Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Nicool

  1. Hello Wetpixel! Initially I posted my question on this thread but it would probably deserve a dedicated discussion. My setup: Two Inon Z240 Type IV strobes, setup to be triggered via fiber optic cables (cables attached, working on previous Nauticam DSLR housing). Shooting fully in Manual mode, strobe outputs controlled manually via the strob knobs (not using TTL). Nikon D500 camera, in Nauticam housing. Because D500 doesn't have internal flash, Nauticam's new external flash triggering system is used, and connected to the D500 via a hot shoe. See here under section "External Flash Triggering" - i am NOT using the optional TTL circuitry, just the baseline one, which works in manual mode only. The problem: Inons don't fire My investigations so far: I am pretty sure the Inons are setup properly (i've switched from TTL shooting to Manual a while ago), and in fact i have been switching the fiber optics from the D500 housing to the D300s housing which i still have, and with the D300s Nauticam housing both strobes fire properly. So clearly the communication between NA-D500 housing and the Inons is not right. I made sure the NA-D500 emits a light signal: i unplugged the fiber optics and looked through the 2 "windows" and, surprise, they both emit a (strong) red light. So i confirmed the housing produces some light. Now i checked on the other end of the fiber optic cables (strobe side), and i do see the red light properly coming through the optical cable, so for me the fiber optic cables are fine - anyways they work perfectly with NA-D300s housing (triggered by the D300s' internal flash. My theories/open question so far: is it normal that the Nauticam LED flash triggering system emits red light? As far as i know LEDs consume fewer power when emitting white/blueish light. are Inon Z240 type 4 strobes supposed to work with a red light when using fiber optics as a trigger? I would be surprised that this very popular strobe model isn't compatible with the new Nauticam LED flash triggering system, but i just don't know. Can anybody help me figure out why it is not working, and how to fix this? I believe the NA-D5 housing uses the exact same strobe triggering system, so maybe some D5 shooters could advice? Some would say RTFM, but in fact the NA-D500 manual is still being written, that's one of the funny aspects of being a very early adopter cheers Nicolas
  2. hi there, So my NA-D500 housing has arrived and it's just fantastic! Love the ergonomics and design! And the size as well: it fits in my Manfrotto carry-on roller bag thanks to its reasonable height. Now it's all ready for Sunday's dive, equipped with Tokina 10-17, vacuum system is green etc. etc... BUT i couldn't manage to get my Inon Z240 type IV strobes to work with the new manual trigger (i am not talking about the optional TTL one, but about the one which comes baseline with the housing). My Inons are both properly setup in manual mode, and i am sure they work well since i just need to move the fibre optics from NA-D500 housing to my NA-D300s housing which sits next to it, and they fire just well with the NA-D300s housing. I have looked through the optical fibre attachment holes on the NA-D500 housing, and i can see a pretty bright light coming out when i pull the trigger... though this light is red. Could that be the reason why my Inons don't like it? I'd be grateful for any idea on how to fix this, otherwise i'll be stuck with available light shots this Sunday, but i'll dive next to beautiful gorgonians, it would be a shame... Of course i've written to my local dealer, a very reactive person which i couldn't thank enough, but i am not sure he'll get my message during the weekend, so if some of you guys have ideas, you're welcome to save my gorgonians dive thanks Nicolas
  3. Look at the last page of the paper manual. I have bought mine from a reputable dealer and it's there (not a separate paper).
  4. Wow thanks guys for the very informative answers, i couldn't dream of more :-) Would you recommend separating the clamps from the strobe arms in the rinse tank? I must confess that after pushing all housing buttons for salt residue, and turning strobe knobs, i am too lazy to take care of arms clamps, but maybe it's worth it?
  5. Wow thanks guys for the very informative answers, i couldn't dream of more :-) Good point. My balls (...) are still in good shape though i could definitely replace all the o-rings, which i haven't done yet, it cannot hurt. In fact, i replaced 2 arms o-rings some time ago because i got dissatisfied with clamp tightness, and it didn't produce the expected improvement. At that time i thought it was because i adopted huge Nauticam float arms (carbon ones). In fact i started thinking my clamps could be the weak point when reading at your last book Alex, it was one of the many useful learnings from it. Thanks again for sharing so much and for the nice dedicace :-)
  6. hello Wetpixel! I think my trusty Ultralight clamps (AC CSF model, those with 15 degrees side movement flexibility) now deserve to retire, as they've become a little tough to use, after about 300-400 photo dives, over... 7 years! By "tough to use" i mean i need to screw harder to get the arms steady, and i am often not fully happy with the steadiness. Looking at photo dealers not too far from home, i am given a number of choices as far as manufacturers are concerned: -ULCS (the same AC CSF ones which i have) -Nauticam (same manufacturer as my housing) -I-Das clamps, offering apparently 60 degrees side movement flexibility -a number of carbondive.com clamps, some with very peculiar shapes Those are the 4 brands within easy reach for me which i have down-selected. Could you share feedbacks on the easiness to use, quality, and durability of these clamps? thanks! Nicolas
  7. Hooray mine is with DHL heading to home sweet home Hope to have it on time & weather permitting, to dive it this week-end!
