Jump to content

Johnny Christensen

Member
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Johnny Christensen

  • Rank
    Triggerfish

Additional Info

  • Camera Model & Brand
    Nikon D200
  • Camera Housing
    Sealux cd200
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    2x Sea & Sea YS60 1x Ikelite DS51
  • Accessories
    Various
  1. Replacing it with a text saying, "I'm cheap - so I steal other peoples photos" might be a proper response.
  2. If it's any help, I used to take my old Sea & Sea strobes in the 90m (300 ft) range on a regular basis. That was YS50 and YS120. It was the worry of the Nikonos V camera that kept me from taking them deeper. I once accidently left one in a pressure-pot overnight at 14 bar's. It held up fine, but of course the controls where not touched when it was sitting in there. I would not hesitate to do the same thing to their newer models.
  3. Depends on what you want to do with the pictures. If it's for traditionel pictures of one shot showing a part of the scenery, then go as wide as possible ie. 10,5mm. But if you want to stitch the pictures together, the 16mm fisheye on a cropped camera will give about 120 degrees of view, while still maintaining lines thats possible to straighten. There is bound to be some curves, but that effect is far less than on the full 10,5mm fisheye. For closeup pictures of wreck artifacts, pool shots of swimmers and underwaterbabies, I'm using 16mm. http://johnnychristensen.com/section142113_107568.html For general big view pictures of wreck sections, I'm using the 10,5mm. http://johnnychristensen.com/gallery.html I have never tried to stich a bunch of pictures together, but it could give some really cool results.
  4. You could also use the Nikkor 16mm f 2,8 fisheye. On a cropped camera, it will give pleasing results for closeup work. My standard lenses for wreck shooting has always been as wide as possible. The 10,5mm filled the gap that 16mm on film left behind. But there should be a few 16mm lenses collecting dust out there, you could pick them up cheap(is) Iceland... what a fantastic country. I've just spend four days there and are now putting all other vacation plans on hold - got to go back for more.
  5. I have loads of equipment to look after when I'm diving. So I'm in favor of securing the camera. Clip 1 & 2 on the camera D-ring, 3 on the harness / bc D-ring to make it short. Unclip 2 to make it longer. Simple, strong and cheap. Works for hoisting your camera down by the boatcrew as well.
  6. And the D3 is now in a colder climate It was a pleasure doing business with Hugh. Everything was exactly as advertised and very fast response with the shipping. I would gladly buy equipment from him again. Best regards Johnny Christensen
  7. Is it still for sale ? Kind regards Johnny Christensen
  8. Hi Alex Yes topside conditions in that video looks cold. But the underwater section had plenty of ambient light and really nice viz. There was no need to use a focus light, you can view that as proof that the new autofocus module works great - but the old ones would do just as well. No problems there, and I would be really surpriced if there was. There looked to be all the light you need, judging from the video. I wish we had that kind of conditions. (Right now I'm trying to sell my D200 to get my own D3 setup, so I'm not saying the D3 is crap. Just saying there was not much of a challenge to the camera in that video.) Atb. Johnny
  9. Hi Tom Thanks, I'm glad you like the pictures. Diving Norway in 1967 and 1969 must have been quite an experience. At that time, I presume the suits that was availeble must have been quite cold. I have still only visited the southern part of Norway, but whitin the next couple of years hoping to go further up north. I find myself spending more and more time above water on hiking trips, and Norway is a fantastic country for that. Atb. Johnny
  10. Well... they said it was worst possible conditions, murky - no light etc. That was clearly not the case, looked absolutly dreamlike conditions to me. Will be interesting to see when it's tested under difficult conditions. Nice pictures though, but it should be with conditions like that.
  11. I have used all the versions of NX from 1.0 to 1.3 and like how it evolved. 1.0 crashed often and was slow to work with. But the features it offered made me tolerate the bugs in the program. 1.1 was a considerable improvement in the speed and bugs department. With that one I switched most of my editing from Photoshop to NX. 1.2 and 1.3 is mainly a question of adding more NEF files to the range it will process. The functionality had a few minor upgrades and it seems they got the last bugs chased out of the program. Since I got the 1.3 version I haven't seen any unwanted features. It's fast and it works really well. And you just gotta love that U-point technology. Now I only use Photoshop for making pictures ready for the web and putting copyright notice on them.
  12. Another example of what the D3 will do, can be found on the Casper Tybjerg website. http://www.ttf.dk/Dansk/Tybjerg/Nyheder.as...&NewsID=107
  13. I just did the math based on Nikon 1,5 crop factor. But 120 or 110 degrees won't make any meaningfull difference in real world use.
  14. As I'm into coldwater wreck photography, when I switched to digital 2 years ago I bought the 10,5mm FE right away. That way I kept the standart format that I was used to from the film based cameras. No complaints there, the 10,5mm is a great lens. Fortunatly there is still the old 16mm FE, that one is great when you want to shoot smaller objects like munitions cases, closeups of handguns, compases and the like. With a 120 degrees angle of view when fittet on a DX camera, it is a great option to when you know your subjects are going to be medium size range. On my website all the wreckpictures are made with 16mm on film or 10,5mm on digital. You can't really tell any quality difference between the two.
  15. I'd say so. I was Antibes from Tuesday to Sunday and had a look for the first time. Jeez I was bored, never seen anything that failed to live up to the hype in such a spectacular way. Very nice people on the festival, but no creative inspiration to be had. Purely a local event from my point of view.
×
×
  • Create New...