Jump to content

vbpress

Member
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About vbpress

  • Rank
    Lionfish

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://fotobestiali.blogspot.it/

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Novara

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Italy
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Nikon
  • Camera Housing
    Sea&Sea
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Sea&Sea YS120
  • Accessories
    TLC Arms
  1. Hi to all, The Sea&Sea M77 (or M82) correction lens is a great tool for rectilinear wide angle lens. The M77 is a meniscus lens which offers a compensation of the dome port. That compensation increasings the perifpheral sharpness more than closing the aperture over f/16 , where the diffraction became a waste. I use Sea&Sea MDX-D800 with Nikon 17-35/2.8 +Sea&Sea M77 behind the 240 dome + ER40+ER20 (extension ring). Also the Nikon 18-35/3.5-4.5 AFs + Sea&Sea M77 offers good results using the same 240 dome + ER40+ER20. Very good result for me is from the old Tokina AT-X 17/3.5 AF Aspherical (thanks to Adam indications) + Sea&Sea M77 and extension ring 40mm (dome 240+ER40) for more compact asset. Tokina 17 has an MFD shorter than the two Nikon wide zoom and it's better in any case. I'd like to try newest 230 glass dome in the future..... but the future is mirrorless! For nikon user (like me) is a difficult time, today we have few choices for Z system (native) and too old lens for F.
  2. One month without response, I'm sorry. I've experience with similar equipment: Sigma 24/1.4 ART in Sea&Sea Housing behind the 240 S&S Dome port (quite different by your 8" dome) mounting the correction lens Sea&Sea CL 77. This is the reason which my experience is less interesting for you (I suppose). I've used 40mm extension ring on my MDX-D800 housing, which is the true important gear to achieve the best possible sharpness corner. In any case my results was very good, but the 24mm DOF is less extended than a very wide lenses, so there are a lot of limitations like in the picture below where despite of f/13 the right side foreground is out of focus. For this reason I prefer 18-17 wide on full frame camera 'cause thy offer wider DOF very useful in this kind of picture. a 18mm shot
  3. Hi Adam Thank you for your precious off-topic, but I still puntualize that the wide angle lenses have a "natural" applications in all focus views, in other words closing the aperture. This is more true behind a dome in uw photography where we have the problem of the corner blur due to the dome out of focus aberrations; we have only two way to reduce the problem 1) increase the dome radius 2) closing the aperture to maximise the deep of field. Well, in my experience f/11 f/16 are abitual aperture in uw wide angle photo shooting. I remember your experience with Tokina 17/3.5 (surpising experience!) also the Nikon 20/1.8 test. Last year I had problems of out of focus shootig toads just behind the 240 dome using Nikon AF-s 18-35/3.5-4.5 because the amphibians were too much close to the dome for mfd of the lens. This is the reason of my interest for Nikon AF-s 20/1.8 but you have reduced all my enthusiasm In any case, staying on topic, I believe that the current best wide angle/dome combo for 36mp camera is also the current best combo for 45mp camera.
  4. Are you sure? Not in my experience. I use 17-35 massively in land, which is a lens that need to be closed by f/8 f/11, anyway I've made a lot of wide aperure shots and the pictures are good, very good. I tried the 16-35 without recognise particular sharpness improvement, inspite of that the AF performane is better and the VR function can help in partiular occasions, but is a less fast lens (f/4) and a little bit bigger. Of course, Nikon users like me are waiting for a modern version of the old 17-35/2.8, but Nikon at that time appears interested to others strange things (180-400/4 Tc a Rolls Roice tele zoom, good luck Nikon) In water using D800/D800E behind Sea&Sea 240 achrylic dome port, I've reached good very good sharpness from corner to center with the cheaper 18-35 Afs closed to f/11 - f/13 adding the correction lens sea&sea CL77 and a couple of extension ring 20+40. But still there is a great lack in the minimun focus distance: 27cm are still too much. I plan to purchase a nikon 20/1.8 afs and, probably, the newest Sea&Sea 230 glass dome; finally, I hope, I'll have the anphibic rectilinear wide angle camera that I'm looking for.
  5. Good Gary! Digital camera are very complex, sometime too much complex. Have you tested the new s&s m77 correction lens on your 16-35 behind the 240 dome? I use this lens on 18-35/3.5-4.5 Afs G and it's a very good tool. The corner sharpness improvement is consistent. Bye
  6. I 've the same camera (2 different cameras) and the same housing system but I've never registered any delay in the shutter. I shoot in af c and manual exp (and of course no auto iso), like you I use the red focus poit illumination. My choose for strobe connections are old nikonos wired cables, I'm very surprised by your problem. The Mdx-D800 is a well made housing, the push buttons have a long escursion and the dial control don't push on camera, comparing to the fitting of D300 in MDX d300 that is quite difficult due to a little tollerance in the camera body position. Seriusly I don't understand what kind of diabolic mismatch cause your problem.
