Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/20/19 in all areas

  1. 5 points
    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
  2. 4 points
    I took a trip aboard the MSY Seahorse in the Banda Sea back in late September/early October. The primary goal of such a trip is to see schooling hammerhead sharks. This was my second attempt and managed to get some good footage of them. It's really quite a challenge to capture them well as you never know when they will show up and how close they'll be. The GH5 has a hard time focusing on such a subject in the water column at a distance. My strategy each dive was to swim off the wall, turn around and focus the lens on a contrasty area on the verge of visibility. Then, I would keep my fingers away from the focus lever for the rest of the dive! When we finally encountered the school, I had to make a few short fin kicks towards them till the focus peaking appeared around them on the monitor, then pressed record! Here is the video of the trip. Comments and critiques are welcomed.
  3. 4 points
    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!
  4. 4 points
    Thought i'd posted this before but i don't think i did. A slightly-too-long compilation of 3 days of Oceanic Mantas at Black Rock in the Mergui Archipelago, Myanmar. Very unusual trip in that (i) lots of mantas there and (ii) the visibility wasnt 5m of green for once! Underwater shot with a Canon EOS70D with and without a magic filter. I know there are frame rate stutter issues in places. No sound track as i dont actually have any music stored locally to put onto the footage.
  5. 4 points
    Hi, a video from my 2nd winter stay at East Greenland. We dove in the fjord in front of Tasiilaq. My plan for this video was to capture the elemental force in this region. I wanted to show time lapses of moving ice during the tides, under- and above water, and mix impressive icebergs with macro footage. A big thank you to Sven from Northern Explorers who supported my ideas and let me do what I wanted! The video is actually in the order as i experienced the trip. As i arrived we still had some left over packice. a few days later the winds brought icebergs in the fjord. After a week hundreds of iceberg right next each other were stranded in a bay. Unfortunately the last week the climate change said hello, and we had unusual warm weather for this time of the season and rain. We can´t went out on the snow mobiles anymore, because all the snow was melted away in only a few days.. And at the dive spots which were in walking distance, the viz droped to 5 meters due the melting water which were washed in the ocean. The video was shot in 7 to 8 days, on 13 dives. Enjoy watching! Alex.
  6. 4 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
  7. 4 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
  8. 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/
  9. 3 points
    I've used the WACP with 28-70mm on several trips over the past year and am impressed with its versatility of FOV range. I believe that is about as close as you’ll get to having your cake and eating it; for now, with full frame. Some examples. At the narrow end (70mm->75degrees): http://www.underwaterdisplay.net/dive63/FJ190513_3215.jpg http://www.underwaterdisplay.net/dive63/FJ190514_3382.jpg At the wide end (28mm->130degrees): http://www.underwaterdisplay.net/dive64/MOR20191007_5670.jpg http://www.underwaterdisplay.net/dive64/MOR20191004_4678.jpg Downside is weight in lugging this beast down a beach but once in the water it’s a thing of beauty. In Moorea recently we did a lot of swimming in the blue and there wasn’t much difference in water resistance (possibly less) between my rig and those using large domes.
  10. 3 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.
  11. 3 points
    female paper nautilus/Argonaut riding plastic trash. Although I did see many riding their normal jellyfish, this one made me sad considering the amount of trash we are putting into the world and our oceans. Female Paper Nautilus by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr paper nautilus/argonaut with plastic trash by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr Female Paper Nautilus by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr
  12. 2 points
    Get a strobe. Start with one and begin to learn. You will not be happy with your photos otherwise. With a bit of practice you'll start to take some pictures that will be really great. Add a second strobe later on when you are ready for more dramatic shots.
