aviddiver.her

Scott, did I understand you correctly that the same vignette we see in the turtle shot was on the opposite side when you rotated the lens hood (sun shield) 180 degrees?

I believe Scott is talking about the lens hood showing in his images. Scott, did you try rotating the lens hood to see if there is a position where it doesn't show? If a lot of the hood is showing it may even be 90 degrees out of place . And, as Interceptor says , sample images would be helpful.

Don't you have to do at least some post processing to decrease the file size you are posting on line? A quick crop while you are there is pretty ready. Or are you using some posting method that resizes for you?

Scott, I only have trouble with the sun shade showing if it gets slightly rotated out of place. You can tighten it down so that doesn't happen as easily but it is very easy to crack the plastic if you try to get it very tight.

Scott, if you already have the lens and housing yes, try it out. If you liked the lens with your S95 I suspect you will like it with the RX100 II. If your S95 had 65mm threads you will need to purchase an adapter ring for the Fix UWL-04 to fit the 52mm Nauticam housing.

Yes. Typically that would be a close up subject that is not small enough to require a macro and not large enough to require a WA lens and still be able to move in fairly close. For example, an anemone or star fish portrait. Additionally, a subject that you can't get close to without it swimming off so if you used a WA lens the subject would be too small. Think reef fish.

Here are a couple of uncropped images using the Nauticam RX 100 II and Fix UWL-28. You can see the edge of the lens hood I was talking about on the left edge in the image with the diver.

I have been using the Nauticam RX 100ii for a couple of months now. I have the Fix fisheye UWL-28M52R lens. I've been told that the 28 is the newer version of the 04. I choose the screw in type because I had screw in diopters already and did not want to buy new lenses to accommodate an AD type mount. Previously I used a Inon UWL-100 screw in without a dome on my old camera housing. I have found that the Fix fisheye is more difficult than my UWL-100 was to screw into the housing. It seems there are two reasons for this: 1. The Fisheye is slightly lighter in water (though still negatively bouyant) so it floats more while I'm trying to screw it in acutally making it more difficult. 2. It is slightly more difficult to hold onto while screwing in. I initially had some difficulty with the adapter ring getting stuck on the housing. Eventually, I got it screwed onto the lens tight enough that I couldn't get it off of the lens so I have left it there and no longer have trouble with the ring sticking onto the housing, it stays with the lens. If you do not already have screw in lenses that you want to be able to use I recommend the AD type mounts (though I've never used that type myself). Over all I am happy with my Fix UWL-28. I am finding that it shoots wider than my Inon WA-100. Which for some shots would be good but for most of my images I find I end up cropping a bit: Four reasons for this 1. I’m using a single strobe so sometimes end up with a dark edge. 2. To improve composition. 3. Sometimes my lens hood rotates and gets in the image so I have to crop it out. 4. When shooting vertically sometimes I get a lens flair on the bottom of the image that I either edit or crop out. I'll try and post a couple of images in a separate post. I do not have them set up were I can use a URL to post them so I may not be able to.

I recently purchased a Sony RX100 M2 with Nauticam housing. I have two INON 165 lenses for macro. I read various discussions on-line regarding how to focus for best macro: Zoom to max. and manually focus while using diopters. On land, before I had a chance to dive with the rig I did some experimenting and tried the DMF setting. It seemed that once manually focused the manual focus distance was maintained even after auto focusing for WA. I finally got to try my RX100 M2 rig out in the water. Four days in the California Channel Islands with Wetpixel and Bradley Photographic. I set the camera to DMF the entire trip and manually focused one time only on dry land with my diopters on. When in the water I moved in to the point where it looked in focus. Then, I half pressed to get a solid green auto focus indicator. Not every image was sharp due to various issues: 1.) I didn't always maintain my position due to surge 2.) I sometimes pressed too hard and took shots when the auto focus light was blinking. When all the issues aligned correctly the images were very sharp. Unfortunately, I only had good macro subjects to work on my last two dives so I didn't get to do a lot of experimenting. I was able to switch to WA and back without messing with the manual focus at all....for the entire 10 dives! I need to experiment more and pay more attention to how close I actually am to the critter using this method. It seemed to me I was at the distance I would expect for the diopters I was using. Here are a few of my results. I don't recall if I used one or two of the Inon 165s for the nudibranch photos but I do know this was on my 10th dive and I had not touched the manual focus since prior to dive 1. Yet, when I moved in close there was a point where I could see focus. Has anyone else used this technique successfully?

$950 US

Got a surpise today when I stopped into my local underwater camera shop..... my Nauticam RX100 M2 housing is in! I now have the camera, housing, and assorted wet mate lenses for the M2! Yipee!!!

The housing controls the camera buttons with gears and buttons that have to reach the proper place on the camera. If you put a smaller camera in, and push it forward for the housing buttons/gears to reach the front buttons on the camera (they may or may not line up with the camera), the buttons/gears on the back would not reach because they would be farther back due to the larger housing. Unfortunaely, the M2 housing is not going to work with the original RX100.

Nauticam finally has the RX100 II housing listed on their website http://nauticam.com/product-list-ca.asp?id=11

No, I was responding to a post Mark made in another thread saying something like 'Nauticam has done a great job of improving an already excellent Rx100 housing'. I'm asking what are the improvements he mentioned.

Mark, aside from size are there any other changes on the Nauticam RX100-II from the original Nauticam RX 100? If so, what are the changes?