  7. I 've employed the nikon 20af during the film era behin 8" aquatica dome port (no extension or diopter required) and the results were very good. Currently on sea&sea digital and 240 dome no extension need too but the image quality is not outstanding (today we have very hight expectations) In other words the question is: why choose a cheap lens to fit in a very expensive housing system?? There are better solutions around, but anyway you don't be warried about extension ring, try your lens behind a big dome (8" is min, bigger is better), close aperture to f/11 and put deep blue in the corners like in the James photo. Have a nice dive and great uw pictures. ps In the last edition of Wildlife Photographer of the Year a winning (terryfing beautiful) picture was taken by canon 5d in ikelite housing 8" achrylic ikelite dome and canon 20/2.8 lens. The corner sharpness is good!
  8. Hola Gus, Yes the Marcelo' s combo is equivalent to Er20L+Er40L. The new S&S ring series are "L" named 'cause the security lock inside the ring, but they offer the same extension of SXER (20mm) and ER40 (40mm). Sea&Sea also has introduced a new ER30L (30 mm) and finally they offer a secure and varius extension ring system. In any case don't trust in sea&sea lens chart, it's incomplete and contain mistakes. I shot with MDX housings and I've tried different options with different lenses, in my experience with rectilinear zoom wide and dome port 240 (old type and new one) I've obtained best results when the front lens is quite complained with the base of the dome port. This empiric regula guarantee clear shots and also improoved using the new corrective lens Sea&Sea M77. I give you the sets that I have used on dome port 240, most of those are not documentated in s&s lens chart Dx sigma 8-16 --> ER40: quite good FX Nikon 17-35/2.8 --> ER20 + ER40: quite good FX sigma 24/1.4 Art --> M77 & ER40: very good FX Nikon 18-35/3.5-4.5 G --> M77 & ER20 + ER40: very good I suppose that Nikon 17-35 can give better results using M77, unfortunately last summer I crashed the lens on rocks (and me too) so I was unable to try it; I've purchased the cheaper Nikon 18-35 G and it surprised me giving great quality pictures BUT NOT BY SEA&SEA LENS CHART INDICATIONS!! S&S suggest to use only the ER40 in combo with M77 lens. I've tried it shooting very orrible pictures: internal dome reflections and poor sharpness in the corner. Great result, thank you S&s. I've added ER20 extension and everything changed: no inner reflections and hight sharpness all over the frame. In your case I suggest the M77 and Er40+ ER20 , but don't miss to consider ER40+ER30 it could surprise you. I hope to be usefull By
  9. Sea&Sea produce a specifical kit (dome 240+extension ring+ zoom gear) to fit the 11-24 in MDX Canon Housing. I'm a nikon user, I'm waiting to try the newest Sigma 12-24/4 ART in my MDX-D800, in case it will be possible.
  10. Sorry, I've forgot to tell that the sigma 8-16 run in AF very well on Nikon D7200 camera. IMHO Nikon in the D500 cameras introduced some particular controls in the AF drive which reduce the compatibility with specific production of other manufacturer, it's sadly but no news under the sun (or below the surface )
  11. Hi Adam, My sigma 8-16 AF run perfecly on my two D800 and of course on my old D300. I've shot for two weeks with D500 trying all my lenses and recording problems only with sigma 8-16. Meter data and aperture are correctly controlled by D500, except the AF hsm motor which doesn't give any sign of life. I guess the lens needs a firmware update, ehm ... I hope. In the near future I plan to meet the sigma italian dealer and I'll ask him about this.
  12. I've tried my sigma 8-16 on Nikon D500 but Autofocus doesn't run. The camera and the lens probably are incompatible. It's not a good news for nikon users.
  13. Great camera (on the paper). The most interesting points are the wide af sensor coverage (very very usefull!!), great iso performance and, probably, a good viewfinder (similar to the D2x series I suppose). No popup? No problem: old style cable but more compact housing design good for best packaging (have you seen the Sea&Sea MDX-D810? The tallest housing ever made for compact DSLR ) Now, who will be the first manufacturer to create an housing for this camera? I guess Nauticam, the faster housing maker on the market. "Bravo Nikon", but in Italy we say "Brava Nikon" becouse (I don't know why) we associate the female gender to all Camera Manufacturer.
  14. At first look, inspite of the few images to see, it's quite hard to suppose that the new nikon flagship camera can be fitted in D4 housing 'cause there are more differences by D4-D5 cameras than in the previus D3-D4. The main body at right and left of the prism appears higher than in D4 design and we know that few mm can make the differences. I hope I'm wrong, but at this moment only housing manufacturer can be happy: new business opportunity in the horizon offered by nikon R&D dep.
  15. No don't make the "upgrade" if you shot with DX cameras. 85 is better, more usable in any conditions. 105 is very long and offer a shallow deep of field. I normally use the 60 afs on my D300. Last summer I' ve switched to a 105 afs: very hardly compared to my previus combo. A lot of shot out of focus and an hell mantaining the target inside the frame, especially in drift movement. I have olso tested 105+tc14, very very long option inside the water, in a natural pool river, no drift no uncontrolled movement, a perfect situation. In any case 85 is good solution, in my opinion. Bye
×
×
  • Create New...