  13. 2 points
    I really like my Sony. The a6000 is a 2014 camera, so not really the latest tech. Also switching to a different brand and get the equivalent (dry land) lenses just because a particular housing was cheap, I don't think I'd save money. I wouldn't switch to a smaller sensor, I wouldn't probably switch to full frame either. I definitely wouldn't switch to DSLR, because I've never had one and mirrorless just makes much more sense to me. So my switching options would be limited Fuji and Canon, and I probably wouldn't accept just any one of those. However I might start looking for used housings for Sony as well. I could upgrade the body, especially to an a6500 for IBIS, or a6600 but that is the latest tech... I have never touched a pro brand housing and I have no idea what it is that makes up the retail price. For me the cheap chinese seems to be doing everything a housing should do, maybe just not the exact same quality as the pro stuff. I'm not that interested in adapting lenses so the available SeaFrogs ports are enough. The same housing even lets me upgrade the camera body up to a6400/a6500. Sure I could see some of the pro stuff being the same and would be surprised if not. Maybe that's just another future upgrade, but as of now I think I'll stick to the plan. Ok wow, now that you said it like the tenth time I had to take a closer look Earlier I Googled it and closed the browser tab when I saw the price. So there's more optics in this thing than just flat rear and dome front glass... I thought that all domes are, well just domes and Meikon did their best in making a chinese copy. Now I know what I'm doing. Thank you. - I'll buy a diopter and a flip adapter. Shoot from quite small to medium sized subjects. - I'll try something with the DIY lights, probably won't ever be powerful enough to do much for wide angle shooting. - Keep searching for used strobes and eventually upgrade to those. Good ones. - For a wet dome I'll search for a used WWL-1. - Maybe upgrade the housing in some point and buy some lenses, but although I thought this is where to start, this is actually the last thing to worry when trying to get better shots on somewhat a low budget. I could buy the Meikon dome for starters, but as I am traveling with two backpacks it's nice to not carry a large piece like that. I might need a bigger backpack when I start to collect more gear. If I'll get the 10 - 18 for wide angle I would get a dome port, possibly an 8" one to allow for over/under shots, so that's skipping the WWL-1. I also need my own scuba equipment, including a dry suit for Nordic diving. Practise makes perfection and rental gear guided fun dives makes a lot of spending on practise, also won't be able to spend time on a single subject as the group will keep moving. So even if I could improve my underwater shooting with not so expensive investments, all in all I have a lot to spend on. Also my motorcycle needs a new motor. And that's just for my hobbies. Did I mention I don't make a lot of money as I mainly work to just get by? I have really chosen the worst hobbies to go with my work ethics... So I might be annoying on this forum for quite a while before I have anything to call a complete setup. Have we come to a consensus? Thank you so much everyone!
  14. 2 points
    Thank you all for your interest in my article in UWPMAG.com. Your questions for the most part address the Sony A7R IV and the Sony FE 90mm F/2.8 macro lens. So let me start off by saying that I am Senior Reviewer for uwpmag.com and I have done over eighty equipment reviews for this magazine alone. Most of my reviews address mirrorless cameras from a number of manufactures and that I have not done much with Panasonic because the Editor is a Pana user and covers that equipment. Most if not all of the questions you have ask are answered in those reviews so I will highlight some of the specific issues you have ask about. First is the issue of comparing apples to apples. I am a big fan of 4/3 and M43 having moved from the Nikonos RS film camera to Olympus 43 (E-1, E-300, E330 E-3) as my first digital cameras. I later migrated to M43 with the first camera with an Olympus housing. So first I can assure you that shooting with M43 is not at all like using Full Frame or Medium Format. Both FF and MF require much more critical focus than M43 or even APS-C. The first Sony FF cameras I reviewed were the A7R II and A7 II with the Sony FE 90mm macro. At that time I said that the 90mm macro was the best macro lens I have ever used, prior to that it was the Olympus 50mm F/2 for 4/3. I have never said that the Sony 90 macro was the fastest macro lens I have ever used so let me clarify that distinction. With each new A7R the auto focus has improved and the recent firmware update for A7R III has made the camera even better but not as good as the RIV. As I covered extensively in both of my A7R IV reviews I have completely changed my auto focus setting preferences. With Olympus EM-5, EM-5 II, EM-1, EM1 II, Sony A7R II & III, Nikon Z-7, Canon EOS R and more I have always used AF-S with back focus because that was what worked best for me while reviewing equipment. I also had a manual focus gear for most of those reviews which I used with subjects in the 1:2 to super macro range. I have now gone to what Sony calls AF-C (auto focus continues) and Tracking: Flexible Spot S (also implemented in the A6400 & A6600). This has allowed me to abandon rear focus and I have yet the use the manual focus gear. I want to make this clear, other brands like Olympus have similar focus settings but they have just not worked all that well for me. Sony is a clear leader in the area of auto focus tech and to say that all mirrorless systems have adopted EYE AF may be true but they just don't rise to the quality of the Sony EYE AF. Sony has two native FE macro lenses the 50mm F/2.8 and the 90mm F/2.8 both of which are class leading. With the A7R IV you can toggle between 61MP FF and 26+MP APS-C which gives an equivalent 90 & 135 or 50 & 75. My personal preference is for the 90 over 100/105 because of the wider AOV, they all end up at 1:1 so you have a slightly wider range without having much closer. As a point of reference I have used the Nauticam SMC-2 with excellent results. That is more than enough magnification for me. Regarding adapted lenses like I used for my Canon EOS R and Nikon Z-7 reviews they are just not the same. Mirrorless lens design is just different from DSLR lens design. So while adapted lenses are quite expectable (I use the Canon 8-15 Fisheye zoom with Metabones for Sony) they will never be as good as like quality lenses designed for mirrorless. When Canon and Nikon introduced DSLR's they kept the same lens mount so film users migrate film lenses. How many photographers are still using film lenses on DSLR's only those that have converted Nikonos or Nikonos RS lenses for underwater use. I have done 1000's of dives with Olympus gear and I can assure you that it works very well but is not up to the current Sony standard for AF. Last I am not sponsored by anyone and while I have an opportunity to test a wide range of equipment the equipment I own I paid for just like everyone else. I was accused of being an Olympus fanboy for years and now the same is true of Sony. The truth is I buy what works best for me, I went back to Olympus after a short stint with the Sony A7R II/A7 II productivity decreased. Since the release of A7R III I have been all in with Sony. That does not mean that I would not switch again if someone builds a better mousetrap. All photos with the Sony 90 macro and Backscatter MF-1 flash.
