Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ChrisRoss last won the day on March 28

ChrisRoss had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

150 Excellent

About ChrisRoss

  • Rank
    Great White

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Sydney Australia

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Olympus OM-D E-M1 MkII
  • Camera Housing
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    INON Z-240

Recent Profile Visitors

32027 profile views
  1. Maybe my wording was wrong - by every time I mean every time I open the cap, not every dive. I agree, I can get a full day out of a good set of batteries. On the other comments, each to their own - I don't see any issues with removing o-rings to check them. I have Z-240s and the cap definitely traps water. It would be so easy to design it so that it didn't trap water and grit. I have an INON dive torch and those o-rings rarely come off - the cap screws down onto an external o-ring and I never see water or grit get in past the external o-ring and into contact with the yellow sealing o-rings. The sync cable port cover also never comes off. Once an o-ring seals as long as it remains intact it won't unseal. I would change those o-rings out when I changed the o-ring of the main cap.
  2. I can see why he might want to do it and the results my well be good, but I see several problems. First getting repeated shots with same lighting angle, changing settings on your strobe or camera, adding or removing air from your BCD popping an SMB etc., if both hands are occupied. You can clip camera or strobe off of course, but so much easier if it's a single package. I certainly woudn't like to leave the strobe hanging from the cable.
  3. I clean and lube mine every time - the issue with INON o-rings is you are screwing on the cap over the o-ring and unless its well lubed it tends to bind and they get a little salt water in the groove which slowly dries out to make salt crystals which can damage your o-ring. If I change out batteries on the following day the cap is tight and I have to go very slow to remove. It probably depends on what type of diving you are doing - if it's shore diving the risk is sand in the o-ring and I would definitely clean them every time. The biggest concern for me is the salt water in the groove it seems like it gets on both sides of the o-ring once you remove the cap. I use the following procedure: remove o-ring and put aside in clean spot wipe groove with tissue to soak up water and inspect and clean as needed. clean o-ring - shake first to remove water then run through fingers and inspect&clean then grease and install it wipe out cap with finger and inspect. take a very small smear of grease and wipe inside cap - it helps the cap go on over the o-ring. Inspect o-ring through cap You can do it pretty quickly once you get the hang of it - better to spend 5 minutes getting it right than buying a new strobe.
  4. It probably won't be a problem to use the energisers for a while - the eneloops are supposedly what helped INON solve a reliability problem due to heat buildup. If you rapid fire full power dumps constantly it could give you a problem , but casual use for a short period probably not?? I think you are using a TG-6 if I remember your other posts shooting that for macro using f6.3 (not the f18 option) should mean you are at quite low power which is easy on the flash. What you will need to do is charge them each outing if they have been sitting more than a few days as they self discharge.
  5. Eneloop is generally regarded as best but INON have a list of other acceptable batteries. It's in the manual, : Sony cycle energy blue Panasonic HHR-3MPS Imedion (MAHA) MHRAAI4 (they also make an excellent 8 cell charger) GP batteries ReCyko+ - 210AAHCBE ANSMANN AG maxE - 5030991, 5030992 5035052 Electrochem NEXCell energyON - AA 2000 mAhr are listed in addition to the eneloops and eneloop Pro. Your strobe probably won't die with energiser, but they will get hotter and are also prone to rapid self discharge. Probably a longer term thing - but I would get eneloop anyway and use them once they arrive and relegate the others to a dive torch or something once you get the eneloops. Depending on how many dives you do in the time the eneloops take to arrive you could use a set of regular AA energiser (disposable), you'll probably get two dives from a set or more if you can get the AA Lithium cells - both are listed in the manual as a battery you can use.
  6. well whatever they do they need to get to 2200 deg C or so. Classic way to achieve that is an electric arc furnace. I wouldn't think you'd need a lot of heat to dimerise acetylene then add HCl unless the reaction is particularly endothermic?
