Jump to content

ChrisRoss

Member
  • Content Count

    676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

ChrisRoss last won the day on October 3

ChrisRoss had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

114 Excellent

About ChrisRoss

  • Rank
    Tiger Shark

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.aus-natural.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sydney Australia

Additional Info

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

Recent Profile Visitors

31380 profile views
  1. If you are using the viewfinder to compose there are a few options to get a magnifier for the LCD screen and these often have dioptric adjustment, lets you use the screen like a viewfinder with your distance vision. Your options will depend on what housing you use - Nauticam compact housings for example have mounting points for their LCD magnifier and AOI make one for the TG camera housings.
  2. I found some issues with purple fringing with the Pany 8mm, on my EM-1 MkII. Apparently the cut off filter for UV is different between Pany and Oly with the Olympus letting through wavelengths that the Pany lens does not fully correct for. Doesn't appear on all shots, most noticable with bright objects against dark backgrounds. The Capture One Pro purple fringing tool can remove much of it. If I was doing it again I'd get the Oly lens. I had a post on that here: I was also thinking the corners were quite soft but have since decided that is due to the corner in question being much closer and falling outside the DOF. The shot in question was along a wall and the wall itself was much closer than what I was photographing. I use the Pany 30mm macro, AF is quite snappy, noticably better than the 60mm macro, haven't used the OLy 30mm to compare. You can't take advantage of the extra magnification (1.25x) on the Oly as it focuses almost on the port glass. In fact I think the practical limit for lighting with the 30mm lenses is about 0.5x as you are getting so close to the port glass it is diffciult to light. Where they shine is for larger subjects - small fish size up to about a 300mm long subject. The working distance for such subjects is too great for the 60mm macro - too much water between you and the subject and much higher chance of backscatter, particulatlry in temperate waters where I shoot often. Some examples: Fish 20cm long: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Bony Fish/slides/Senator Wrasse 3.html Fish 12cm long: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Bony Fish/slides/Blotched Hawkfish.html Nudi 5cm long, 50% crop: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Nudibranches/slides/Hypselodoris bennetti.9.html Nudis 4cm long: http://www.aus-natural.com/Underwater/Nudibranches/slides/Goniobranchus tasmaniensis2.html
  3. The Fantasea dome is 6", looks like it's a piece of a larger radius dome, but still a little on the small side. with APS-C you will probably need f11 for sharp corners with a 15mm equivalent rectilinear wide lens. Dome size and the required aperture scales with sensor size. For the same scene the depth of field is greater with a smaller sensor, so I can use f8 with my 7-14 (14-28 equivalent) lens, equivalent depth of field on an APS-C requires f11 and full frame needs f16. Big domes makes things easier as the radius of curvature of the virtual image is larger meaning that the image is further away and difference in distance between the corners and centre of the virtual image is less requiring less depth of field to cover. You might get better results at f8 than your UWL at f13 but to get the best out of the lens in the corners stopping down to f11 or so will certainly be a benefit.
  4. I'll have to look into it, the lens does not get a great deal of use - so shots where I could pick that up are few.
  5. Dome ports will be the same size regardless except of course for fisheye lenses. For rectilinear lenses the port size scales with sensor size and is related the depth of field needed to bring the corners into focus. If you look at DXO measurements, the Olympus EM-1 MkII is very close match for the D500 in noise, it loses a bit of dynamic range, but is surprisingly very close. This only applies to the EM-1 MkII, the other cameras in the Olympus range a bit further behind the the EM-1 II. That makes for a very compact setup, for the 7-14mm lens it uses a 180mm dome port and the lenses are all very compact. here's my EM-1 MkII in a Think Tank streetwalker hard drive backpack: In here is the housing with camera inside, 2x Z-240, OLy 12-40 and Pany 7-14, 60mm macro, 8mm Pany fisheye, the Zen 170mm dome for the 12-40 & 7-14, the Zen 100mm fisheye port and th60mm macro port, plus spare batteries, fibre optics etc. It will fit in all but the smallest overhead compartments or under the seat in front on any plane.
  6. The dome is the N85 II and it is about 115 mm from the outer surface of the dome to the outer surface of the housing. 5cm is the correct measurement for lens flange to where I estimate for the nodal point.
  7. Google photography pricing guide and you will get heaps of hits. Decide on a price point and try it out if it is snapped you probably priced too low. Allow time for editing and include things like image delivery format. Also you need to specify that the copyright remains with you and the terms you are licensing the use of the photos for. This can be anything from unrestricted to a very specific usage depending on client needs.
  8. Also depends on which housing system you are on and what size port you want. If you on Nauticam then there is an 8.5" (215mm) acrylic dome, if you want bigger like the 230 and 250mm domes for very wide lenses they seem to be mostly glass construction. Getting the big domes is what tends to make a difference for ultra wide (weitwinkel) lenses in the 11-16mm range - mostly in terns of corner quality. You will note in Nauticam's port charts one dome/extension is marked with an asterisk as being the optimum.
  9. did it with a tripod, levelled the clamp and head then moved it back and forth with a dovetail plate till the parallex shifts stopped, rotating it using the pan control. I have seen other references that say the point is where the aperture appears to be when looking from the front and it does appear to be in the same vicinity. I estimated it was between the top of the MF ring and the line on the lens hood. I may have completely stuffed it up but I recall I found a point where the parallex shift stopped, it was some time ago though.
  10. I expect the method used is more about expediency and finding the closest extension from the library of what is currently available in extension rings that will satisfy the majority of people who use the dome. Most people would have a hard time determining if the lens is placed correctly according to theory but would immediately notice vignetting. I checked my Pany 7-14 which I use in a Zen Type II dome - this is a partial dome (not 180° curve) with a radius of 110mm. that places the centre of curvature about 30mm behind the measured nodal point of the lens which is up near the front of the lens. A bit of geometry shows that extending the dome much further would cause vignetting. So in this case it a compromise to allow you to use a more compact dome with a larger radius of curvature than would be possible with a hemisphere dome.
  11. This is going to vary among dive centres, if you go to Lembeh in Indonesia, many of the dive centres offer two divers one guide as standard and they are used to people taking their time over images. Do your research on what type of guide to diver ratio is provided at different venues. Certainly in Indonesia there are many centres that have very good guide to diver ratios.
  12. The WWL-1 supports zoom through so it should work, assume they fit in the same port? Or if you have the Nauticam 45 macro port for the 30 then the lens comes right up to the glass so I don't see why it would not work, would be just like zooming to 30mm on the 14-42. Not that wide but still wider than the macro lens alone maybe a 70° field of view.
  13. Just because you have a camera you like to use on land does not mean that housing it is the best solution for taking images underwater. A lot of people like the Sony cameras and they certainly have good image quality. But going underwater is an expensive exercise and it gets more expensive as you go to larger sensors, particularly for wide angle where you need bigger domes to take advantage of all that resolution. You may or may not have the ultra wide (weitwinkel) angle and macro lenses needed for underwater shooting. Then there are the strobes which are pretty much essential to get the best images. You don't say what type of shooting you might like to do - tropical diving, diving in places like California etc.?? Are you dive certified or interested in snorkelling/freediving? All this makes a difference.
  14. I'm hosted on Lunarpages, I think mine is like $6 per month with more than enough capacity. unless you develop a big online presence it should be fine for most personal websites.
×
×
  • Create New...