john70490

Prefably with diffuser and 1" ball mount. Serial number must be higher than 70000. Payment by Paypal.

My 60mm D lens and 1.4x teleconverter fit perfectly in the port for my 105mm D lens.

Thanks everybody for your comments. After due consideration, I've taken the plunge and ordered a Latuz Optics L800 with a spare battery, red filter and diffuser. I'll post my opinion when I've received and tested it.

Thank you for your comments. My Fisheye LED500 has neither a red filter nor a red light and I can't say I miss it. The Laluz Optics L800 also has a safe position. As regards cut-off, I thought we were all more or less agreed that this is unnecessary as the strobe completely overwhelms the focus light and also has a different colour temperature. I intend to use the light only as a focus light, not as a substitute for a strobe or as a video light, by the way.

Thanks Gina! I've also heard very good reports of the Sola lights. However, the Laluz Optics L800 is $100 cheaper than the Sola 500 and $300 cheaper than the Sola 800. It is also somewhat smaller and lighter than the Sola lights and has about the same burn time as the Sola 800. If it is as good as it sounds, it offers the same advantages as the Sola 800 at a much lower price.

It seems to have all the requirements - powerful, 80 degree beam with no hotspot, long burn time, three effect levels, on-off by means of a press button on the back and small size and weight. The price is also reasonable. My FIX LED500 DX works fine but it is big and heavy, making it less sutable for travel. Also, I'm always afraid it will put too much of a strain on the accessory ball mount on the top of my Ikelite housing. The Latuz Optics L800 also has a much longer burn time. But does anybody have any practical experience of it? http://www.laluzoptics.com/L800.html

I have an Ikelite housing and Ikelite TTL-compatible strobes and find TTL works fine, both for macro and wide angle, although I know most people use manual for wide angle. The use of TTL for wide angle is debatable, although it works fine for me, but I see absolutely no reason at all not to use TTL for macro if you have Ikelite strobes, especially as the knob on the back of the housing allows you to make fine adjustments to the strobe output in TTL mode.

PM sent re 2 DS 125's. I can't help you re dual TTL cord or arms.

Oops! Apologies for the multiple uploads! I'm not sure what happened there.

No need to worry about popping my balloon, Tim! I'm not expecting to get on the cover of National Geographic any time soon The 18-55mm lens focuses down to 0.28m, compared to 0.219m for the 60mm D lens. In the southern Red Sea, where I use my 18-55, the vis is almost always at least 30m, often much more, and the 6.1cm difference is not critical under these conditions. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating, so I attach an example of shots taken at the extremes of the lens, i.e. 18mm and 55mm. I don't expect the ace photographers here will like them but I can't see much wrong with the image quality as such. If I plan to take nudibranchs, I of course ues the 60mm lens, with or without a TC, and if I am after extreme wide angle, I use my Tokina 10-17, but if I am doing an ordinary reef dive and am likely to see everything from small fish to large rays and green turtles, the 18-55mm lens does the job fine.

I have the Micro-Nikkor 60mm D, 105 mm D and Tokina 10-17mm but the 18-55mm lens, with a +4 diopter and Ikelite's dedicated 6" dome port, has become my favourite all-round lens for use on tropical reefs. It covers everything from almost macro to moderately wide angle and the optics are excellent in spite of the ridiculously low price.

The new version is about $150 more expensive then the D lens and focuses slightly faster but there are still an awful lot of D lenses in use and most of us are perfectly happy with it.

Just to expand on what others have indirectly said, it is essential to check that the port locks really are locked. It's not enough to just close the locks. You need to press down on each lock until you hear a distinct click,

The ridiculously cheap Nikon 18-55 works very well underwater if you add a +4 diopter and your housing manufacturer makes a suitable dome port. The optics are excellent and it is incredibly flexible (enables me to take everything from almost macro to moderately wide angle). It has become my favourite general purpose lens for clear tropical waters. I love my Tokina 10-17mm but you need to get very close if you want to take decent shark shots.

I only have experience of the Tokina 10-17mm, which is a great lens, but wonder if those of you who have used the Nikon 12-24mm have also tried the 10-24mm. I have the impression from reports on the web that it has better optics. Any comments on this?

The question was whether he can use a D80 in his D90 housing. Your blog is about the opposite, i.e. using a D90 in a D80 housing, which we already know works fairly well.

You might like to post a question on the Ikelite Q and A forum on Scubaboard. Here is Iklite's answer to the opposite question, i.e. a D90 in the D80 housing: http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ikelite/3...80-housing.html

Could you use this http://uwcamerastuff.com/modular_5_dome.htm ? Does Hugyfot make an adapter for Ikelite ports? I expect Bill Libecap knows the answer.

Hi, I am a Brit living in Sweden. Would you be willingv to post tome? I would of course pay the postage (USPS small packet) and your Paypall fee. Regards, John

Yes, the argument does apply to any DSLR but if you buy a housing for one of the latest models, e.g the D7000, you can expect to use it happily for several years, whereas with a camera that is rapidly becoming obsolescent, like the D 90, you will in all probability suffer the same depreciation in value of the housing within a much shorter time. Regarding the 60mm lens, a couple of friends of mine who have recently bought the new version becuase their older 60mm broke say the difference in focus speed is negligible and they cannot see any difference in the optics. The new version is supposed to have a better bouquet (boket?) but I've never heard any complaints about the D version from u/w photographers in that respect. Personally, I wouldn't pay $150 more for the new version but the decision is naturally up to the prospective buyer.

EDIT: Duplicate post.

Thanks Mark and Tom! Lovely shots! I'll use the TC then. I'll try it with and without the Woody's diopter.

OK, I have a Woody's diopter too.

Thanks John! I plan to use the set-up for tiny nudibranchs etc. A friend of mine has taken some amazing shots with the 60mm lens and +4 dioter (no teleconverter). As I have both the Tamron TC and a +4 diopter, I thought I would try both together or is that a bad idea? Would the TC alone or +¤ diopter alone be a better choice?

I posted the following on Scubaboard but didn'tr get much response, so I'm hoping to do beter here: I will be going on a trip to the Red Sea in a couple of weeks and plan to experiment with supermacro for the first time. I have the 60mm D lens, which I have used for several years and am very happy with. I plan to combine it with a 1.4x teleconverter and +4 diopter. I realize that the depth of field will be very small and wonder if the set-up will make it difficult for the camera to autofocus. Would it be better to skip the tc and just use the diopter? I have a good focus light but the light conditions and visibility in southern Egypt are so good that I have rarely had to use it in the daytime on past trips. Grateful for comments and tips.