  15. 2 points
    ATTENTION AMATEUR & PRO UW PHOTOGRAPHERS planning a trip to Baja Mexico: Now that I have returned from Baja California, Mexico, here is what I know 1st hand. If you fly into Cabo San Lucas or into La Paz, Mexico, expect to pay a fee if the Customs agents stop you and notice that you have an underwater housing. The agent will Google the housing to see it’s worth, then demand that you pay 16% of that price. Many new DSLR UW housings are $4,000 or more. You will pay $640 US dollars to use that fancy new housing in Baja Mexico. The customs agent will also show you an official document in English that states you may bring in 2 cameras and the accoutrements involved, but the underwater housing is a fee by Mexican law. I ran into a pro photographer I know who happened to be staying in the same hotel. He was leading a small underwater photo tour in La Paz. The vacationers were all from Switzerland and they all told me that they had to pay exorbitant fees for their camera housings and their video housings at La Paz airport even though they were all amateurs themselves. Customs officials are targeting underwater photographers at the airport in Cabo San Lucas and in La Paz. If you have a hard-sided protective travel case for your gear they will stop you. The customs agent said I was allowed 2 cameras and the things that go along with that, BUT an underwater housing must be taxed by Mexican customs laws even if you are not a professional. He showed me the document in writing about this customs law. I told the officer that I was NOT a pro photographer, but the document he showed me specifies underwater housings as a taxable item. I told the officer that my housing was old and maybe worth $200 which is true since it is about 7 years old. He got out his cell phone and looked up the model name and number (Olympus PT-EP08 UW case for E-M5) and said it was worth at least $300. In order for me to enter the country and use MY OWN underwater camera case for personal use (I do not earn a living by photography nor do I sell my photos online or in another way) I had to pay $50 US dollars to keep my housing with me. FYI: Customs officers in Cabo San Lucas airport take credit cards for this "Photographer's Fee". Even though Cabo/La Paz is the nearest warm water diving destination to my home, this will be my last vacation here for underwater photography. If you have a nondescript, soft-sided carry-on suitcase that you can carry all of you underwater housings in, then do it. If you have to check your underwater housings through with a hard case and your dive gear is packed in a bag with a diving insignia on it, they will stop you. If they find an underwater camera housing in you luggage, the Mexican authorities will nail you for 16% of the value of that housing at the price that they find online.
  16. 2 points
    Keldan sell float rings for their lights buy them as the lights have torque that will bend your arms The WWL-1 with the collar together with the 35 macro port and the 14-42 MkII is 880 grams negative in fresh water in total you will need 2 KG of lift muvh better to balance the lights and the housing separately and keep the arms light
  17. 2 points
    I hope this input is not too late to accommodate in your test. I believe It is important to have a reference color to ensure that your WB is done correctly. You could use any reference chart or object (with the most dominant colors: Red, Blue, Green). Earlier I used 3 small cut outs of foam with lead attached. Now, I am using the Xrite Passport video color checker. It has a gray card and a focus card as well. It can last 3-5 years with good care. Now they even have a nano version and there are alternatives in the market. I used the color checker for my Davinci Resolve workflow. It can get you to a good start for color correction. The other point is to try to do a manual WB without a red filter. Red filter can take away about 2 fstops. With lights you really don’t need a red filter in my opinion cause the artificial light should bring the colors back as far as the lights can go. If you are trying red filter to bring the colors beyond the reach out of the light, it is a different story and quite complicated hence you need to attach blue filters to your lights. I do not trust the Kelvin rating of lights manufacturers usually - that’s why manual WB is needed. You need to try the MWB at a greater depth like 30m in addition to the depths you mentioned. Here is a link I on the color checker subject - you’ll find a link on the top of the page: Regards, Thani
  18. 2 points