  8. I have for sale the LCD window which allows using dslr 45 viewfinder... On NA-EM5 housing. Not sure if it also works for the NA-EM5II housing?
  9. I just read about the new TTL circuitry which will be installed in Nauticam NA-D500 housing: http://wetpixel.com/articles/uw-technics-releases-ttl-converter Is it the part #26307 which you were referring to? It looks brilliant to me, and i hope Nauticam will take advantage of this very slim design to lower down the housing height as much as possible, since there is no need for pop-up flash (irrelevant to D500 anyways) and no need for an extra electric-to-optical flash trigger module. DSLR housings which aren't too tall can fit in airline carry-on photo bags, so i hope the NA-D500 housing is one of these. Nicolas
  10. Well, thinking twice i shouldn't infer it's a shrimp. The idea cross my mind that it could be a larvae of something else, lobster maybe? It was photographed in March 2016, water about 15 degrees celcius, if it helps to identify it.
  11. Hi folks! I'd be very interested in your help to identify this tiny shrimp which i met for the first time some weeks ago, in Antibes waters (South of France). To give you an idea of scale, she sits on some sort of gastropod (the yellow guy in the shell) which itself was climing a posedonia seaweed, which was around 1.5 cm, max 2 cm in width i'd say. Encounter was during a night dive, about 10 meters deep. Photographed with a Nikon D300s, some cropping but not too much. cheers Nicolas Remark: i've reduced the picture size to upload it, but you can find a bit larger file here: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/1M4qvoHtyWHcXTDd_gIiStMTjNZETYmyPJy0liipFm0?feat=directlink
  12. If that helps: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1427157/5 Although these are not underwater images, the great feedbacks from several professionnal action photographers was good enough to convince me, like this one who says he shot 1000 moto-cross race photo and doesn't have a single shot out of focus :-) Now i am waiting in pain the nauticam housing to be announced to confirm whether i am happy with design choices/ergonomics/innovations, and if so order! I strongly hope they will offer same flash trigger as with D5 housing. Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
  13. Though i adressed this issue by buying one yesterday :-D Found in stock in a local store (south of France) Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
  14. I am asking myself the same :-) The biggest issue i see for now is camera availability - rumors say recent earthquake in japan may delay further shipments Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
  15. And i have a nauticam setup for olympus om-D em5 (mark 1), if interested to save money pm me ;-) Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
  16. Thanks Tursiops that's good advice! My "inner" floqt arms being 4" only i might be too short, but any case the extra long clamps could definitely help when needing to fold arms, like for macro shooting. How long are your inner arms? Would you have a photo of your gear? Which brand/model for the extra long clamps? Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
  17. Hi there, I am writing in regards to getting underwater photography gear neutral underwater. After a recent housing change i find my current set of arms and arms accessories unadequate, and before i order anything else, i'd like to give all this a decent thought, and hear some advice from others. I started shooting in 2008 with regular ULCS strobe arms (2x 8" and 2x4"), which i completed with 4x large Stix floats and 4x jumbo Stix floats. My feedback on this setup: obviously getting closer to housing neutrality made my whole shooting experience much better. Only painpoint was that those Stix floats take a lot of time to dry, but that's minor. Moving to another housing in 2013 (NA-EM5 + 45 degrees Nauticam viewvinder + subsee +10 diopter), these weren't sufficient anymore, so i put the Stix floats aside, and replaced the 2x 8" ULCS arms by 2x Nauticam carbon fiber float arms (200mm x 60mm). My feedback on this setup: benefits were getting the right amount of buoyancy & arms drying easily, but i wasn't totally satisfied as i felt strobe arms manipulation to be trickier than with the Stix floats: i had to screw the clamps very tight to avoid the float arms from going up, and then strobe repositioning got unpractical. Also, i must say my gear wasn't symetric: i had a flexitray left handle, but no right handle (handstrap), meaning the right arm was closer to the optical axis than the left one. I believe this contributed to the un-practicality. Now (2016) i am moving to a Nauticam DSLR housing (NA-D300s), complemented by my 45 degrees viewfinder. Photo here: When shooting with 60mm