Jump to content

Rocha

Senior Moderator
  • Content Count

    3075
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rocha


  1.  

    I can't see any info on this- I think this is an important factor in choosing an u/w camera body. The Nikon info talks about eye point, but I don't think that means the viewfinder size.

    Here is what I gathered from the web:

     

    D2x viewfinder: 19.9mm eyepoint, coverage 100%, magnification 0.86x.

    D4 viewfinder: 18mm eyepoint, coverage 100%, magnification 0.70x.

    D810 viewfinder: 17mm eyepoint, coverage 100%, magnification 0.70x.

    D610 viewfinder: 21mm eyepoint, coverage 100%, magnification 0.70x.

    D300s viewfinder: 19.5mm eyepoint, coverage 100%, magnification 0.94x.

     

    D500 viewfinder: 16mm eyepoint, coverage 100%, magnification 1.00x.

     

    The lower the eyepoint, the closer you have to put your eye to the viewfinder to see it fully. The way I see it, the D500 viewfinder will be very similar to the D300s (note that FX cameras have lower magnification, hence the 0.7x, vs close to 1.0 in DX): you will need to look 3mm closer than what you would in a D300s to get a 100% view, but you will get higher magnification, which is good (and is higher than the D2x too). As far as actual viewfinder size, a good photoshopper could probably make a side-by-side or overlay of the D500 with other cameras for us to compare. Any takers?


  2. I can't see any reason why it should be much better than the 16-35mm. Compatibility with dome ports is always a problem with mid-range zooms, particularly with FX sensors: an underwater comparison is needed, and soon!

     

    I certainly can't see it being so much better than the (more expensive) 16-35mm that it justifies replacing that lens...

     

    I don't want to replace the 16-35mm (which I don't have), I just want a cheaper ang lighter alternative, and this lens is half the price and half the weight. :)


  3. Well, I can't speak for all of the marine reserves in the Philippines, but I can tell you that at least in some of them it does work. Over the past 4-5 years I did a lot of diving around Dumaguete (and some in Cebu), and the only places where I saw fish bigger than a dinner plate were inside reserves that I had to pay photo/dive fees. I can't remember the names of the reserves in Cebu, but just do some dives along the coast outside reserves and then go to places like Dawin and Apo Island, the difference is night and day...


  4. I faced a similar decision a few weeks ago trying to decide between Nauticam and Aquatica for my D800. After looking at a couple of Aquatica products (a Canon 7D housing here at work and two 5D MIII housings that my friends have) I decided to go with Aquatica. I am used to handling Subal (had a Subal D2x for almost 10 years) and the Aquatica is of similar quality. But if you are not in a hurry, I think you should wait to hear from people that handled both housings before you make a decision.


  5. For flat ports it is really simple, you just need to add an extension that is the same length as the TC. The length of the extensions are their numbers, extension 20 is 20mm, 30 is 30mm, etc. Remember that for the 105 you will need to add the 30 from the original extension, so either two extensions or one that is 30mm+the converter length. But my question is, why would you put a TC on the 60 if you have the 105? The 1.4 TC on the 60 would essentially make it a very slow focusing 90, which is very close in focal length to the 105, but the latter is faster to focus and probaly better IQ when compared to the 60+TC...

     

    P.S.: With the TC you will probably lose the ability to manual focus, unless Nautical has a special focus gear for lens+TC (which I don't think they do).


  6. According to Nauticam's system chart you can use the 60 with the "macro port 60" and the 105 with the "extension ring 30"+"macro port 60", and their focus rings should work with this configuration. But before getting the rings, make sure you want to use manual focus! I would not get separate ports, we want to minimize weight and gear when traveling.

     

    For your second question, the extension ring for the Tokina 10-17 + TC is different than that for the 105, it will be either the 20 or 40 depending on the dome port that you chose. Check this for more detailed info:

     

    http://www.nauticam.com/images/attach/dslr_port_system_chart.pdf

     

    As for your last question, given the costs for your new Nauticam housing and ports (not to mention camera and lenses), I think a new diopter holder will be the least of your worries ;) (and I am sure they will not be the same).


  7. So, I just spent some time looking for this great thread because I specifically wanted to ressurect it from the dead for some perspective. Warning, ZOMBIE thread! :)

     

    On message #85 above I show my first fully manual (non-TTL) shot with my D2x 8 years ago. Back when this thread started I didn't even want to think about trying to photograph fish without TTL, needless to say, today that's all I do (and well I like to think). Now I am upgrading to a D800 and there are a myriad of options for TTL, the one I am looking at is the Ikelite TTL adapter. What are you guys doing these days? Shooting TTL or hanging on to greater control with non-TTL? How reliable and accurate are those adapters? Is there any advantage in getting one or should I just keep shooting the way I have done for the past 8 years?


  8. Well i would go in December to:

    Oman (again) or the Red Sea (southern Egypt or Sudan), southern Phillipines, Cocos, Malpelo or Galapagos, San Fernando de Noronha (Brazil)

    Chris

     

    Fernando de Noronha (no San :) ) is great in December, I second that! It is high season in Brazil though, so might be a bit on the expensive side.

×
×
  • Create New...