Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About wus

  • Rank
    Sea Nettle
  • Birthday 10/26/1955

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Munich, Germany
  • Interests
    Travel, photography, wildlife, culture

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Nikonos V
  • Camera Housing
    none so far
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    none so far
  • Accessories
    Nikonos 15 and 28 mm lenses with viewfinders
  1. Thank you, Dan. Today I bought the RX100VI. Can't tell much yet, but it seems to be a good little camera. Don't have any UW housing yet, but think I will buy the Nauticam. WWL-1 compatibility is no issue for me as that lens it too big, heavy and expensive for me. What I will (likely) buy are the flip diopter holder for the standard port and the SMC-1.
  2. What is your experience? Pros and cons? Thanks in advance, Wolfgang
  3. Thanks for all your answers... @Wolfgang: I'm not quite sure if I understand the concept of the AD mount - on the Recsea website it looks rather different from Nauticam's flip mount. Do you have a picture for me, showing the mount with 2 lenses?
  4. Hi all UW photographers out there, I want to buy a good compact, suitable housing and strobe/LED. To give you an idea about my UW photography experience: In the analog era I used to dive with a Minolta Alpha 8000i with (usually) a 100mm Macro lens in a Hugyfot housing, Subtronic 250Ws strobe w/built-in pilot lamp, plus a Nikonos V with 28 or 15mm lens mounted on top of the Hugyfot housing. With this setup I could shoot macro and wideangle on the same dive, which was really nice. Disadvantage of this setup was its bulk and weight. Particularly the huge and heavy Subtronic strobe was really difficult to handle when I had to fight currents, as I encountered them near Alor or some spots in the Andaman islands. So for the future I am looking for something much smaller and lighter, but with a similar level of versatility. Instead of one big and heavy strobes, I want to use 2 really small and lightweight ones. I have pretty much narrowed down my search to a Sony RX100 II*, but I am not sure what housing I should buy as there are so many. It should be - compact and lightweight - good for a diving depth of at least 60 meters, which I guess rules out the cheaper plastic housings - give me good control over the camera's settings - allow fiber optic connection of 2 UW strobes with TTL control - allow mounting of 2 strobe arms - allow mounting of wet lenses. I remember on a trip to Ambon I saw a guy with a housing who had 2 wet lenses mounted to the left and right of his port, one wide angle converter and one close-up lens. He could flip them in and out very quickly. This looked very useful to me. Do any of you out there know if any of the housings for the RX100 II offers such a mount option? * Or would you recommend another good compact? I chose the RX 100 II over the newer RX100 models because of its longer lens, 100 instead of the 70mm max offered by the newer versions.
  5. Hi everyone, I'm still using the good old Nikonos V with the original 15 and 28 mm Nikonos lenses so far, also used to have a Minolta SLR with 100mm Macro in a Hugy housing and a Subtronic strobe. I had the Nik V mounted on top of the SLR housing and both were connected to the Subtronic so I could shoot high quality wide angle and macro in the same dive. I did this for almost 20 years, until in 2006, the strobe and the Minolta gave up. Since then I'm using only the Nikonos V with a SB-105. I'm missing a good macro setup though. I do have the Nikonos V close up kit and use it occasionally, but it can't replace the SLR with 100mm macro. Now I want to switch to digital. Because (D)SLR housings are so big and bulky, and also because of the prices (not only for the initial purchase but also for the airfares to my favorite dive grounds) I'd prefer to use one of the better compacts. Ideally one that allows (fairly) wide angle and macro in one camera, to avoid a bulky 2 camera setup as I used to have. The question is, will I get pictures from those compacts anywhere near the quality I'm used to from my analog equipment? When I zoom to the wide end, will pictures still be fully sharp, even in the corners? Nikonos lenses do a phantastic job in this regard... Compacts have their best macro capabilities at the wide end, which scale can I expect at the more practical long end, under water? How much will screw on macro lenses deteriorate quality, and how much closer can I go with them? (I think there aren't too many different ones to choose from, right?) When I think about it, I hate the idea of screwing on a macro lens to take a close up then remove it in the next moment to shoot a passing tuna or manta ray. Is there any way to overcome this? What do you think? Do I expect too much if I believe to get the quality I'm used to from my Nikonos and SLR? Which compact would you suggest? I know these 3 are all very good on land, question is how good are they under water, and how practical in use? I did read many of the posts here, including the pinned ones, but the one on quality is close to 5 years old which can hardly reflect today's compact's quality and performance. Any advice, hints, recommendations etc. are more than welcome. Tell me straight if you think I'm asking too much. Thank you all!
