Storker

I've bought a cheap soft cooling bag which I use as my "camera bag" for diving. Between dive trips, I remove the camera from the housing, take out the batteries from the strobes, store all my UW photo gear in the cooling bag together with the rest of my diving gear, and store my UW camera together with my topside camera gear.

Option G: "Yes, dear... Uh, did I remember to tell you that I think you'd look fabulous in those shoes you told me you wanted? Why don't you go an buy them, I'd really like to see you in them"

On the Mk1, it's under Shooting menu 1 -> Reset/Myset. -- Typed on an on-screen keyboard with [-]autocorrupt[/-] autocorrect and sent from my Android device. Typos are a feature, not a bug.

My dome port has built-in shades. I actually believed that that was standard...

That's basically what I was afraid of. I've been using the 8/3.5 almost exclusively since I bought it, but I guess I'll just have to go back to using the 9-18 when the viz really sucks and I want WA instead of CFWA and semi-CFWA. 8+8" arms are out of the question; the main reason I chose a micro four thirds system was because it's noticeably more compact than a dSLR system.

Hm, OK. I guess it's hard to beat physics. I'll try looking into that, cheers! Cool pic, BTW. The wolffish is usually rather docile, particularly the larger specimens. It's not uncommon that divers can pet them as the lie on the bottom. Unless you're into spearfishing, that is. They don't particularly appreciate being speared and can become a bit PO'd about that

I've had my fisheye lens for about a year now, and I did anticipate a bit of a learning curve going from a rectilinear WA zoom to FE. But now I'm getting a little annoyed. My CFWAs turn out decently after a few tries to position the strobes correctly (arms tucked a bit in, strobes behind the housing and angled a bit outwards). However, I struggle to find a good position for the strobes for WA shots at a little distance. Most shots come out with very visible backscatter on the sides, like the beam of a flashlight in heavy fog. My diving is generally in half-decent to poor-ish viz (typically 4 to 8 meters), so it might just be that the water is too murky for that kind of shots, but I'm not quite ready to give up. Tips are appreciated. BTW, my setup is: Olympus OM-D E-M5 in a Nauticam NA-EM5 housing, Flexitray with two handles Panasonic 8mm/3.5 in the Nauticam 4.33" dome port Two Inon Z240 with stock diffusers on 5" + 7" arms

Are you comfortable with a drysuit? Most Norwegian divers dive dry, and you might have issues finding a suitable wetsuit for rent. Expect seeing more bottom life (anemones, soft coral, crustaceans) and less free-swimming fish than in the typical warm water dive.

I've used the 4" semidome with my 9-18, since that's what Nauticam recommended when I got my kit. There are some corner sharpness issues, though.

You're assuming that the system is based on logic. Much to learn you have, young Padawan.

I use a similar one, but with a boltsnap at each end. And two clamps with shackles. -- Typed on an on-screen keyboard with [-]autocorrupt[/-] autocorrect and sent from my Android device. Typos are a feature, not a bug.

Yup. I was rather polite in my reply, though, and managed to avoid asking them to send me a large package of their product, free of charge, but I'd promise to tell all my friends about where I'd gotten the stuff from. Even if I was quite tempted... You see that kind of tactic more and more, and it riles me up ever so slightly. There are some good photogs out there trying to make a living, and giving decent stuff away for free is basically depriving them of their income. I have no problems if one of my pics could beat the pro on quality; any pro needs competition to stay sharp. Non-profit I'm fine with; I've taken quite a few pics for my kids' sports club and only asked to be credited. I'm happy with that, since they're a non-profit organization and just can't afford a pro. OTOH, if someone wants to use my stuff to make money for themself, I want a piece of the cake. Somewhat related joke:

Thanks, that was really helpful! It turned out they wanted extensive use (magazine ads, own website, social media, so something worth in the order of 150€ according to alamy.com) and were offering only being credited with the image. So they basically wanted free advertisement material. And they claimed that other photogs already had accepted that "offer". I turned it down...

After reading the review here on Wetpixel, I decided to pre-order the book on Amazon. Being located in Europe, I found it easier to shop through Amazon UK rather than order directly from Alex. I assume it'll be a nice complement to Martin Edge's The Underwater Photographer.

Today I logged in to flickr and found a mail asking about using one of my pictures for marketing since it showed a species of seaweed that one of the company's products is based on. I checked the company (pretty easy, since the email address was on the company's domain), and although I don't much believe in the product they're not running a total snake oil scheme scamming money out of poor and/or sick people. So, I don't have any serious ethical objections to them using my picture to sell stuff. What I don't have the slightest idea about is what's "normal" pricing for this kind of stuff. From the company's domain name, it's located in the UK in case that affects pricing. I'm thinking about reserving my copyright and only allowing use for a specific purpose, with other use to be re-negotiated, so that will probably also affect the pricing. So, given those constraints, what would be a decent price and/or starting point for haggling price? BTW, this is the picture: