Jump to content

String

Member
  • Content Count

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

String last won the day on May 7

String had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

16 Good

About String

  • Rank
    Moray Eel

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Khao Lak, Thailand

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    --
  • Camera Model & Brand
    EOS70D
  • Camera Housing
    Nauticam
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Ikelite DS161s
  • Accessories
    mini domes, macro, ports etc etc etc

Recent Profile Visitors

9645 profile views
  1. From personal experience id say even a low lumen constant light has MUCH more of an effect on marine life than a strobe. Even something dim like a 3,000 lumen lots of marine life actively distances itself from you or turns away. 10,000+ is significantly worse. With a strobe, although its much more powerful its over very quickly. I suspect some animals simply dont even see the flash - theres no reaction at all (lionfish, bannerfish, barracuda etc). Some clearly DO see it and blink (turtles octopus, cuttlefish etc) but do not turn away or try to leave the area. I guess its like a person, take a photo of me with a camera flash its unlikely to annoy me. But shine a really bright light constantly in my face and im far more likely to get annoyed or turn away.
  2. Surely a lot of that is personal preference. Some like colour, some don't. Depends on the viewer. Personally i've never yet seen a B&W image or video that i didn't think "i bet this would look so much better in colour" but i fully understand there are people who feel the exact opposite.
  3. Actually should clarify i mean for non uw use. Adapted lenses generally all seem to suffer in terms of AF speed and accuracy the longer the focal length. On all the ones ive tried (sony and canon systems) at 400m the AF performance is fairly dire compared to native without an adaptor. I know its not an issue underwater but like i said, for me i ideally need one system to cover both.
  4. Ive never used those (or seen them in the wild in fact). Experience the above-mentioned Sony models and the Eos R. The AF issues with adapted lenses are another issue for me - combine that with EVF lag and above water sport and wildlife is tricky.
  5. Its totally different from the 80D sadly (joystick etc). I bought it in the hope that a housing would be made. I know Ikelite and some have them but i dont want to go there. I may have made an expensive gamble. Ultimately my underwater setup currently is a dated 70D so no 4k video and other things so in bad need of an upgrade but as of yet there isnt really anything on the market i can use for underwater AND surface sensibly. The 90D hybrid isnt really that - it superimposes a lot of data but the view itself is still optical. You need liveview for video and other features. Id *love* a camera i could take video by looking through the viewfinder which mirrorless does as holding a DSLR steady and having to look at the back LCD screen is difficult. I still cant accept the lag in an EVF for sport/wildlife shooting on land. As i said, i havent tried an A9 or A7m4 but the others i have tried still to me had distracting and noticeable latency.
  6. This is the problem, as they themselves admitted, its not based on any evidence the masks actually do that at all (and no research into harmful unexpected results such as potentially increased risk of infection due to incorrect use and adhering). The CDC is a massive outlier here, i dont know another major body recommending masks (nor making recommendations that aren't based on any science what-so-ever). Its very odd for them to do such a thing and does hint a bit of desperation. In short, there is no data to suggest "my mask protects you" and also no data showing "my mask doesn't make me more prone to disease than no mask". Both of which are pretty important. ...and getting back to the original point. The website that is ultimately "fake news". Ultimately it makes claims that are demonstrably untrue, selectively edits the data to try to fit its conclusion and offers no scientific backing. Its worth than nothing. Its possible to have sensible debate of the actual science but that website is nothing of the sort. Its a screaming hysteria site with absolutely no basis in science or fact. Its misleading and potentially dangerous.
  7. I actually bought a 90D and its a good little camera. Not high end for sure but a big upgrade over my 70D (I just wish there was a nauticam housing....). Maybe im different but i do above and below water photography and for ease of accessories, travel weight, spares and so on really want the same gear to use in both for some commonality. On the surface at least, mirrorless AF still lags behind a dedicated sensor. There's also the issue that most (all?) mount adaptors tend to drastically affect the AF speed and accuracy the more you get into longer focal lengths. So for me at least, sport and wildlife wise where most of it is through L glass at longer lengths, mirrorless simply isnt going to be useful for me yet. I like APS-C for the above (combined with the resolution of the 90D) for the reach it gives me. Admittedly i haven't tried an A9 or A74 but i absolutely hate the EVF for tracking sport or wildlife. The A72 was unusable completely, the A73 still feels laggy to me and isn't a pleasant usage experience. Again i can see an upside to EVF but also downsides. Underwater probably more pros than cons, surface not so much. If i was doing underwater *only* they im fairly sure id go full frame mirrorless but as i need a setup to both, that isnt a useful option for me currently. At least not yet. My setup is a compromise, not absolutely perfect for underwater but good enough. The other way around would significantly hamper my above-water ability.