  6. Hi everyone, I know this forum is about digital underwater photography but I hope some of you out there are shooting under water long enough to tell me your experience. I wouldn't know where else I could ask this. I own a Nikonos V along with 28 and 15mm UW Nikkor lenses. To me the 15 mm still is among the best wide angle lenses as far as image quality is concerned. I wouldn't know of any digital which comes close at such a wide angle of view - if YOU do, would you please let me know? But what I really want to know is if you think - or know from experience - if the 13 mm on the Nikonos RS is even better? Can it compete with the old 15 mm, quality wise? And how does the Nikonos RS 20 to 35 mm compare to the old, non-AF, fixed focal length 28 mm UW Nikkor? Can it reproduce equally brilliant as the old fixed focal length 28mm, over its whole focal range? Thanks for sharing thoughts and experience!
  7. wus


    Lots of great shots indeed. I love the Pygmy Seahorse (the yellow one), wish I had such a nice one. They tend to look away when you point the camera at them. The Hairy Frogfish eating his catch sequence is also phantastic! But I also found some of your shots a bit flat, as if shot without flash. What flash are you using, and how do you control exposure? Are you sure your flash is working as expected, all the time?
  8. I thank you all for these quick answers! What I meant with the px/mm spec is the resolution that a particular camera / lens combination can achieve in relation to the size of the smallest object the camera can focus on. An EOS 50D doesn't have the highest overall resolution, but a smaller sensor than the few full frame SLRs that have an even higher resolution. When used with a macro that can focus to a 1:1 reproduction ratio, it can reproduce objects as small as its sensor, in other words, the 50D can use its whole 4752 x 3104 px resolution on objects as small as its sensor - 22.3 x 14.9 mm -, resulting in the stated 213 px/mm. A full format SLR like the Sony A900 has a higher total resolution (6096 x 4064) but due to its larger full frame sensor with an equivalent 1:1 macro lens can't reproduce objects smaller than 36 x 24 mm (frame filling). As a result, the resolution in relation to the smallest object it can focus on is somewhat inferior to the 50D's, 169 px/mm, despite it's higher total resolution. So if I want a tool to picture as small objects as possible with the highest resolution possible, the 50D is the better choice. About the add on macro lenses, don't they limit focusing to the close range? Also don't they reduce image quality?
