Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Valtman

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 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!
  2. I have to apologize, the last message might have sounded rude, but that wasn't my intention. I'm sorry. If I'm buying new lenses (camera objectives) I don't count that money to be spent in underwater photography, at least not solely. Most of my shooting happens on dry land, and I don't do that very much either. I have to think of how much would I be using those lenses altogether and if that does justify the price. And if I hold myself from buying those lenses and the housing, it makes sense to me to not spend the money on anything else either. So you think that the Meikon wet dome is rubbish? They do sell it bundled to use with the 16 - 50 mm. I'm not saying that the Nauticam wouldn't be much better, but maybe I could be happy with it not knowing of anything better... Don't you think it would be much better to get a wet diopter for macro shooting? I was thinking the Inon UCL-165, fits my budget. Or just shooting small things without any wet lens, wouldn't using a dome have a negative impact? With the dome I could get physically closer to the subject and without the dome the subject would seem get closer to me, am I right? Both methods might have their uses... I'm getting really confused. How about dry domes? I could buy the new housing and save a little not buying any lenses just yet if the 16 - 50 in fact is a good beginner all around lens. And what you're saying is one could shoot macroish through a dome... I am still very fond to the idea of being able to do different things on a single dive, even if the 18 - 135 mm wouldn't be any good. I might be shooting surfing, snowboarding or other things above water but not dry in which the new housing could be a lot better. Who knows. Heavy editing of the photos is part of the fun and what I tend to do anyway regardless of the image quality, so I'm not afraid of minor weaknesses in gear. And as said, I'm not a pro, just for fun. I will check the second hand offerings, thanks for pointing that out. And sorry again for being like this.
  3. Interesting, I never would have guessed the strobe output to be hundreds of thousands lumens. Knowing that makes the prices seem a little bit more acceptable, but it doesn't change the fact that I really can't afford them. 10k lumens on a LED light was my downgrade suggestion of the things that my friend has been building. Maybe adding a zero makes the whole system too big or expensive. Maybe not, since there are super powerful (like 100 W or more) LED chips and the batteries would not need to last for hours on full power, a few minutes would do, a few seconds at a time, so heat would not be a problem either. Maybe 10k is enough for me as a beginner. Maybe I'll start saving for proper strobes. One thing is for sure, the search for a budget friendly light for underwater photography is far from over. That's an insanely expensive lens, why would I ever consider that? There's a Meikon wet wide angle lens for 189 $ which is more than the housing itself and feels expensive to me. As most things do. I have spent ~150 $ in this hobby at this point. I try to keep the figure as low as possible. Maybe one day I could earn money with the photos and spending my yearly income on gear seems a good idea... Probably not.
  4. Home made LED lights are as bright as you make them, aren't they? Probably going for something around 10.000 lumens per head, should be enough. If not, add another. I'm not saying it's going to be for free, just that I think there's a little too much air in the strobe prices. The friend really knows what he's doing, professional AV technician and what not, smartest guy I know.
  5. I currently have a Sony A6000 and a Meikon fixed port housing. Since I discovered the SaltedLine I started searching for lenses. I was almost certain that the 18 - 135 mm + a wet diopter, maybe a wet wide angle lens would do everything for me, but then I read a bit and found out that is not the case at all. 18 - 105 mm would be better as an all-around lens, but neither that is good for anything. I also read that doing one thing per dive gets the job done better than trying to do everything, even if you had the gear to do so. So dedicated wide angle and macro lenses. Currently I'm thinking 10 - 18 mm for wide angle and Sigma 70mm f/2.8 A DG HSM for macro. The latter is less than half the price of the Sony 90 mm. Might not be perfect, but the 90 mm is out of the question due to the price. The 10 - 18 mm is also not that cheap and that got me thinking, do I really need to go that wide very often? I really don't know what would I be shooting. I like diving in the tropics, but will be diving wherever I go. Do I even need the macro just yet, maybe I'll invest in those wet lenses and practise UW photography to the limits of my current housing and the 16 - 50 mm. I know the first thing to invest in is lighting and as really budget oriented person I can't justify the asking price of the lights on the market. Really, WTF? A few LEDs and a PCB to control them in a pressure resistant housing isn't hundreds of dollars, shouldn't be. Luckily I have a super multi talented friend who has built a few static/video lights, so he's gonna have to build me one or two. I've never done so much flash photography, static lighting seems easier to work with. Am I missing something?
  6. Hello everybody! My name is Valtteri, I'm from Finland but luckily leaving to South East Asia again in about a week. I've been diving for a few years now, but as it is freaking cold here and I haven't had the money to buy a dry suit - or any scuba gear of my own - yet, I've been diving while traveling. My go to destination has been and probably will be Koh Tao in the gulf of Thailand. I've grown to hate the place as much as I love it and if there were another place where I could get the courses done in my native language even close to the prices on that island I wouldn't find myself there almost every year. I've always felt the most safe and comfortable diving with Koh Tao Divers, which I can't say about all the dive centers I've dove with. Finnish people speak relatively good English - some might do Swedish too - so highly recommended for all. I don't do one or two week vacations - it's between one to four months for me - and to do that I cannot be tied to a full time job. Thus my yearly income is quite low, thus my budget for gear is quite low as I try to prefer eating over shiny things. I have a Sony A6000 and I'm pretty sure sticking with the series. Last year I bought the Meikon fixed port housing and I actually got a few almost decent shots on the very first dives with the camera in Komodo national park in Indonesia (amazing place, skip the lizard, go for the dives). At that time I realized I know nothing about underwater photography - you really do need a light source, a faster lens only gives you more blur. I still don't have that light and for this coming trip I'm stuck with the kit zoom underwater, but I'm going to start building something a little more serious around the camera. And that's why I'm here - to ask all the stupid questions! Here's the few almost decent shots that I got. Heavily Photoshopped to hide the flaws. 1. Green turtle, Sony A6000 + 16-50 mm @ 50 mm - f/5,6 - 1/80 sec 2. The same green turtle, 17 mm - f/4,5 - 1/125 sec 3. White tip reef shark from above, 16 mm - f/4,5 - 1/80 sec 4. Manta ray, 16 mm - f/4,5 - 1/250 sec Sorry for a long post, thank you in advance for bearing with me and my stupid questions. Valtteri
  • Create New...