Jump to content

ChrisRoss

Member
  • Content Count

    634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

ChrisRoss last won the day on July 28

ChrisRoss had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

107 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

31346 profile views
  1. Probably not, the glass domes are less buoyant than the acrylic ones and the volume of the 140mm dome is small- buoyancy varies with displaced water volume and the weight of the item - a small dome has less buoyancy than a large one and glass domes are heavier. I certainly don't notice anything with my 170mm dome or 100mm fisheye dome, while I know people with a 7" acrylic Nauticam dome on the same rig and that has noticeable buoyancy (tends to twist up) as it is lighter and large in volume being a full 180° dome.
  2. You could always do a free diving course, where they will teach you about proper weighting and how to safely stay down longer. You want to be neutrally buoyant at some depth so you don't struggle to get back up again. Again there are guidelines for this in the course.
  3. Most repair shops, particularly the camera manufacturers won't touch anything with water damage. Basically because of the potential for something else to fail shortly after whatever they do.
  4. Mine stopped working as it was able to twist enough to lose contact withe the hot shoe connections - try twisting it either way gently to see if it comes to life. I have a second flash without that problem which is my main flash to use in the housing.
  5. Have to agree with Wolfgang - also the 140mm domes do come up second hand occasionally, there's one from a month back in the classifieds : The 170mm dome is too small for a 16mm lens on full frame, if budget is a concern you could buy the 8.5" acrylic dome if and when you get something like a 16-35mm. Dome size scales with sensor size and focal length. If on the other hand you wanted to use something like a 24-70 the 180 dome would be fine.
  6. I would regard the Zen 170mm dome and the Nauticam 180mm dome as more or less interchangable. It looks like Zen consider the compromise of using the 170mm dome acceptable while Nauticam do not for their 180mm dome. They are both more or less the same spherical segment. You will note that Nauticam recommend the 140mm dome as the optimum. Any particular reason you would like to use the bigger dome?, the 140mm dome is more compact and probably better for CFWA work and getting in close. With smaller formats you could argue that you could use the dome for other wide lenses but it is probably a bit small for the 14-16mm rectilinear wide lenses.
  7. So it seems the dome is having some influence on the very corner of the frame as I noted the first sample (reeftop photo) the corner is very much closer compared to the seafan where the blurring is not so bad. I'm wondering if it's worth trying out a Wratten 2A or not, seems like this is correctable which the problem solved by the 2A was not and the blurring is likely due to the dome??
  8. OK here's some samples from on land, one is a bit of white paper against black BG far corner of frame second is outside tree branches against the sky both have strong purple fringing which is removable with tools in the Raw converter. You can see in the outdoor corrected file it's not completely gone from the very fine needles.
  9. An update, I did some more digging and opened up the the file in ACR, then used the defringing tool which removed the purple fringe quite well, but the definition in the corners is still not great. Here's the corner in question with and without defringing: I'll try some outdoor shots and try to induce some fringing.
  10. The 180mm dome is a segment from a larger dome and not a full 180° hemisphere, so that means you can either place the dome in the right spot to prevent vignetting or place the the entrance pupil at the centre of the radius of curvature, but not both. You need to have the lens well forward of the centre of curvature of the dome so that the lens can see out to the side. The segment is chosen so that about a 114° field of view is available/visible from the base of the dome (about a 14mm lens field of view), but the fisheye needs 180° The recommended 140mm dome is a 180° hemisphere so you can have the lens placed correctly at the centre of curvature and not vignette. Regarding the flash, the penalty of the full frame is you need to stop down to get enough depth of field probably f11 so you need a lot of light. Video lights won't cut it, see for example this post: And this: The little S2000 would need to be on full power and would probably also struggle a little bit, fisheye wide angle is the most demanding for lighting, even the little S-2000 will put out significantly more light than your video lights will, so using them to assist the strobes doesn't help as there is just not enough light.
  11. I don't know but unless you have experience you should be extremely careful- the capacitor stores and packs quite a punch and unless you know how to deal with that already I wouldn't recommend opening it.
  12. Wet wide angle lenses are not housing specific, they go on any port with an m67 filter thread. For the 14-42 one example would be this lens: http://www.inon.jp/products/lens/uwlh10028m67/top.html Type 2 for your setup I believe, it gives a 100° angle of view, it doesn't give good quality zoom through though, optimised for the wide end at 14mm on the 14-42. You could carry that plus a close up diopter with the 14-42 to give you wide subject coverage.
  13. They are mostly standard, called Sea & Sea connectors, have a little rubber o-ring on them to hold them in the port. You can always use these right angle bushes, they wan't let go of the cable: http://www.divervision.com/inon-rubber-bush-type-l-for-dual-fiber-optics-456212143784.html
  14. Probably be better I would think it would be un balanced trying to use the hotshoe.
  15. Hi all, this discussion started branching from another thread, so moving to a thread of it's own. I see soft corners with my Panasonic 8mm f3.5 fisheye on Olympus EM-1 MkII body. I was referred to this article: https://alanwatsonforster.org/writing/mft-purple.html By Interceptor121. Looking at the first image of the reeftop I can certainly see fringing in the corners, the top corner is a zoomed in view. I first put it down to the dome. Looking at the second image of the sea fan, the problem is there but not as bad. First image the corner in question is closer while I think I'm more square on withe corner at the same distance as centre with the second seafan image. Should be fixable according the article with a Wratten 2A gel in the rear holder. Before I rush out and buy one anyone else have similar experience or actually installed a 2A gel filter? Gel filters are not the easiest thing to find and are pretty fragile but I believe I can order a 75mm square one for $A85. Details are Olympus OM-D EM-1 MkII + Pany 8mm f3.5, Nauticam housing/Zen 100mm dome. Shooting at f8. Click on the images to see them bigger.
×
×
  • Create New...