  8. ...which actually admits there is no evidence or studies to the efficacy of masks at all. They're honest enough about it. (Its surprising to see a recommendation based on no peer reviewed evidence into (i) bemefit and (ii) potentially harmful unexpected effects from a major world body though. This puts them massively out of step with just about everywhere else). CDC is basically saying "We know asymptomatic carriers are everywhere due to new research" (this much is true) but then says wear a cloth mask where no studies at all have been done to see if they have any positive effects or if so outweigh the actual negative effects.
  9. I would caution that nothing on that site seems to list ANY scientific evidence at all yet claims "scientific evidence". Alarm bells should be flashing. I uses a chart claiming "MASK USE!!" for some countries that have controlled this while ignoring (i) they embarked on mass testing, rapid tracing and isolation and (ii) some of the countries there actually had big fines FOR wearing a mask in public without being sick. Its misleading at best, deliberately deceiving would be another term.... When you dig around the mainstream media stuff it cites, it leads to NO peer reviewed articles on it. It's also worth noting in its change of policy the CDC itself admitted there is no research on mask efficiency. There are some (unreviewed studies) on distance of droplets travelling but crucially *none* showing the efficacy of masks to reduce or change this. They admit this - its a recommendation based more on a hunch and guess than actual evidence. All the research that HAS been done is in a clinical environment. Thats very different to average people on the street. There is evidence that masks, especially cloth masks can INCREASE the risk of infections due to moisture and pathogen trapping, this combined by a non clinical (untrained people touching them, sliding them on and off etc) can transfer infections. From the ECDC tehnical report 26/3:- NCBI paper in 2015 found: There are 20+ references off this and a further 40 from the ECDC on about this. Actually, peer reviewed data. So i'd be VERY cautious of this website as it contains *no* scientific validation, cherry picks outcomes from charts whilst (i) invented things about mask use and (ii) ignoring ACTUAL mitigation factors performed. A few mistruths from that site:- There is no data what-so-ever anywhere to suggest we "know" that. No verified peer review model published out there suggests anything of the sort. Is demonstrably untrue using the data on their own site! I could go on tearing apart each claim but you get the point, in normal times this website would be banned for unaccirate or misleading medical claims and advertising in many countries. Ultimately if you do decide to wear a cloth mask, be aware that you could easily increase the risk of infections generally so it should be sterilised and washed certainly after each and every use, ideally every time you touch it bare hands. Otherwise you maybe creating a bigger problem than the one you're trying to solve.
  10. Local store isnt really an option where i am in Thailand as there are none. All would involve multi hour trips to a city and back and even then the chances of them understanding what i need are slim! Its a genuine, newly bought Nauticam housing so the parts themselves should all be Nauticam. Its the reducer thing i need really as without that i cant screw the handle down.
  11. I've got a Nauticam housing for my Canon EOS 70D and in the process of reconfiguring it slightly and have lost some original bits. Currently i have a ball mount for a gopro mounted which i want to remove. The problem is, removing this requires some sort of reducer and screw to complete the housing setup but im unable to find the name (or part numbers) i need. This is the mounting hole with the ball removed. The other side has a reducer of some sort and screw as can be seen here:- Basically im after the name and/or part numbers of these items (reducer thingy and screw so can order them and remove the unneeded ball mount.
  12. Cardiff specifically, Doha and other places they didnt care less. I was 7.2kg, had to lose 200grams (and then unknown to them collect the other 7kg id left with relatives outside the check-in area....
  13. Qatar Airlines from Cardiff ruthlessly enforced hand baggage to the gram. The other one now is all flights at KLIA2 (so Air Asia main hub) they now weigh after checking and before immigration. I end up wearing 2 pairs of shorts and hiking trousers with stuffed pockets every single time going through there now as a result.
  14. We go there roughly once a month (OK less this year due to the crazy myanmar visa price and new $1000 per boat fee they've introduced!). Myanmar can be highly variable. Typically 3-5m vis and green, sometimes the Mantas are around Black rock (and the Twins), sometimes not. Once a year in roughly February they seem to congregate for a few days in large numbers then vanish (this video was shot over a period of 3 days/12 dives - normally we do 1 day at black rock but customers kept voting to stay so we did). As far as IDs go, we had 50 different individual mantas on this particular trip and yes, I submit to Manta Matcher). Unusually the vis was 15m+ and blue water as opposed to 5m of green as well. The following year we only had 1 day of Manta madness there but got 20 different IDs over 4 dives, the next day there they'd all gone. This time though they were breaching, sometimes as 1s, sometimes as pairs so behaviour was completely different. What was interesting is both seasons we didn't have the same manta on more than 1 dive so that hints there's a very large number of them moving through the area. A lot of the Manta IDs came back as new but several had been seen at Koh Bon / Similans several years previously. Also some of the ones we get in the Similans come back as being at Black Rock and further north so they clearly move around a lot over several years.
×
×
  • Create New...