    For photo only: Nikon D850 or Sony A7RIV. Probably leaning towards the Nikon for Macro and the Sony otherwise, simply because of past experience with the 90mm macro focusing on the sony A7RII. Unless it's significantly improved as Simon has heard, in which case I don't see much benefit to the D850. But I'd be happy with either if all I was shooting is photos. In terms of lens selection, the Canon 8-15 works great on the A7RIV with adapter, the Sony 16-35F4 worked great for wide angle for me in the past (I prefer it to the Nikon 16-35F4), even with a 180mm dome, and the Sony 90mm macro is a great lens, albeit it slow to focus on the older sony A7RII/A7RIII. For video predominantly: Probably Panasonic S1R today or wait for Canon 1DX Mark III. Stabilization is important, adopted lenses are fine on the S1R. But I tend to agree with Interceptor21 that full frame may not be the best option for video, and there's a lot of interesting m4/3 and s35/aps-c options out there. Also, if you're shooting predominantly video, I think an argument should be made to go for a purely video camera rather than a hybrid. I'd take a hard look at the BMPCC 4K and 6k and the ZCAM E2 (along with the GH5, which I own). The Canon C500 Mark II looks very tempting if you've got that sort of budget. If shooting 50/50 Photo/Video: ???? I don't think currently a great full frame option exists. The Panasonic S1R arguably, though I'd prefer to have higher resolution for the photo side. Sony white balance isn't great, and none of their offerings even shoot 4k60, which I've come to love on the GH5, so I wouldn't 'upgrade' to any camera for video that didn't at least have 4k60, stabilization, and prefereably a raw codec. For photos, I'd like to have >= 36mpix. I guess the Panasonic S1R technically meets those specifications, if shooting video in the 4k mode, but no higher bit rate options at 4k60 and no raw. One can hope that the Sony A7SIII when it finally comes around gives us a 36mpix sensor, sensor stabilizaton, 8k30/4k120 (or at least 60) and some form of raw recording. Now that would be perfect. But so long as it doesn't have raw and the sony white balance remains as it is today, I won't be buying it either. What's conspicuously missing from all the above categories IMO is anything from Nikon & Sony's new mirrorless range. Lens selection for these cameras may be fine, but there's nothing particularly compelling about the Z6, Z7 or EOS R for either underwater photos, videos or in a hybrid role.
  19. 2 points
    If one dome is 10 cm radius and the other is 12 with the same lens you need two cm more. Fisheye lenses tend to have the entrance pupil right at the end of the lens you can find those on panotools https://wiki.panotools.org/Entrance_Pupil_Database#First_party_lenses For a fisheye lens generally you can try the longest extension until it sees the petals and vignettes and this gives you the best set up. On a fisheye lens I doubt you will be able to see the difference between a 10 cm and 12 cm radius but for a rectilinear lens those 2 cm are worth times 4 for focus distance. You should double check you are using the superdome with the correct extension for the rectilinear lens. In general 20 mm is not very wide however and large domes are not so important. Looking at this lens the entrance pupil is probably inside the housing so if you were using extensions (that will not vignette as the dome is huge) you are probably in a situation where the lens has a lot of distortion and the quality is compromised. Looking at entrance pupils of other nikon prime lenses they all look pretty poor performers. Zoom like 10-24 or 14-24 that are longer lenses will most likely do better at least at wide end due to the geometry of the housing. As you can read I do a lot of tests in the sink or pools....
  20. 2 points
    @Interceptor121 Have you tried the A7rIII? I'd welcome any tips. Rather than hijacking this thread, I'll just add a link to a blog post I wrote on this specific topic https://naturetripper.com/underwater-macro-photography/ Anyway, I've read in reviews that the A7rIV is an improvement. That'd be good. (Sorry, Adam, for going off-topic here.)
  21. 2 points
    The Sony's are AWSOME! I've been using the A9, A9II, A7IV and RX100 VII with Ikelite housings. The AF just doesn't miss. Fantastic in lowlight too.I switched from the Canon G7II and couldn't be happier.
  22. 2 points
    I can see both sides of the coin as im a photographer (or claim to be) and also a guide. Personally when ive got my full camera setup in photographer mode i would NOT want to guide me. No matter how much i try to be a good buddy and good group person i simply cant pull it off. As advice above, going when its quiet OR getting a private guide is often the only sensible option. Speaking as a guide its a nightmare when you have a group of "normal" divers who want a tour and 1 proper photographer with a camera. Its impossible to please both.