  7. Open ended question - really depends on where you are from - if there's Covid active there still likelihood of travel is low realistically. There's no diving local to you?
  8. Hi Bill, agree, I don't have direct knowledge about the calcium cycle - the CaOH2 from step 3 is probably a finely divided suspension mixed with all the stuff in the Calcium carbide which is not carbide - I think the carbide comes out as about 80-90% carbide - the rest must be something else- probably silica and alumina?. So whether it is recyled or not depends on how difficult it is filter out the CaOH2 from what is left - it may be more cost effective to sell the slurry as agricultural lime? There may also be some nasty by-products from the acetylene mixed in - that is an extremely reactive molecule. I found an article on a study on the CO2 footprint of using carbide sludge in cement kilns vs fresh limestone which tends to indicate it is a waste product - it reduces CO2 emissions compared to mining limestone as you don't get the CO2 emission from the limestone and you don't mine and crush it, but you do have to dry it. I agree about the chloroprene - there may be better processes you can use and you can use that process whatever the source of chloroprene. A lot of marketing for wetsuit material is dubious - take all these claims of reflective layers reducing radiant heat loss - radiant heat loss is not a thing for underwater - I could go into a lot of detail why not - suffice it to say that the temperature difference of the radiating body - you in your wetsuit - to the environment is very low so the driving force for radiant heat loss is minimal. Convective and conductive heat loss dominate. The point is don't believe the marketing all you can go on is reviews about how people like the product - compared to what they had before.
  9. I think what I was trying to say was AF on the adapter for the 8-15 fisheye for example might be acceptable but would suck on a macro lens as you said. The problem is no way to predict the performance unless someone else has tried it out - all you really can be sure of is it won't be as good as the same lens on a D series Nikon.
  10. I don't shoot any of these cameras but I would tend to go with what you know, early adopters always pay a premium to be beta testers. Having said that the main shortcoming seems to dedicated lens availability and AF performance. this is how I would look at it: Lenses on the adapter will be optically the same as what they perform on a DSLR - there is no glass in it just a spacer the advantage of dedicated Z lenses will mainly be wide angle - optics tell you that - a non retrofocus design has better opportunity to be sharp. But that extra resolution and definition could well be lost on UW wides due to issues with dome port optics. AF on the adapter will likely vary from lens to lens AF for wide angle work (reef scenes, CFWA) on the mirrorless bodies is probably already OK - it's not very demanding AF on macro or perhaps fish portraiture or seals for example where fast AF is needed is where you will see any penalty The lifetime of the EVF should be no different to the rear LCD - the reliability of which is probably no better or worse than shutter and mirror reliability and almost certainly more reliable than mechanical connections to stop down the aperture on older lenses and AF motors on any lens. On the pixel dumping it sounds like a great argument except it ignores the fact you don't have to use all the resolution. The Z6 and Z7 will be near identical if you down sample the Z7 to Z6 resolution, you gather the same amount of light with both so image quality should be so close as to be indistinguishable apart from fine detail on very large blow-ups. You might be able to crop the Z7 a little more and blow up to larger sizes but... In underwater work particularly with full frame people stop right down to deal with dome corner sharpness and you are in diffraction and losing some of that extra resolution. My feeling is that for most lower resolution will be fine for UW shots for most people - but there are certainly those who can make use of it. For now I would think you can either pickup a second hand D800 as a stopgap to last till Z6/Z7 mkII come out or the D860.... or go with a something new. On the something new if AF is important to you a D850 is known quantity and will certainly produce great shots. The Z6 or Z7 will also do fine if you can live without the AF of the D850. Where I see advantages for mirrorless is brighter viewfinder images and features like focus peaking to help with focus.
