Jump to content

Segerdahl

Member
  • Content Count

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Segerdahl

  • Rank
    Moray Eel

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sweden

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Sweden
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Nikon D800E & D7200
  • Camera Housing
    Ikelite
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Ikelite DS-161
  • Accessories
    Ultralight
  1. Yes, but thanks for the tips. I can't see any strong reason of using them instead of the standard diffusor (that's included with the DS161 strobe) though. The difference seems to be too little.
  2. Nope, we get our milk in tetra pak. No plastic... Well I haven't tested any dome diffusors myself, so I don't know for sure. The sample images at Glowdive's link is all what I have seen and to me they look very promising. My main head ache is if I should go for Ikelite's or Glowdive's. They probable do a similar job, but there could be other reasons to pick one over the other such as built quality, material (will they break easily?), how they are attached (easy to remove under water, safely secured etc), how they alter the color of the light etc.
  3. Thanks for the reply! Do they change the color of the light? How is the attachment? Good/bad? Just press it on or!? The idea was that they would better light up subjects close to the dome with a more even and less strong light. Causing less backscatter (which always is a pain). Also when you shoot something close to a wall, it is hard to get an even light on the strobe close to the wall.
  4. Hi Tim, Thanks, but I already have flat diffusors. That was not the issue. I have been taking uw-photos with diffusors for about 25 years... ;-) As you could see if you followed my links, I am talking about DOME like diffusors. Diffusors specially made for CFWA.
  5. Thinking about getting one of those "new" diffusors that are better suited for CFWA. As I use Ikelite DS161, I have found two alternatives: Ikelite's http://www.ikelite.com/accessories/4069.2-dome-diffuser.html Glowdive's (they have versions for most strobe models) http://www.glowdive.com/lightdome/en/index.htm Anyone who has tested any? Anyone who can see benefits/drawbacks between these two or perhaps wants to recommend yet another one? Thanks!
  6. AF is the same as S95. LX5 is much faster. Still no TTL in Manual mode. I think the video is still fully automatic. Yes 1080p, but that is no guarantee for high quality. Test it first! No AF during video. LX5 has a fully manual video mode and a great following AF during video. You can even zoom and alter the exposure while filming.
  7. LX-5 is a very nice camera. It has good IQ, fast AF (very close to the fastest 4/3, but not as fast as the super fast Nikon J1) and good video. On top of this is has tons of useful features and is very sturdy build. Everything about it feels high quality. And it's still pretty small and light. No you don't have to shoot raw all the time. I use on land as well and the colors are very nice. If you don't like it out of the box you have many options to fine tune how the jpg should be created in the camera. Raw in combination with a good raw converter will, like on any compact give you higher IQ. Less noise and less jpg artifacts is what I appreciates. The IQ you get after processing its raw files in e.g. Lightroom 3 (simply a little sharpening and a little nr) is amazingly good. You can even batch process your raw (using the same nr and sharpening) and get really top notch jpg without any efforts. But, my suggestion is to shoot raw+jpg. It takes no extra time and if you don't have a raw converter at hands, you simply go with the jpg. I love that you can easily move the AF. Not many compacts can do that. Ikelite also has their smallest uw-housing ever made for a TTL camera. It's exactly like a schrunk D-SLR uw-housing. With Ike strobes you get real TTL with cable. No need to use the internal flash, waste battery and get slow reloads. The housing isn't perfect but at that price and with true TTL, it is very hard to beat. If you want to spend more money their are smaller, lighter housings with better ergonomics. But, not with true TTL. It has a 100% fully manual video mode wich is great. You can even alter the expose during filming. You can even zoom during filming. But perhaps the best part is that it has an excellent following AF while filming. You can also here change the way the colors etc are created. Sure it's only 720p, but it's h.264 and is silk smooth.
  8. Regarding new back plates for old housings. The idea is great but in reality it's often a bad deal. I have switched cameras way too often. Once I bought a back plate instead of a new housing. It was much cheaper than buying a new housing and it felt like a good deal. Problem is that when I changed camera again, it was impossible to sell the backplate. I could easily sell the complete housing (with either the new or the old backplate), but selling just the back plate turned out to be impossible (anyone looking for a D300s backplate for Ikelite D300 or D300s uw-housing?). So, I recommend to instead sell the old housing and buy a new one. I would have saved money doing that.
  9. Hi Christophe, Thanks! Tons of lenses and tons of lightning set-up... I'm still experimenting and trying all kinds of things. Lenses: 60mm macro, 17-70mm makro, 10-17 fisheye, 10.5mm fisheye Lightning: Natural/Sun Fisheye FIXLED 1000 + 2 DS 161 lights Fisheye FIXLED 1000 Divelight 2 Sola 1200
  10. Hi, I have just made an underwater video with my D-SLR Nikon D7000, in which I boiled down the very best of the ca 15-20 dives this summer into 160 seconds. All scenes are taken in the (murky but exiting) waters of the swedish west coast. In the movie there are wrecks, nudibranches, fishes, lobsters, divers etc. As always, I did the filming, editing and composed (etc) the music. I have uploaded it to a Nikon movie competition. Mine is the only underwater movie in the competition. I AM UNDERWATER - Nikon Film Festival (don't try the fullscreen version as it's only a pixel zoom) It would be great if you would like to watch it, even more fun if you took the time to write a comment and I guess the best would be if you would be nice and give me a high grade (just click on the star to the very right, 5 star ;-)). Thanks, Peter Segerdahl
  11. This is actually an excellent post that has got way too little attention/appreciation. It would be great though if you would post some images of the approx strobe positions used for the different results.
  12. I ordered the new super large whibal card, thinking I could always cut it smaller if it's too big. Shipping and customs will be more expensive than the card itself so... The D7000 is excellent for video. I have done alot with natural light and the results are fantastic. Could be even better if I got the whibal right underwater though. ;-)
  13. First, thanks for doing all the tests! It would be much more interesting to see how it behaves under water though... I guess there are not that many choices so I think I will order one (I'll go for a larger one) and try it out myself. Thanks again and if you ever test it underwater, please let me know the results.
  14. So, your test with 10-17 and D7000 failed? In what way did it fail!? Was you reading "no good" or did you simply not like the colors? Which WhiBal card (what size) is it that you have? "In-camera WB" : Is that the same as manual white balancing!? If you ask me, Michael Tapes only stated the obvious and was not of much help. Sure, shooting RAW is better but there is no video RAW on D7000...
×
×
  • Create New...