Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


TmxDiver last won the day on September 7

TmxDiver had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

About TmxDiver

  • Rank
    Wolf Eel

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Southern California
  • Interests
    Wreck Diving, Cave Diving, Rebreathers

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. It may well depend on the lens behind the Wetoptics, but for the Sony 28-60mm I would interpret it this way that the WAPC-C (situated between WWL-1 and WAPC-1 in optical quality) is not worth going for, as the difference between WWL-1 and WAPC-C, if existing, probably must be very, very small... Wolfgang P.S.: I do not think that comparing WWL-1, WAPC-C and WAPC-1 is "apples to oranges", as the final outcome on the image is practically the same (same FOV and distortion), except MAYBE center and corner sharpness. Objective measures are not existing/accessible and different authors have different opinions (The lowest common denominator of different reports is, however, that the differences in IQ is small, if existing). Hence it is totally justified to ask for objective measures of differences in IQ as the differences in size, weight and money to spend are obvious... Thanks for the research. This is enough for me to decide to stick with the WWL-1B and not spend the money for the WACP-C which, in my particular case, would probably have neglible and no noticeable increase in quality. - brett
  2. I'm in exactly the same place. I'm not sure it is worth the money to move from the WWL-1B to the WACP-C. This has to do with current abilities as a photographer as much as it does anything else. I'm just not sure I will see a noticeable difference. But, I would love to see some real-world data comparing the two. - brett
  3. Just FYI, I was able to fit my full frame Nauticam Sony a7rIV housing into the Pelican 1535 by removing the balls (solving the "deep enough" problem) AND the handles (solving the "wide enough" problem). Regards, - brett
  4. As posted earlier, I use the Pelican Air 1535 but I think you will have a hard time fitting a 230mm dome in it along with a FF camera setup. I could be wrong. As a point of reference, I just weighed my Pelican 1535 with my dividers in the case but no equipment and it weighs 10.8 lbs. - brett
  5. Thanks! The wrecks there are so amazing to photograph. - brett
  6. Great! If you want, you can sign up on the blog to get updates whenever I publish (which is usually only about once/week). The Infidel is a fun wreck for sure. If you are going to that depth, consider a goal of diving the UB88 which is a little bit deeper but amazing to dive a WW1 German Sub off Southern California. It is about 190' to the sand and about 165' to the top of the conning tower. - brett
  7. You should definitely go -- it is epic diving with amazing wide angle photographic opportunities. I went in July 2021 and took my rebreather. We were diving the wrecks if Presque Isle which are all about 180-200 ffw. On most dives it was 35 or so minutes on the wreck and a runtime of about 105-120 minutes. Pictures are here: https://wreckedinmyrevo.com/tag/lake-huron/ Regards, - brett
  8. This is exactly what I do. My camera, lenses, and Lithium batteries go in my carry on and my housing, WWL-1B (with hard cap), ports, flash, video lights, etc. all go into a Pelican case with "custom cut" dividers to hold everything in place. The Pelican can be carried on (size is okay, weight is not) or checked and I have options. I've done some pretty serious travel in the past year and never had a problem. Regards, - brett
  9. Thanks. I have to make a small correction. I was getting my kit ready for a dive tomorrow and checked the diffuser and it is the "White Diffuser" and NOT the "Wide Angle Diffuser." - brett
  10. PS - Yes, I know it is an American flag on a Canadian destroyer. Don't ask me... - brett
  11. I was out diving the Yukon in San Diego yesterday playing with my Retra ProX and had the wide angle diffuser. The water was very green (normal for the area) and had a TON of particulate matter in the water. Quite frankly, I'm a bit surprised at how the photos turned out given the conditions. Visibility was probably 6m / 20 feet. The photos below have had a few adjustments in LR but nothing major and I haven't cleaned up any backscatter. I'm not planning to use them for anything other than I was just testing the strobes in those conditions. Regards, - brett
  12. Thanks! It is a Pelican Air 1535: https://www.pelican.com/us/en/product/cases/carry-on-case/air/1535 - brett
  13. One of the reasons I decided on the WWL-1B over two other options I considered (16-35 with 230mm dome and the WACP-1) is the size/weight. Based on the picture posted by @dreifish, I'm glad I made that choice. There are better options from a purely technical standpoint but they come at the "cost" of size/weight and, as usual, there is no free lunch. I have all my primary photo equipment in a small-ish Pelican case that I can either carry on (it is overweight but under max size) or check it if I'm lazy or if I am forced to and it is protected from the vagaries of checked luggage. Picture below: - brett
  14. I have a Sony a7rIV and I would prefer the 16-35 + 230mm dome combo (I shoot a lot of wrecks and prefer rectilinear) but I have the same issue: I don't want to travel with a 230mm dome (along with a rebreather, drysuit, camera gear, dive gear, etc.). At the time, the WACP-C was not available and I didn't want to spend the $$ on the WACP-1 so I went with the WWL-1B. I just checked the port chart for the WWL-1B and I don't see any Nikon full frame lenses listed so you might need the WACP-1 (or the new WACP-C). I don't know the Nikon system, but If I'm reading the WACP-1 port chart correctly It looks like with the 28-70mm Nikon lens you get a FOV of 130 to 59 degrees which seems like a pretty good range. Regards, - brett
  • Create New...