considerations I hadn’t thought of, and your responses are much appreciated. I’ve decided to proceed with the A7C + 28-60 + WWL. I’ll use the A7C kit for a month or so to confirm if the performance enhancements balance the limitations of full-frame. If the A7C works out for me, as I hope, I’ll keep it and sell my Olympus kit. If the A7C does not work out for me, I’ll sell the A7C kit and upgrade to a Zen 170 dome for the 12-40. I consider this a learning exercise with no wrong result...albeit an expensive learning exercise
  47. 1 point
    This is a no brainer to me, first I used the Olympus line for years including the EM-1 II and also the WWL-1with EM1 II you can find those reviews in the back issues at uwpmag.com. I am also probably the only one on this site that has used the Sony A7C, FE 28-60mm zoom and WWL-1. The only real question here is do I want to stay with a smaller format sensor or go to full frame with its added issues. Bottom line is that the A7C is faster, smaller and has noticeably better image quality as most FF cameras do when compared to sub-full-frame. I have heard all the arguments for both formats but the bottom line is that if your top priorities are speed and IQ the Sony A7C is just better. While many DSLR users will argue that size should not be a large issue when selecting a U/W camera I believe they are forgetting why many of the older ones left film cameras in large housings and went to the Nikonos RS system. My spell check does not even recognize the word Nikonos but I would venture to say that more than half of the published U/W photo pro's were using the RS system before they went to digital. I would also bet that one of the top reasons for using the Nikonos RS SLR camera body and lenses was reduced the size and weight of the system. I would guess the top reason was the quality of the water contact optics which won out over AF speed because they were more than a bit slow.
  48. 1 point
    Hi Chris, I typically shoot in the mornings in clear water, so not nearly night conditions, but there can be issues with early morning contrast between animals and the dark blue horizontal backdrop. Here are two photos I took this weekend one day apart at the same dive site fully zoomed in at f6.3 and 1/160. I lightly white balanced these in LR, otherwise they’re pure in all their rough glory. Day 1: The group of 7 dolphins were taken with the 14-42 at 42mm with the WWL at 8:30AM f6.3 1/160th ISO 640 (auto-iso) Day 2: The tiger was taken with the 12-40 PRO zoomed to 40mm at noon, so more light. f6.3 1/160th ISO 160 (auto-iso) Also on day 2, some playful dolphins made very close runs. I had the 12-40, so can’t compare to the 14-42 close up, but this illustrates how well the 12-40 performs at ISO 640. Fast moving dolphins, and the bulk of my shots were sharp. Zoomed to 22mm. Slight crop in LR. f6.3 1/250 ISO 640
  49. 1 point
    Hi I agree about Philippines or Indonesia. We spent time at Dumaguete / Dauin and have talked about your idea. Have a look at the two eBooks we wrote about SEAsia diving. https://photojourney.smiliemail.org/gallery/ Maybe Thailand as well?
  50. 1 point
    Enjoyed Bonaire but Southeast Asia has spoiled us. Actually the Philippines is an area we should investigate more. We went to Dumaguete once and enjoyed it.

Sponsors

Advertisements



  • Newsletter

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