Jump to content


Senior Moderator
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rocha

  1. I for one never use Pelicans as I think they are an invitation to robbery and just scream "expensive gear inside"! So I carry as much as I can with me, which is usually my camera, lenses, housing and ports. I used to carry them inside a regular plain Samsonite rolling carry-on bag, but a lot of airlines started weighing them (as Dave says a couple of posts above), and mine usually weighs 15kg, which is no good.


    So, during my last trip to the Philippines with a photographer friend he had a back pack with about the same gear that I had PLUS his laptop. His backpack weighed like 3kg more than my carry-on, but because it was a backpack nobody in the airline counter even asked to weigh it, they just waved him by. I was not so lucky as they were weighing all rolling carry-ons and I had to check mine in. I am seriously considering getting a backpack with a laptop compartment for my next trip then.


    The expedition 9x above looks good, but the Expedition 8x looks even better to me. It is slightly smaller, but has a laptop compartment.

  2. I tend to agree with the above, but it is hard to tell for sure without a better "ID" type photo (showing the whole animal, for rays ideally from above). It can also be a small Dasyatis as they do often get a mottled pattern, but I am more inclined to say it is a Yellow Stingray. Either way, the ray looks healthy.

  3. That's a good point Drew, but I am sure you won't get any flames from the authors (unless it is a book). If they are just articles, the authors will be glad to see them spread in as many sources as possible. The PUBLISHERS are the ones that hate seeing PDFs free on the web because they are the ones that profit from the articles. Having said that, here are links for a few of my articles that may be of interest, first the free ones:


    Rocha et al. 2008 - Population genetics of Chromis multilineata


    Randall and Rocha 2009 - Description of Halichoeres claudia


    Randall and Rocha 2009 - Description of Chaetodontoplus mesoleucus

  4. So, the rumor mill is active again. The new kid on the block seems to be a possible Nikon D900, basically a D700 with a better sensor (18mp at least) and 1080p video (not that I care about that).


    Rumors about this possible D900 are flying over the net, does anybody have any inside info they want to share? ^_^ I for one would be the first on the wait list if such camera ever materialized as I am looking for a smaller alternative to my aging D2x. Not that there is anything wrong with my D2x, but in the age of ever changing airport security smaller is always better.

  5. Condensation and being able to see your seals are not issues (unless you want to see the inside of your housing while it floods), the only issues are price/size/weight/durability. I owned Ikelite housings for about 10 years, first for my N90 and then for my F100 (yes, those are N and F, back in the film days).


    Both my ikelites for the film cameras started to develop structural damage (deep cracks) after about 5 years of intense use. I must tell you though that a lot of my dives were between 100 and 150 feet, still well within the limits of Ikelite, but not the usual recreational dives. The aluminum housings are more expensive, smaller, lighter, more durable (Aquaticas are built like tanks) and their controls are more precise (at least when compared to the Ikelites I used).


    If you can only afford an Ikelite, then you have already answered your question...

  6. My understanding is that the d300 is slightly faster autofocusing than the D2x. I doubt, however, that the difference is noticable and that was my point. My point is that FOR MACRO the Nikon lenses work better on the cropped sensor. The 60mm and 105mm respectively lenses are almost perfect for macro on a cropped sensor.


    Is this the impression that everybody had? I tested a D300 before and thought it's AF was noticeable slower than my D2x, was the D300 that I tested defective? The 60 and 105 are just as good on FF sensors, you just need to get closer to your subject.

  7. I think for macro photography the smaller sensor is better and the D300/40D/E-3 are as good as it gets and the D2x a tad behind.


    I don't think the D2x is behind these cameras at all. Actually, the only camera I ever tried that has an AF better than the D2x was the D3. I have to admit that I never tried a D700, but I don't think it would be ahead of the D2x in terms of focus. The same? Maybe. Ahead? I doubt. As for the smaller sensor being "better", that depends on how you define better :D There are advantages and disadvantages to both, I don't think a small sensor could ever attain resolutions of today's FF sensors (24mp) without having diffraction issues.

  8. I am in the same boat too... My D2x is aging, but still does a great job. I don't really consider the D300 and D700 upgrades, as everything has the same rez, and, correct if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure the D2x has the best AF between the three (D2x, D300, D700). The ideal camera to me would be a 7D: 18MP, small, $1700 street price, but with a D2x focus accuracy (don't really care about vid).


    But I think the bottom line for me is: do I really "need" an upgrade? Currently the D2x does everything I need, in terms of focus and resolution. The only real inconvenience is its size. So, since I am not as heavy a user as Alex is (I think I put as many shots in my D2x in four years as he put in his D700 in one), I think I will keep the D2x until Nikon comes up with a higher resolution D700x or D400.

  • Create New...