Jump to content

Gazzer

Member
  • Content Count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Gazzer

  • Rank
    Lionfish

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.scubacam.com.sg
  1. A cheaper alternative would be the little Epoque digital light. http://www.epoque-japan.com/e-digitallight.htm I was using a pair of them in Puerto Galera, Philippines as video lights for macro work. They work pretty well. Manufacturer’s burn time of 40min is maybe just about possible. The light features a charging port so you do not need to remove batteries etc for charging and it has an infinitely variable power control. The halogen bulb features a blue coated reflector which helps to raise the color temperature. The only complaint I had is with the power control which also serves as the on/off switch. It is very small and with wet fingers it makes turning the lights off and on more difficult than it should be. If you were wearing diving gloves it would be a near impossible task! No reason why they would not work well as focus lights. Anyway at around US$250 it is worth considering.
  2. Customer in Singapore just flooded her PT-020. Ruined the camera. Olympus exchange the whole lot.......... NO questions asked. Makes me think they know this housing has some serious issues. Actually we have been told that they are now difficult to find in the shops. Could it be Oly have pulled the housing?
  3. They are several things you can do to help reduce the back scatter problem. 1. Strobe Direction - For wide angle it is easiest just to make sure the strobe is pointing directly ahead. Do not try to point the strobe at the subject. This allows the edge of the light beam to light the subject and not include too many particles. 2. Strobe Power - Select a camera aperture that allows you to use as much ambient light as possible to minimise the light output of the strobe. The strobe should provide 'fill in' only to bring back the colours. 3. Use wide angle lenses - This gets you closer to the subject. Less water between camera lens and the subject means less water partcles for you to worry about. Using above techniques can allow you to take wide angle shots that make the water look clear even in less than perfect conditions. Incidently I would disagree with the poster above. The more strobes you use the more chance you have of introducing back scatter into images. I have found best results using a single wide angle strobe for most shots works fine. I actually prefer two strobes for macro only. Maybe a bit backward but works for me
  4. :wink: Cheap... well judging by the picture I think it would have to be. Look at the shutter release lever, anybody remember the old PT010 housing? How many port options do you think would be available? Sorry guys you get what you pay for............ and support?
  5. It will be good news if Olympus make a better job of the housing design than they did with the C5060/8080 units :shock:
  6. I think the small pegs that are used to secure the port are of major conceran. Having broken one of myself they seem to be way to fragile for there intended purpose. I see the pegs have been beefed up slightly on the PT-023 housing. Maybe the realised the problem of it was just down to the huge lens port that comes with the PT-023! Anybody have experience of this?
  7. Hi guys and sorry for not having visited this thread in some time. Would just like to comment on some of the recent posts. Guide Number - My understanding of guide number is f stop x distance. Is that not how a guide number is calculated? There may be some recognized standard for what distance to measure at or what aperture to use but I can't see why in our tests that really matters. What we are looking for is comparison. No doubt a strobes underwater guide number is not critical as long as it can reach a certain minimum level. We make that clear in the report, I think! Far more important is the angle of coverage etc. All strobes were measured with the same flash meter. We can't state that these are definitive results as the meter was never calibrated however we can be certain, due to multiple repeats of the same strobe test and obtaining the same results, that they are as accurate as the meter would allow and certainly reflect a true comparison of the strobes. The whole point of the test! I will state again, for us, guide number is not a major issue but since manufacturers insist on quoting it in the specifications we thought it would be useful to try and get a real life comparison. Beam Angle - Really my comments reflect what I said above. We took the 1 f stop drop off in light as one that I believe Ikelite state as the desired point at which angle should be calculated. Again this is only in an attempt to get a comparison between strobes. Our test results do not of course show the drop off in light and how quickly it occurs, the real shape of the beam and evenness. An earlier strobe test, taking pictures of strobes fired at a grey carpet produced interesting results. Our intention would be to repeat this test but underwater. Use a grey sheet marked with a grid pattern and take pictures using the test strobes. The next step of the test! Again our report was done to compare the beam angles quoted by manufacturers as it's something they always list in strobe specifications. Strobe Light Quality - The actual strobe color temperature is something that we need to measure. We did try shooting a colorful picture underwater but the results proved nothing. We had to take a series of shots at different settings and or vary the strobe power to obtain a properly exposed shot. The varying in settings causes a big difference to the light quality and colors reproduced in the image. So we ended up with a series of shots from each strobe which frankly all looked similar when comparing the strobes. Admittedly this was done at the end of our pool session and we did not take the time over it that we should have. We are still thinking of a test that would most accurately reflect the strobes underwater performance as our initial attempts proved to us that it is not an easy thing to measure and quantify! Any suggestions?
  8. Not really on topic but maybe of interest to newby's out there. Have a looked at (if you can find them), Epoque ball joint strobe arms. Their cheap and not too bad. Same ball size as Ultralight, with 'O' ring. Only diff is that there made from Polycarbonate. For not too heavy use they should be OK
  9. I traded in a couple of Sea & Sea YS-90DX's for Inon Z-220's. The Z-220 is brighter, have a wider more uniform beam and smaller. I don't have first hand experience with the Ikelite. You can find lots of opinions and even some test results with a quick search on these boards. I would echo Herbko, The Inon's offer far greater coverage angle than the Sea & Sea with some extra features bedsides!
  10. I have had mixed experience of using the Nikon 5000 with strobes in TTL mode. I found that the results were ok for potrait shots where the subject was around 1m away. Macro shots were a complete disaster. Mostly over exposed. I guess it is because the camera light sensor is in such a position that it can't properly detect the amount of light being reflected back from the subject when it is close to the camera. It sees less light so tells the strobe to put out more, result, over exposed images! There's no solution except shoot in manual. The Nikon 5000 simply does not offer true TTL control
  11. Johann, you will not be able to achieve TTL with any underwater strobe while using the PT-023 housing. You will need either Ikelites EV (manual) Controller for the DS125 or a fibre optic sync cable if using Inon or Sea & Sea. If you really want TTL with the C8080 then you should have gone with the Ikelite housing which does give true TTL when hard wired to the DS125.
  12. Herbko, Yes I understand the proceedure except the bit on the RAW 16bit linear convertor. Why is RAW so important for the test? Also regarding the histogram. How would this help the comparisson? The histogram simply displays the quantity of each colour, going from black to white. I do not see a problem in conducting such a test, David what do you think?
  13. Alex, Yes understand. Actually the test that was done by Jeff http://www.digitaldiver.net/images/strobearticle/strobearticlescrn2.pdf ://http://www.digitaldiver.net/images/...ticlescrn2.pdf where he fired the strobes at a grey carpet is basically what we need but conducted underwater? Should not be a problem to do!
×
×
  • Create New...