  23. 2 points
    Hmm. I'll throw in my two cents, but I've not shot the new mirrorless cameras, nor do I feel any particular desire to. I've been shooting Nikon DSLR since 2004, and Nikon SLR since 1992. My mirrorless experience has all been with point-n-shoot cameras, mostly Canon, and then a Sony RX100 II. I've shot all of those mirrorless cameras underwater, and the Nikon D810 and D850 also. Initially I was drawn to mirrorless (point-n-shoots) for IQ and price. IQ meaning 'better than the ISO400 disposable film camera' I used first. But I was drawn to the live view experience as well, being able to see my composition in the rear LCD while swimming along or just holding the camera out with one hand. Ultimately I was tired of missing the shots I so often missed with point-n-shoots, due to poor autofocus. This colors my perceptions somewhat as I became more and more demanding of a camera that quickly and precisely focused where I wanted it. Eye of a critter peeking out from behind something - wide point-n-shoot autofocus couldn't capture that. Fish swimming by - seems to get a lot of shots of fish tails swimming out of frame. I also got tired of the lack of colors, so I took the next step up: went to a 1" sensor (RX100) and added flash (dual YS-D1 strobes). The total cost of camera and rig (included a couple of wet lenses for macro and wide angle I never ended up using) was $5000. Nauticam housing. What I got was a nicer point-n-shoot that had huge advances over my previous cameras only because of adding flash. Autofocus was still too slow. So MY choice was to get one of my DSLR's underwater so that I could finally resolve my autofocus issues. I bought a D810 Nauticam housing, a 105mm macro port and a 230mm dome port. Here's where I can give some advice. I really wanted much better autofocus with the DSLR, and I got it. I also added an expensive high-eyepoint eyepiece so I could more easily see everything from behind my mask. I spent a lot of money for this capability, and for macro I pretty much got what I wanted. For wide angle, not so much, until recently. The recent addition was a Sea and Sea internal correction lens that really, really, really works well and fixes my corner issues with the 16-35 in the dome port. Should you end up with the Canon 16-35 in a full frame camera behind a big dome, you would be well-advised to get this correction lens too. OK - so here's what I gave up, and you should be aware of these tradeoffs too, if not already from your current rig. 1. video. Yes, I can do video with the D810 or D850, but to be honest, mirrorless cameras have always been easier to shoot and tend to have better video autofocus. With any of my point-n-shoots I felt right at home switching to video mid-dive and filming a video sequence. The autofocus on the D850 during video is almost unusable, especially if the camera is also moving. In general, it's much more limiting. 2. focal range. All my mirrorless cameras had a mildly-wide to moderate telephoto zoom lens. To do wide angle, I needed a wet lens. To do macro, I needed a wet lens too. My DSLR choices are the opposite - no choices in the middle. I'm either wide to very wide (16-35) or I'm macro with the 105vr. The Canon choice would be the 90mm macro, and I think that's too short for full-frame. 3. travel-friendliness. I bet your current rig fits in a carry-on, or at least a suitcase. Mine doesn't. I use all of one roller bag for the housing, dome port, strobes and a few odds and ends. I put the camera in the housing, with a lens (or port) attached. I put the lenses and backup camera (RX100, in its small housing) in a waist bag, and then I still have the macro port and 90mm dome port extension (filled with clamps) in a suitcase. If you go full-frame, you go BIG. You also tend to have less lens choices. I'm very pleased with the quality of the shots I get now, but the cost in $, size and weight is up there. A compromise well worth looking at is a DX/APS-C format DSLR. In the Nikon world that would a D500. With a DX/APS-C format camera (mirrorless or not) you get noticeably smaller wide angle options. You also get more focal range options. You still have autofocus during video issues (with Nikon, not sure about Canon here). If you value video a lot, lean toward mirrorless. If you value stills, lean toward a DSLR. That's primarily on the basis of better autofocus performance. Consider also that systems designed for mirrorless (including the lenses) may focus silently, while older design DSLR lenses can have a lot of audible clicking and whirring while focusing.
  24. 2 points
    Hey guys! My name is Tom Park and i'm a Dive Master and Pro Underwater Photographer from Australia. I get asked this all the time so I made a video with my top 5 tips and tricks to improve your UW photos. I hope you all enjoy and learn something from this Happy shooting! Tom
  25. 2 points
    1. The color chart isn't necessary. It's there to confirm the accuracy of the technique. 2. The technique as I understand it requires multiple pictures of the same object from different distances in order to reverse-engineer the water filtration factor by comparing the colors of that object (or pixel) from different distances. 3. The advantage over a simple white balance as far as I understand is that it depth-maps all the elements in the picture in 3d space and appropriately color-corrects for all of them depending on the amount of water between that object and the camera. So you'd see warm colors extending far into the background, not just for the foreground subject as you would get with a normal white balance off a grey card at foreground distance. 4. For photos this process is rather cumbersome as it forces you to take multiple pictures of the same subject from different distances. So it will not provide a 1-click adjustment for photos in its current form. 5. For video however, this could be brilliant if your video clip involves movement anyway, as you can get a lot of distance information from subsequent frames of the video (the same way you can get 3d mapping from a moving video clip when doing photogametry). So potentially this could be implemented as a 1-click solution for a video file. Though it would obviously work better raw video.
