Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


newdiver last won the day on March 25

newdiver had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About newdiver

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. As mentioned by Chris the Seafrogs housing is not top quality and the dials don't align very well in my case (A7 III), this results in a bit of frustration underwater trying to get to the correct shooting mode since there is no front dial button on the housing it becomes even more tricky. However in saying that I think it is worth the compromises. Given the rate that new cameras getting announced by Sony and other manufacturer it becomes an easier choice if you want to upgrade to the latest camera, since $500 USD for the housing is easy to forgo then a few thousands in the case of Nauticam or other expensive housing options. I am thinking of upgrading my A7 III to A7 IV due to be announced in a few days, and it won't be too much of a loss to get rid off the A7 III housing. I assume that you might go down the path of upgrading your A7R II to newer model then you might find it less damaging financially to get rid of your current housing.
  2. I am so glad I stumbled upon this, such a great info with huge consequences. I was thinking of travelling to Mexico for diving but I won't be doing that any longer. It is such a shame since I was so set on Socorro.
  3. Philippine has also announced quarantine free travel from countries in the green lane, which are mainly from Africa and a few others.
  4. It is an alignment issue and it is how it looked in their video of the a7iii housing they sent me. There are no covers on the camera obviously and I have removed the rubbers one by one and it just doesn't sit flash against the dials.
  5. I haven't used Nauticam housing so can't comment on the comparison, however my Fantasea housing for RX100VI is miles ahead of Seafrogs A7III housing in-terms of overall quality. The camera doesn't fit flash to align all the button and dials and therefore a lot of turning and twisting to change the settings. As an example the mode dial, I had to keep turning it a dozen times to engage it and once it did, it would skip several dials and get me to a mode I didn't want. I contacted Seafrogs support who sent me spare dials to replace it and it didn't help, since the issue is the actual camera not seating all the way in and flash where the dials are properly aligned.
  6. I have had my vaccine so waiting on the third hand or any other limb to grow I had RX100VI with a diopter that I was using with a flip adapter and I was thinking along the line of that and ignoring the fact that WWL-1B is a different beast and can't be used with a flip. I will be getting the double lens carrier if I do order the WWL-1B. I am not sure if my diopter which is an AOI UCL-900 will work with the CMC M67 to Bayonet ring. I need to convert it to Bayonet both to use it and carry it on the carrier.
  7. oh I see, I used a flip holder previously and it didn't occur to me. Thanks for that
  8. I have been doing a similar investigation into the a7c or a7iii setup and everything you have got on that list seems what I have found to be needed as well. However your requirement for two holders, are you going to be using the 16-50 behind a flat port? What is the use case for it if that is the case? I have only accounted for one holder to hold either the WWL-1B or the diopter.
  9. Agreed, I was referring to a few meters and more and it will definitely be helpful within the one meter as you mentioned, one more thing that I forgot was attaching wet macro lens to it and zooming in. It will be very handy indeed. The 16-35 and the 6" dome port was chosen as there wasn't much option with Seafrogs housing at the time with smaller port supporting the WWL. I didn't think how bad the IQ was going to be with the 6" dome until I discovered it for myself. It will be a waiting game on the Seafrogs front to see when they will list the port for 28-60 and if the WWL work fine with it without vignetting.
  10. By this you mean the a7 will produce as good of an image as the A1 with wwl, am I right?
  11. Don't you lose sharpness and contrast if you zoom in compared to getting closer to your subject, the lesser body of water the sharper and contrasty the image? I actually don't have a lens at moment for WWLs. I have the 16-35 F4 used behind a 6" dome port from Seafrogs, however I am not happy with the results from the one dive trip that I had back in January this year. I mainly used F8-F12 and anything outside of the centre of the image is unusable. I was also asking in my own thread about Seafrogs a7c housing and I am kind of cooling down on the idea of new housing and new camera and sticking with my a7iii. As suggested by the helpful members there is not a significant difference between the a7iii and a7c housing, I might be able to reduce the bulk a bit if I replace the dome with a WWL. I don't have the lens or WWLs hence the question which route should I consider? WWL-C with 24mm prime or WWL-1B with 28-60 and this very much depends on the new 28-60 port from Seafrogs being compatible with the WWLs. Actually I don't think that Seafrogs have a port for 24mm f2.8 and I need to confirm that with them. I guess this might rule out the WWL-C option.
  12. I am also curious about WWL-C with 24mm prime vs WWL-1B with 28-60mm. WWL-C is cheaper and also slightly smaller. Is it true that the zoom range for the 28-60mm won't be much useful given that zoom isn't recommended in the water? So it comes down to WWL-C vs WWL-1B both 130 degree fov, am I right?
  13. Yes Phil, I saw that too and it will hopefully work with WWL-1B. Is a WL the best setup for wide angle? I am assuming it is improved performance over a dome for both photo and video?
  14. Do you know where one can get the LED board other than UWtechnics? I am keen on this experiment.
  • Create New...