macro + focus light, i don't have adequate equipment to make my rig neutral: -my 2008 setup with Stix floats doesn't provide sufficient buoyancy, but i felt it provided great comfort in strobes repositioning. I tested it yesterday. Here's how it looks like one one arm: -my 2013 nauticam float arms make the housing (too much) positive One idea i have is to buy 4 extra jumbo Stix floats, and add them to my ULCS strobe arms (2x 8" and 2x4"), replacing some of the large floats possibly. I tested (on land) that i could squeeze 4 jumbo Stix floats on a 8" ULCS arm + 1 jumbo & 1 large Stix floats on the adjacent 4" ULCS arms, and this would bring extra buoyancy, hopefully enough! Here's how it would look like on one arm: Thinking/questions: Have any of you got the same feeling that very large float arms (like my 200mm x 60mm Nauticam carbon float arms) make strobes re-positioning too cumbersome, because they are just too buoyant? Would i workaround this problem and get a more user-friendly gear by spreading lots of Stix floats over the 4 arms sections? Any other solution(s) to offset the weight of a large DSLR rig while keeping strobe arms easy to re-position? thanks!! Nicolas
  18. The next limit for these setups isn't size but weight. I have several times taken all my OM-D E-M5 gear: Nauticam housing and associated ports/domes+ 60mm + 12-50mm + 9-18mm + 8mm fisheye + 2x Z240 + 2 dive computers + Nikon D3 + 24-70mm f/2.8 + mac book pro 15" + all chargers. Basically all my photo related gear except the arms and housing tray (which were checked-in) but the carry on bag weighted 16kg, not to the taste of all airlines! Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
  19. Is it suitable for nikon version of tokina 10-17mm? If yes i'd be interested
  20. thanks for the feedback Tim, this is why i am interested to see whether users see in the field the same kind of gap which test benches highlight
  21. i guess this is kind-of equivalent to my above point: DX lenses are usually less able than FX lenses in getting lots of megapixels out of the sensor. I didn't mean it was impossible (for instance some Zeiss expensive lenses get almost 100% of the resolution out of the D7100/D7200, but it's a 5000 USD lens...).
  22. dear all, I've read this thread with attention as i am myself hesitating between a DX or FX body for my next housing. Previously i had been using a D300, then D7000, then OM-D EM-5, and i'd like to go back to Nikon DSLR. I am bringing this thread up because it includes lots of useful considerations already, except maybe the following one, on which i'd love to have some feedback: what would be the resolution (megapixels) you can really get out of these setups (meaning not the advertised sensor resolution)? In my case i am hesitating between a D7200/D7100 and a D750, which are both 24 MP sensors. I've spend quite some time browsing the tests on DxoMark.com, and when looking at the lenses we typically use underwater, it seems the latest DX cameras are far behind the FX in sharpness: 1/ take the venerable Nikon 105mm Micro AF-S: it renders only 12 MP on a D7100, vs 19 MP on a D750 => on a side note, the Sigma 105mm F/2.8 EX DG OS HSM manages to resolve 15 MP out of the D7100, but i believe it's not popular underwater for some reasons. 2/ similar result for Nikon 60mm Micro AF-S: it renders only 11 MP on a D7100, vs 17 MP on a D750 => on a side note, the Tamron 60mm F/2 Macro manages to resolve 14 MP out of the D7100, but i believe it's not popular underwater for some reasons. 3/ consider the Nikon 10-24mm: it renders only 10 MP on a D7100, whereas the "equivalent" Nikon 16-35mm gets 16 MP out of a D750. 4/ unfortunately the fisheyes haven't been tested, it would have been interesting to see how the Tokina 10-17mm performs. My conclusion after reading these measures: the best resolution i one can really get out of a D7100/D7200 for underwater photography is in fact 10-12 MP, whereas it's about 16-19 MP on a D750 (in fact it would even be less on both, due to the imperfections of dome/ports). I had read multiple times in this thread that the IQ of FX cameras was better than DX, but i thought it was in the extreme cases where you close aperture (diffraction coming up quicker on DX) or increase ISOs (noise damaging details quicker on DX). I didn't think the difference would be so significant when shooting at low ISO, with lenses pretty opened. What are your thoughts on this? Do real-life experiments tend to confirm such a statement? regards Nicolas
  23. I would have been quite interested if it were rated to 40m/120ft. IMHO if you have to put it within a housing it makes it just another camera. I am wondering if some housing manufacturers would built wet lenses that could go straight on the housing (hence minimizing optical defaults)
  • Create New...