  26. 2 points
    It takes a loooong time to get to the Maldives (south of India in case you didn't know) but the diving is fabulous, the people are wonderful, and it's well worth the effort. We just got back from 9 days on the Manthiri, had a fabulous time, and wanted to share our experiences with you. Below you'll find the links to the trip report as well as the overall picture page, which contains 12 teaser pix plus links to the full SmugMug slideshow (view it as a single-page collage, click on individual pix for full-screen, or choose "slideshow"). There are also links to the five short videos we created during the trip as well, which includes the Manta Feeding Aggregation at Raa Atoll (even though the title says Baa). You've got to look at at east that one. WAAAAY cool and amazing experience. Enjoy!!! And let me know if you have question or comments (or want to reserve your spot now for our next journey there). MALDIVES 2019 TRIP REPORT MALDIVES 2019 PIX PAGE: 12 TEASER PIX with SMGMUG & VIDEO LINKS - Ken
  27. 2 points
    Allow me to suggest that you don’t always want “flat and even” lighting, for macro unless you want to produce straightforward ID images. Light and shadow need to be balanced. Backscatter needs to be managed. Backgrounds often need to be minimized. These objectives are not usually compatible with “flat and even” light. I had been pursuing the same goal. Most images were OK, some better than that, but few were outstanding. My biggest revelation came on a weekend when I (inexplicably) left my strobe arms at home, and had to jury rig one strobe to the cold shoe on top of the housing, literally strapped to the focus light mount with duct tape with no ability to swivel downward. I figured what the heck, it was worth a try. Somehow, I stumbled on a lighting setup that used the very edge of the light and produced better images than I had been making. Two examples below. Now I actively try to use just the edge of light when possible, aiming the strobes slightly outward or upward. Remember that strobes produce a cone of light at about 90-100 degrees. You also want the front of the strobe just behind the front of the port. I like them at 10 and 2 o’clock because it seems more natural to my eye to have the light coming from above the subject. I also frequently turn one strobe off, or turn one down to several stops if the shadows are too harsh. There are other ways to set up that might seem counterintuitive. Martin Edge’s book The Underwater Photographer and Ales Mustard’s book Underwater Photography Master Class both have lots of good material on strobe positioning. There are many good tutorials on this and other topics available on line: Backscatter tutorials UW Photo Guide tutorials Dive Photo Guide tutorials Good luck, and have fun!
  28. 2 points
    I used only loc-line parts (and some additional screews to create a quadropod. I used 1/2 " parts but perhaps 3/4" would be more stable. It was very easy to assemble. You can see it in work in this video:
  29. 2 points
    Here my 2 cents on the excessive noise problem with small sensors: Trimix-Wolfgang's observations on excessive noise with MFT are supported by the testshots of DPReview, so this are not just subjective impressions and his observations are substantial. This is, however, only the case when comparing the cameras at the original manufacturers ISO settings. To have a look on your own, open this link: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dc-gh5s-review/6. Select as cameras OMD-10III (similar sensor as EM5), EM1II (for best MFT sensor), D500 (for Z50 comparison, likely similar sensor) and D850 (for FF reference). When selecting ISO100 and pushing up exposure +6EV with the Nikons, and ISO200 (=base ISO with olys) and +5EV with olys, one can see excess noise with olys and D500 performs much better as expected by the small difference in physical sensor size (384% for FX, 165% for DX and 100% for MFT): Manufactureres ISO settings can, however, not always directly be compared: DxO measure the actual ISO sensitivity by themselves to make the ISO information provided by the manufacturers comparable. Then, at comparable ISO sensitivity, the SNR of D500 is almost identical to EM1II. According to DxO an ISO200 at the EM1II is in fact ISO83 (="DxO ISO ?"), ISO100 in D500 and D850 correspond to ISO70: Wolfgang
  30. 2 points
    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!
  31. 2 points
    I use this project suggested in one the several threads on the topic It's perfect for my needs and very cheap
  32. 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
  33. 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.
  34. 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.
  35. 2 points
    Hi to all, here https://www.flickr.com/photos/scipio2010/albums/72157709339258021you can see my first pictures shot with a Nikon D850 in Nauticam housing, during Macromania 2019 in Puerto Galera, Mindoro island, Philippines Scipionems
  36. 2 points
    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
  37. 2 points
    I put together my first kit in early 2016. At the time, I believe the Sony A7II was the only full frame mirrorless choice out there. I went back and forth doing hours upon hours of research. It finally came down to a choice between the A7RII and the Olympus EM-1. I wound up choosing the EM-1. Price was a considerable factor. Not only was the Sony body more expensive, but the glass was much more expensive as well. And heavier. From a travel perspective, the M4/3 body and lenses are a heck of a lot smaller and lighter to lug around. At the time, there was not a whole lot of great native Sony glass to pair up with the A7... I would imagine that has changed, but I can't say that I am super familiar with Sony lens offerings currently. Certainly M4/3 have TONS of great lens choices that are tried and true for underwater applications. I have been SUPER happy with my EM-1. Obviously nowadays, you can get the mark II, which has a slightly higher MP sensor (20 vs 16). However, aside from a faster AF, I'm not sure how many of the other modest improvements are going to make any difference to you underwater. And, if you can stomach not HAVING to have the newest model, you'll surely find EM1 bodies and housings in the classifieds for a fraction of what you'll pay for a new body and housing. For me, the 16 MP sensor has worked well enough. I have made prints that I've hung at my office up to 24x36 inches at 300 DPI. Obviously you can't crop as much as you'd be able to crop with the A7RIII, but unless you are planning on making HUGE prints, all a 42 MP sensor is going to do is fill up your SD card faster. Also, do not forget that the EM-1 allows strobe syncing up to 1/320th of a second, which outperforms most other higher end offerings on the market. My final plug for the EM-1 is that the ability to change shooting parameters (aperture, shutter speed) on the fly is BRILLIANTLY easy. Regarding Nauticam vs Ikelite, I've only used Nauticam, so cannot compare the two. But my wife and I both shoot an EM1 in Nauticam and everything has been bullet proof. Vacuum pump and leak sensor are a no brainer. I agree with bill1946, SS YSD2 are a great bang for the buck and have worked very well for me. I have over 200 dives in with my older non-J D2s and haven't had any issues. Obviously numerous posts around these forums will cast some doubt in your mind about D2 reliability. If I had to do it over again, it would be between YSD2 and some RETRAs. Hope this helps!
