Jump to content

TmxDiver

Member
  • Content Count

    152
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by TmxDiver

  1. I think there are a few factors here. 1. Form factor - You are probably going to want a wrist computer due to size; however, that is also subject to your eyesight. I'm 53 and my eyesight is crap but I wear contacts so it isn't as big of an issue. 2. Algorithm - Some people dive with computers that use the same algorithm, some prefer computers with different algorithms and dive the most conservative NDL on any given dive. All of my computers use the "standard" Buhlmann with gradient factors. 3. Functionality - Are you a Trimix diver or do you expect to be? Do you plan to dive CCR and want an off-board internal setpoint feature? Etc. Personally, I will never dive a Suunto again. I had a DX for one dive trip and retuned it after it went into violation mode twice for stupid reasons (I can explain more details if anybody really wants to know). Luckily, I was just testing it out and it wasn't my primary computer. I currently use a Shearwater Teric and I wrap it around my left strobe arm. I need multiple gasses, Trimix, and CCR capabilities so it somewhat limits computer choices. I like that the screen is easy to use and it has some specific features that I find useful in a "oh crap" bailout situation if both of my rebreather onboard computers fail. However, the Teric isn't cheap. In the past, I've had good luck with Oceanic computers. I find them easy to read, intuitive and well priced for what you get. Nowadays, they also give the ability to use either the relatively liberal Oceanic DSAT algorithm or the more standard Buhlmann (I think the 16C variant but not sure). If you don't need Trimix or CC, then I would go with one of the wrist-mounted Oceanic computers. In fact, they have one called the "B.U.D." which is some kind of backup computer and has a MSRP of $200. I'm not sure what the limitations are, but it could be an option. If you want/need, I can send a picture of my computer mounted on the strobe arm, but it is pretty straightforward.
  2. Thanks for the advice. I shoot an APS-C (Sony a6400). I also have the Sony 10-18mm (15-27 FF equiv) with a Nauticam 7" dome. I've had reasonably good results with F/8 or smaller in that configuration. They aren't perfect but they are good enough for me to share the dive with other people and the corners aren't distracting. I'm also usually shooting under "harsh" conditions (deep and dark with a lot of particulate matter) which doesn't help. - brett
  3. Perfect, thanks Chris. I might have a crack at it if I get some free cycles. I've also been using Metashape quite a bit lately and I think I might try to use their lens correction tool.
  4. Thanks, Chris. Quite the process indeed. It does seem like a potential "Covid project" and since I have a pool in my backyard... Just FYI to others, I went to go look at this and it looks like Adobe no longer supplies the image (see attached screenshot). I'm sure I could find it on the Internet somewhere if I really wanted to. I wonder if I asked Adobe to add a profile correction for an underwater wet lens what their reaction would be. Maybe I'll try just to have a little fun.
  5. Is anybody doing lens correction in Lightroom for either of these two wet lenses? Based on the EXIF data, Lightroom obviously thinks that I'm just using the native lens and has no idea about the wet lens. As has been pointed out before, the WWL-C (and probably the WWL-1) actually has a noticeable amount of barrel distortion. I've tried correcting it "by hand" but I'm wondering if anybody has a lens profile (it would in some sense also depend upon the focal length of the native lens). - brett
  6. Here is a sample photo of the TBM Avenger taken with the Sony 10-18 and the Nauticam 7" dome. It is very dark at 75 meters in Southern California. This photo has been developed a bit in LR but I haven't tried to remove backscatter, etc.. This is at 1/60th, f 8.0, ISO 1250 and 10mm. You can definitely see soft corners and edges but keep in mind that you will always have sacrifices in these conditions with almost no natural light. You will either have to boost ISO or drop the f-stop, etc. but there are no free lunches. If I dive this plane again, maybe I'll take the WWL-C and see how it does. - brett
  7. I'm not sure I'm the best judge but I'll give you my feedback and thoughts on the setups I've been using over the past six months. I have a Sony a6400 in a Nauticam housing and I have the WWL-C that I use with the 16-50mm lens and I also have the Sony 10-18mm lens that I use with the Nauticam 7" acrylic dome. Due to Covid, all of my diving recently has been in Southern California and I tend to dive on deeper wrecks (50m+). That means it is usually really dark, a lot of backscatter & particulate matter in the water, green-ish water most days, I'm shooting wide angle, etc. I.e., they are very "camera unfriendly" conditions. I usually shoot with 2 x 15k Big Blue video lights and still need to boost my ISO for anything wide angle. One reason I went with the acrylic vs glass dome from Nauticam is the 60m limit on the glass dome (yes, I know the Zen glass dome is rated to 300' and I will probably get that someday). The bottom line is that I'm somewhat mixed in my favorite of those two combinations and still need to do more shooting with the WWL-C. If I had to pick one, it would be the 10-18mm with the dome. The WWL-C is compact (relative to the 7" dome) but obviously heavier vs. an acrylic dome. The 7" dome is "floaty" but I've put some of the wheel weights with stickers on the bottom to help with that. I've attached a sample photo with the WWL-C and the 16-50 lens. It is 1/60th, f5.6, ISO 1600 and 17mm. The corners are a bit blurry and this wreck was one of the shallower ones (40m or so). You can see that the corners get a bit blurry, but not too bad and if you are willing to crop a little, I'd say acceptable. I think the WWL-C is 130 degree FOV at 24mm FF equivalent focal length, but I "feel" like I get a wider FOV with the Sony 10-18. I also just like the way the photos "look" better. It is hard to explain but I think that is why I find myself shooting with the 10-18 more often. I'm also working on a long-term photogrammetry model of a 60m deep submarine so I want to use the same lens setup on all the photos. I did a 75 meter dive recently on a TBM Avenger in very dark conditions and took the 10-18 lens and wasn't shooting for a photogrammetry model. I can't attach another photo to this post due to size limits but I will post it to another message so you can get an idea. My overall conclusion is that I like the WWL-C but I need to spend more time shooting with it in different conditions to form a more complete opinion. - brett