  11. To follow on from what Phil said, the port chart says effectively add any canon lens with metabones adapter using the extensions and domes recommended for using those lenses in a Nauticam Canon housing. Effectively once you add the 100-120 adapter and Metabones adapter treat the combination like a Canon housing and use the Canon port charts and of course this extends to the Zen port charts. So you can add anything Canon based on this chart : http://www.jaredparsons.com/portchart/zen-only/by-combination-group/nauticam-n120/ That's not to say it will work well just that it will fit and perform optically like it would on a Canon system. It depends on how well the lens in question plays with the Metabones adapter. Bear in mind some of the options might require fitting the port over the lens as the lens/zoom ring may not fit through the N100 housing if they are too large in diameter. This also applies by the way to the Micro43 system which has a similar entry on the port charts- so you can add a Canon 8-15 to a micro43 system which is particularly interesting as the whole zoom range is available.
  12. These suits are advertised as being made from Limestone - this is in reality quite a stretch. I have a background in process industries and I can tell you that there is no actual limestone in the neoprene material. A long story follows for those interested. The process starts with limestone and a source of carbon I believe the Japanese made one uses old tyres. Limestone is calcium carbonate and it first reacts to make lime - calcium oxide, releasing the CO2 that is bound with the calcium. The calcium oxide reacts with the carbon source at very high temperatures - 2200°C. The reaction makes calcium carbide: CaO + 3 C → CaC2 + CO . The CO would need to be combusted to CO2 or used in another process. Next step is to react the Calcium Carbide (CaC2 ) with water to make Acetylene and Calcium hydroxide. The Calcium hydroxide is a waste product but could be used for agricultural lime for example - I don't know if it is or not it is a low value product. If they recycled the lime that I think would be a positive step from a green perspective. Once you have the acetylene - this is the gas used in oxy-acetylene welding and cutting - you can then react it with chlorine to make chloroprene which is polymerised to make neoprene. Conventional neoprene is also made from chloroprene but the chloroprene is made from butadiene which is manufactured from petroleum - a by-product of the refining of petroleum and chlorine or hydrochloric acid. In fact when it was invented in the 1930's neoprene was made via the acetylene process but had odor problems that were easier to overcome making via the petroleum route. Effectively what happens is two acetylene molecules react to make a compund similar to butadiene that can be reacted to make chlorprene. So both types of neoprene start from the same building blocks: you see claims that the "limestone" product has superior properties but if they both start from the same building block -that is chlorprene- oil based neoprene could use the same reactions. So where does this leave us?? - both processes are energy intensive I don't have the numbers but my educated guess is that the limestone product has higher energy input to achieve the same product - but the raw material is in fact old tyres and this is probably a better use for them than landfill or burning them - it is a form of recycling. I would say that if you like the properties of the suits over conventional suits - use them. But don't claim they are made of limestone and are somehow magically a lot greener. They in fact are made of old tyres which is a good thing but maybe not as marketable perhaps as trying to claim they are not made from petroleum. I have not been able to find any analysis on the greenhouse footprint differences in the new technologies but my gut feel is that the limestone process is more energy intensive. If they made it in a solar furnace that would be a clear advantage I think and definitely tip the scales in favour of the new product. There is also Yulex, which is a made from natural rubber (85%) which is a renewable resource, but utilises agricultural land to grow rubber trees. It is certainly less energy intensive.
  13. The last entry on the Sony N100 port chart https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YRwHfXvXLqWK3NsfXjtGbm7gSEmAw4g0/view has an entry for the metabones adapter and then refers you to the Canon N120 port chart. What this means is you use the N100-N120 35.5mm adapter and then use the recommended ports and extension for the Canon 8-15 in the Canon port chart which is the Canon 140mm dome and 30mm extension. The adapter has a zoom knob, so presumably the Canon zoom gear mates with this zoom knob - you should check that with your supplier or someone using the combo may be able to confirm this for you.
  14. I found Garuda very good, when I put the bag on the scale they asked is that scuba gear? Free 23kg allowance for dive gear. I booked on Garuda's website and prices there were quite OK.
  • Create New...