  38. 2 points
    Few things: Using the 45 viewfinder for macro does take some time to learn, but makes it much better to frame shots once you get used to it. When I first read that you were bumping up against the viewfinder and that it caused a leak I thought you were talking about the housing - but then realized you were talking about your mask. My mask is up against the 45 viewfinder on every shot - haven't had this problem before... 45 vs. 180 viewfinder: I own both, and have used both, but after getting used to the 45 I've basically put the 180 on the shelf and use the 45 exclusively for macro and wide angle. Lots of folks are going to tell you that the 45 is for macro - the fact that I can rotate the viewfinder so I can easily shoot either portrait or landscape while basically staying in the same orientation to my subject ends up being great for wide angle. Also - when shooting subjects at the surface (my family was in both Moorea and Tetiaroa last year shooting humpbacks) the 45 is perfect, because you can float on the surface and shoot with the camera just below the surface (although we spent a lot of the time either shooting slightly downwards where the viewfinder doesn't help as much, or shooting level while free diving to about 10-15 feet - where the viewfinder is fine). Lighting while shooting humpbacks and sharks in French Polynesia: While shooting the humpbacks I think you are already know that you won't be carrying any lights (strobes, lights, etc.). You are going to swim, and swim some more, and yet swim even more to both get close to the whales and position yourself so that can shoot side on or face on. You are going to want to push the minimum amount of camera gear through the water. It's all ambient light shooting. For shooting the sharks at Fakarava and Rangiroa - I would absolutely take your strobes. Even a small amount of strobe lighting helps freeze the outer edges of the sharks against the water background. Because you will be shooting through several feet of water it will make a big difference (and if you shoot on the outer edges of the passes, you will be deep). Weight restrictions are reasonable on the inter-island flights, and scuba divers can check in an extra 5kg of baggage (on the larger planes). Maldives entries: I've been to the Maldives a number of times, and never had an issue with having my camera handed down to me (via the braided handle clipped near both ball mounts). Some of the dives can be "negative entry" - but never to the point where you couldn't quickly return to the surface to collect your camera. Personally, I would never jump off a boat with my housing, strobes, etc. I have made some "quick entries" sliding off a boat to get shots of dolphins or a manta swimming by, but that's been while snorkeling. Last - you can shoot as many or as few subjects as you want on a dive. However, Anilao is very much a u/w photo destination, and the guides are all (very) used to finding a subject for photographers then expecting them to spend 1 minute - 20+ minutes shooting that one subject. When you are shooting they usually wander off to find the next subject for you. U/W photographers usually only have 2 speeds on a dive - slow and stop. If you're diving with a (non-photographer) buddy, this can cause some tension... as you shoot more with your DSLR you will notice that you will start slowing down as you dive - and your buddy is going to end up waiting for you (sometimes a lot, as you find subjects you want to spend time with). My wife has put up with ~20 years of this, and I've noticed that I shoot a little less on a dive now when we dive together (it's a compromise). When I dive with either our son or daughter (who both also shoot underwater) we'll stay shooting the same subject for minutes at a time (and cover less distance).
  39. 2 points
    diminuative paper nautilus/argonauts. these guys are dwarfs in comparison to the large females male paper nautilus/argonaut on jellyfish by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr male paper nautilus/argonaut on jellyfish by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr
  40. 2 points
    a few more nautilus pics. These were riding their normal jellies rather than trash paper nautilus/argonaut on jelly by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr paper nautilus/argonaut on jellyfish by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr paper nautilus/argonaut on jelly by Karyll Gonzalez, on Flickr
  41. 2 points
  42. 2 points
    I will start by saying that my equipment is not the limiting factor in getting better images, its the grey matter behind the viewfinder that holds them back! I see great images all the time shot on all formats. I'm a big fan of the m4/3 system in general and Olympus gear in particular - I've had three of them. I currently use an E-M1 mk II in a Nauticam housing. I shoot stills exclusively and macro with the 60mm lens probably 80% of the time and also use a Subsee +5 diopter which allows 2:1 magnification. The E-M1 has very good autofocus and decent continuous focus with tracking that I am starting to appreciate in some situations. The 60mm macro lens is super sharp. The m4/3 system with its 2x crop factor has obvious advantages for macro photography (and for wildlife, which I also do). The size and weight of the body and lenses are of course more travel friendly , but to be honest not a game changer compared to full frame once you pack the housing, strobes, batteries etc. For a benchmark, everything I need fits in a Pelican 1600. I have not used a full frame kit but I dive with people who do, and I believe that the IQ of both ecosystems is comparable. I will say that I have seen images from full frame systems that I don't think I could have made with my setup. This holds especially for wide angle. But I feel no compelling reason to change.