  8. Thanks! I've used them for quite a few things, actually. Below is a link to what I bought. The hardest part was just trying to figure out what to search for. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B083416L5L/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 I'm not sure what you mean by "What did you stick on it?" The zip tie "anchors" that I bought have stickers "built in" on them so I just put it on the vacuum cover and then tied cave line to it. Let me know if you want more info or pictures. - brett
  9. I "lost" my cap for a few days and then ended up finding it. After that scare, I bought some little square stickers from Amazon and did the following:
  10. Very nice writeup! I love OpenBSD. I started 25 years ago with Linux but the kernel started to become too unreliable and so I switched to OpenBSD on laptops. I was in cybersecurity and so it suited me very well. Rock solid and (obviously) very secure. At some point in my career, I had to use other tools and ended up switching to OSX but I really miss OpenBSD.
  11. So many good Cenotes. I'll second the Angelita recommendation. Very unique dive. I'd also say the Pit. Car Wash is also nice. I'd recommend diving with ProTec.
  12. I totally agree on the Teric! I usually dive a rEvo and have the Teric as an off-board "oh-crap" computer if my other two on-board computers fail. When I dive open circut, I use my Teric as well. Here is a picture a friend took of me on the Sacramento wreck (70m) in Redondo Beach, CA. You can see my Teric on the left float arm in the picture below. PS - I have no relationship with Shearwater and don't sell any dive equipment. I'm just a satisfied user.
  13. Did you sell this or is it still available?
  14. You mean like monitoring your PO2 & deco, adding O2/Dil, and taking pictures?! Brett
  15. Article about an interesting patent granted to Apple: https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/09/22/future-iphone-could-take-better-underwater-photos-with-automatic-optical-analysis Regards, - brett
  16. Great topic, thanks Adam & Simon! I have a question about the lens discussion. Simon mentioned that the software reads the data embedded into the photo in order to correct for the lens type/distortion. Totally understand that as Lightroom (and other software) can do the same. However, how does (or could) it work with a wet lens? For example, I have a Sony a6400 with the SE1650-PZ lens and the Nauticam WWL-C wet lens. The software would think it was just the native lens. Thanks, - brett
  17. Yes, drysuit diving is "not quite the same." But, quite honestly, I have discovered SOOO many amazing dive sites that are right here in my "backyard" here in SoCal. Here is a section of my blog with photos of some of the AMAZING wrecks and structures I have had the fortune to dive locally this year: https://wreckedinmyrevo.com/category/socal-dive/ If all works out, I'll be diving on a new site this week that has never had divers on it (and taking pictures of course)! Regards, - brett
  18. I'm still pondering the 10-18 rectilinear vs Tokina Fisheye and was doing a little research around weights of various solutions (given your comment above and my experience using the WWL-C). The WWL-C is for sure a heavy chunk of metal & glass and weighs 1.05kg. I don't personally find it too bulky or unwieldy while navigating underwater and it pairs nicely with the Nauticam a6400 housing. I have it mounted on the bayonet mount and it feels "solid." Interestingly enough, the Zen DP-170-N85 II dome weights 1.03kg or essentially exactly the same as the WWL-C. Given that the WWL-C has a built in buoyancy collar, the in-water weight is listed as 0.17kg. The Zen site doesn't provide an in-water weight but I'm guessing it is going to be similar due to the amount of air trapped in the dome. The Nauticam site doesn't list the weight of the 7" acrylic dome, but as you said, it is "very floaty" so I'm not sure that is a good solution either. I just thought folks might find the weight comparison interesting. - brett
  19. Very good points, thanks Chris! I'll try to keep it all "in focus" (hah!) when I'm taking pictures of a destroyer this week. So much to think about -- especially at 80 meters deep with deco time multiplying quickly. I'm planning to get some pictures of the 5" guns which will present a very long depth-of-field picture so we'll see how those come out. I'll plan on focussing closer to the front of the gun as opposed to the turret or further back along the gun. Brett
  20. I've done 4 or 5 dives with mine on a LX-10 and I find I need to zoom in to about 30mm. I could see a slight vignette in my pool tests at 28mm (see the lower left corner in the 28mm photo below vs. 30mm). As Chris says, it is a "mechanical" issue so it could be that you are attaching the WWL-C closer to the port than I am -- but I'm not sure how that would be possible since the only way I know to attach is via the M67 bayonet adapter which just screws directly onto the fixed port of the NA-LX10 housing. First picture is 28mm and second is 30mm.