  9. Hello all, I used to shoot with a Minolta Dynax 8000i housed in a Hugyfot Jetmarin, mostly with the 100 mm 2.8 Macro, but this combination "passed away" during my last diving trip 2 years ago. I also still own a Nikonos V with Nikonos 15 and 28 mm lenses and viewfinders which I intend to continue using for a few more years, or at least until I learn that something better has become available. With "better" I mean with regards to image quality shooting wide angle / landscape under water. As far as I am aware there is still nothing that comes close (but please tell me if you think different, I'm eager to learn, didn't spend ages to search the internet recently). Usually I went into the water with both cameras mounted on top of each other. See a picture of this setup in my album. I now want to buy a new camera for under water macro photography. Because of the weight (air transportation can get quite expensive) and the bulk of the big SLR housing and flash (specifically when I encountered strong currents on my dives) I first thought with the great point and shoots available now I will buy one of these and save most of the weight I used to have with the big housed SLR. Also because from trying out the one or other of the better models of this category (of course only on land, not under water) I knew many have great macro capabilities. Some of these cameras, such as the Canon G10, can shoot an area as small as 31 x 23 mm with a resolution of 14.6 MP, or 142 pixels per millimeter. However when I had a closer look to evaluate this camera's suitability for UW photography I was disappointed when I learned that the great macro resolution is only available at the wide end of the zoom, and at a distance of only 1 cm from the lens. This is not usable under water. And as strange as it sounds when you first read about it, at the long end of the zoom range - where you would normally expect to zoom closer to your object - the minimum area covered is 89 x 67 mm, or only 50 pixels per mm. Even with my old setup, where I used to scan the 35 mm slides with a Nikon LS-2000 slide scanner (with 2700 dpi resolution), I had a much better effective resolution of 106 px/mm. The best combination available today, with regard to the maximum resolution achievable, should be Canon's EOS 50D. With a 1:1 macro it should go up to 213 px/mm. Do I really have to buy a (D)SLR to get the high macro resolution that I want? Is anyone aware of a good quality P&S which has the highest macro resolution at the long end of the zoom range? What would you recommend? What else should be considered?
  10. I made some nice ambient light shots with the built in meter, and wouldn't want to take an additional meter along. But, admittedly, I never tried. Used automatic exposure most of the time anyway. As you also wrote yourself, without the flash it's a real neat compact thing (although quite heavy, considering how small it is) to lug around, anything additional, even if just a Sekonic, adds at least some bulk.
  11. Hi! My 1st post here, although I'm not new in U/W photography. Looks like there's a lot of useful information collected here. But the hour or so that I just spent searching the forum did not bring me on much. I'm trying to find out which digital compact is the best one for underwater macro photography. In the past I used a Minolta Dynax (Maxxum) 8000i film SLR with the 100 mm macro in a Hugyfot housing. I shot some nice photos I guess. Some can be seen in the Underwater Galleries on the Eastern Samar website (scroll down to the bottom), if you're interested. In my opinion, one disadvantage of my old setup is the small depth of field in the extreme close range. This should be much better with a compact digital because the sensors are so much smaller than 35mm slides. And therefore I now consider to use a housed compact, although I will of course continue to use SLRs over water. Another reason that speaks for the compact is size and weight. SLR housings are big and heavy, and unfortunately here in Europe we don't enjoy the piece concept for airline luggage that seems common in the US ... so whenever I flew to the Red Sea, the Philippines or Indonesia with my old setup, I had a weight problem and had to pay for the overweight luggage. 1. The camera: At present I'm looking at Canon's G9 - after all the reviews I read about it I'm sure it's a good camera, but how good is it for macro photography, under water? Is there any better choice for this particular application, among the compacts? One disadvantage of most compacts is that they have the minimum focus distance at the wide end of the zoom range. For the G9 this means that you'd have to get as close as 1 cm to the object - not practical under water. How close can you really go, or more precisely asked, what is the smallest area that the G9 can capture under water? Are you aware of any compact that does not have this limitation, and allows focusing real close even at the long end of the zoom range? 2. The housing: Should be good for at least 60 meters depth, preferrably more, allow connection of underwater strobe(s). The housing must give me control over all functions of the camera. I looked at Ikelite, Patima and the Sea & Sea found on digideep (but strangely can't find on Sea & Sea), but am not determined. Any other suggestion (also for other cameras than the G9)? 3. The substrobe(s): Should be small and lightweight, and ideally have built-in lamps for night dives. Must support TTL control from the camera. From experience with my old setup I know that a single flash often results in unevenly lit pictures, therefore I think it would be much better if I had 2. Question is, is there any system that supports TTL control of 2 strobes from a compact camera? How would this connect? I have not seen housings for compacts with 2 strobe connectors - are there? It would be nice if you could share your views with me. Thank you to all who will! - wus
  • Create New...