  43. 2 points
    Chilbal (& Wolfgang), I know these are supposed to be respectful & polite forums however I (respectfully) completely disagree, and I also believe you are looking at this issues too simplistically. For example: when fish are caught (with nets or cyanide or by any other mechanism) they are shipped in small bags of water (inside packing boxes) in the bellies of planes to whatever wholesaler is paying for the fish. The death rate of shipping reef fish in boxes like this is over 50% (I know this because I had a friend who ran a business in this space on 4 islands in the Pacific (for the N. American, Japanese, and Korean markets) - he let the business die after 3 years when he couldn't find economical ways of reducing the mortality rate. Wholesalers pay for live fish only - so collectors will always ship 2x-3x the number of fish ordered to make sure they fulfill their orders - they expect a high % of die off in transportation (due to stress, overheating, lack of oxygen, lack of food, etc.) Then add in the mortality rate for shipping to either retail or end customers, which is another 10%-20%. A huge number of fish are being taken off the reefs so that some people can watch these "pretty fish" in their tanks in their living rooms. Anyone who supports this trade and is also an underwater photographer is at a minimum a hypocrite, and more likely just selfish. I'll say it again - if you believe that it is unethical to keep a Cheetah as a pet, then there should be no reason in keeping reef fish in a private aquarium. Collectors for public aquariums are a totally different breed - and in many cases work for the aquariums themselves (like the Monterey Bay Aquarium) - in many countries they have to maintain a scientific specimen collection license, and must agree to a standard of ethical collection (and husbandry) practices. If you care about the reef don't maintain a private aquarium -go support your public aquarium instead.
  44. 2 points
    I can add a little bit of information here. I've been diving with a D810 for three years, and a D850 for 6 months, and a 16-35vr for wide angle. I use a Nauticam 230mm dome on a 90 mm extension port. Apparently 70mm extensions were recommended in the past, along with a +2 diopter. For years I tried the 16-35 with and without the diopter, but I was always disappointed in the edge and corner performance, I wondered why I spent so much money and effort on wide angle only to get shots I always had to crop. Then I added the Sea and Sea 77mm internal correction filter. Night and day improvement!!! I have little else to compare, and nothing in the DSLR world, but if you are going for the 16-35, I'd certainly recommend the Sea & Sea lens along with 90mm extension and the 230mm dome.
  45. 2 points
    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.
  46. 2 points
    Yep, echoing Tim's comments new format is definitely more 21st century. Easy on the eyes with nice contrast and clean lines.
  47. 1 point
    You can’t balance this rig without consideration of the ports used. In broad terms float arms are needed in three situations 1. Compact cameras with wet lenses where the rig weight is static 2. Rigs where stix floats do not offer sufficient lift. 3. Diving at 30 meters and deeper Case 2 tend to be DSLR like video set ups. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  48. 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
  49. 1 point
    Hi Dave, yeah sure, here are a few. Like I say, taken on the A6000, Sigma 19mm f2.8 lens, Meikon housing, 1 strobe (InonZ330, some of them may have been taken with one Sea&SeaYs-02 strobe before I had the Inon). I've got a Meikon wet lens attached to the housing. The A6000 is 1.5 crop, therefore the Sigma lens is effectively about 28mm, but the wet lens widens it a bit, I'm guessing to about 20 or 22mm?? Not sure. Anyway, it's a total workhorse. Been used for I'd say about 600 dives over the last 3 years, as well as daily blasted on land. I dread to think how many clicks its done and (touch wood) it's still going. People argue that the Sony's have that 'weird colour science' but I've found it's totally fixable in LR. Here are a link to some sample images... (can't upload them direct here as it's saying I can only upload max 0.98mb. Sample images **edit** Oh and forgot to mention re video, obviously there's no 4k but it does have zebras which I use constantly and it absolutely enables you to nail exposure every time. No complaints about the auto focus either.
  50. 1 point
    You can shoot larger critters with the 60mm, you just have to get farther away...which can introduce water-quality and strobe-power problems, but it's worth it. The 60mm is a terrific lens and easy to use (exceeded I think only by the ease of the 30mm). And it is a LOT cheaper (even with port and gear) than the 12-40. The 12-40 is a very good lens, but for macro I prefer the fixed focal length because I really like the manual focus gear (with peaking turned on). I do not think I get enough light from a video light, plus for macro it can almost fry your little subjects. The reason you see so many eyeballs with the 60mm is because it is possible. I've git a lot of frogfish pix with my 60mm.

Sponsors

Advertisements



  • Newsletter

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