  21. I use the Nauticam M67 Bayonet II adapter (part 83250): https://www.nauticam.com/products/m67-to-bayonet-converter-ii The reason for not changing mid-dive is size/weight and because I can zoom in with the WWL-C in place (but not true macro). Once you remove it, you have to store it somewhere and hope either the front or rear glass won't get scratched. You could install one of those lens holders on an arm I guess, but it is a pretty heavy piece of equipment. Most of my dives are wrecks and so I dive with the intent of shooting wide angle. If I see the occasional wolf eel or other cool creature, I just zoom in and take the pic. Will it be perfect? Nah, but I'm not shooting for the cover of a magazine either. In terms of aperture, I'm still experimenting. Again, since a lot of my shots involve water or sand around the primary subject, it doesn't matter as much. Also, in Southern California on deep wrecks, I need all the help I can get in terms of light. My general methodology has been: 1. Shoot natural light shots of the overall wreck with a wider open aperture just knowing the corners might be soft but also that they are generally water or sand 2. Shoot closer up features with a light (strobe or video) and close down the aperture. Below is a picture of a turbo supercharger on a P-38 that I shot earlier this week in San Diego. It is 1/80th, f6.3, ISO 1600. You can see that the corners aren't perfect - but my real "focus" is on the supercharger so I don't really care so much. I actually had to stop down the exposure in LR by a full stop. So, in reality, I should have stopped down f8 when I shot the picture. Still learning. This week I've got my Sony a6400 ready to go so I'll be shooting with the WWL-C on that rig instead and we'll see how it works.
  22. I've done a few dives with the WWL-C on a LX-10 (similar enough to the size/weight of the RX100) while waiting to get my a6400 setup complete and it is a big piece of glass. I've got it mounted with the M67 bayonet mount. I agree with the above points and would summarize: 1. I personally wouldn't mount it on a flip adapter. I think it would be to flimsy, especially for the types of dives I do. 2. I would only take on dives where the intention is wide angle. I would not plan on a "presto-change-o" mid-dive to remove the lens and shoot "true" macro on the same dive. 3. I haven't done any serious tests yet, but I believe that if you using a zoom lens, you could get a reasonable fish portrait type shot even with the WWL-C still attached. - brett
  23. Thanks, Chris. Yes, I've been thinking about that option as well and it seems like a good one. If I go that route, I need to decide if I should get the N120 mount version that would allow me to migrate into full frame camera at some point in the future. BTW - Zen now has support page which has links to port charts for different mounts: https://www.zenunderwater.com/pages/support Any thoughts on image quality of the WWL-C/16-50 combo vs. 10-18 behind a glass dome? - brett
  24. Yeah, I'm trying to avoid another checked piece of luggage. Because I'm on a rebreather, I have a Pelican case with the rebreather (rEvo) and then a large duffel bag with all my other gear for technical diving (multiple regs, reels, spools, lights, etc) along with some sturdier camera gear (housing, video lights, arms, etc) and a bit of clothing. All LiOn batteries, computers & camera go into a backpack for carry-on. And that doesn't include a drysuit for cold destinations.... - brett
  25. Nice pictures! Which dome do you use with the 10-18? Right now, my main subject is wrecks and they don't move so fast so I'm not too worried about focus speed (at least for now). Thanks, Brett
×
×
  • Create New...