Jump to content

stuartv

Member
  • Content Count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

stuartv last won the day on April 7

stuartv had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About stuartv

  • Rank
    Triggerfish

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Manassas, VA

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United States
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Olympus OM-D E-M10
  • Camera Housing
    Meikon
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Inon Z240
  1. Nice! Thank you very much. This is great! That video is awesome, by the way. I wish i could get that kind of ambient light and viz when I dive with the NC sand tiger sharks... Anyway, one last question. I will need to preset my camera's focus before I put it in the housing. Doing that on dry land, what distance should I set the focus to? I imagine that 20cm under water, behind the WWL-1, translates to a different distance on land, with only the kit lens and no dome. Someday, I will upgrade to a better camera and a better housing. But, for now, I have a Meikon housing and I cannot adjust the focus once the camera is in the housing.
  2. Ah ha! Now THAT is some great info! But, let me make sure I understand. During a typical dive for me (shooting sharks and wrecks) the distance to my subject (from the front of the lens) might be anywhere from, say 2 feet (~50cm?) to 10 feet (3 - 4m). Are you suggesting that setting the focus manually to 20cm is going to give me truly sharp results over that whole range? For the sake of discussion, let's just assume I set an aperture of f/5.6. i have never tried shooting with Manual focus. If that would work, that would be great. Eliminating focus lag and out of focus shots is the whole reason I was looking at getting a focus light.
  3. With the crop factor of 2, I usually set up for CFWA with an aperture of 4 - 5.6, to achieve a DOF equivalent to a FF camera set at f/8 - f/11. Regardless, what you're saying makes sense and is right in line with what I was thinking from my other reading. The comment about the auto-off, though, is not making sense to me. The auto-off lights I'm talking about are ones that have an optical sensor to detect when to shut off. They detect a pre-flash and turn off for around 1 second. I can see how that would work. But, if you're shooting in Manual and there is no pre-flash, then it would be the actual flash that would trigger the focus light to turn off. Except, at that point, it's probably too late, isn't it? I'm guessing that a $99 focus light is not going to have fast enough electronics to turn off during the main flash event quickly enough that it doesn't affect the exposure at all. Or is turning off right when the strobe fires (presuming a front curtain sync) quick enough to take the focus light out of the equation for exposure of the background? Re-reading your post, I think that is what you're saying. The auto-off would mean the focus light turns off while the strobe is dumping, but then stays off for the duration of the time the shutter is open, and that is enough to eliminate any real concern over it creating backscatter. Yes?
  4. I assume you are also using 1 or more strobes. So, maybe the auto-off IS so fast that that is why it doesn't affect the exposure. OR, maybe it's what I postulated above. The strobe(s) are so much brighter than the focus light that even though the focus light may be on during the exposure, it is completely drowned out by the much brighter strobe(s) and that is why you don't have a red spot or red tint in your photos? And that is really the gist of my original post. Is auto-off of any use for people shooting on full Manual? Or will 2 lights, one with auto-off and one without, both yield exactly the same results (presuming both have the same output)?
  5. So, even with a lot of particulate in the water, it doesn't show up as backscatter in the image because of how little light the focus light is actually putting out?
  6. I guess I might add, I'm shooting an Olympus OM-D E-M10 (yes, an old camera), the kit 14-42 lens, and a Nauticam WWL-1, with 2 x Inon Z240 strobes. Often, I'm shooting sharks, inside a wreck, so it's dark (though you can see outside water in the shots through holes in the wreck). I have thought about using the strobe focus lights, but they don't turn back on after the shot. I don't normally have time to keep turning them back on after every shot. Also, I think that not only will a focus light help the camera, it will help me. Often, the image on the camera display is so dark that I can't tell with any real precision exactly what the composition is or exactly what spot it's focusing on. I'm thinking that a focus light will brighten up the image shown on the LCD display. Regardless, the question from my OP remains: Is the auto-off feature on a focus light important for me to have? I *think* it's not, but I'd like to get some confirmation from someone who actually knows. I'm an amateur hack, at best, and I may be wrong in the way I have thought it through.
  7. I have determined that I should add a focus light to my camera rig. I have read what articles I can find on the subject. All the articles recommend using a focus light (for the kinds of shooting I'm doing - normally, CFWA). But, none of them even talk about the feature that I see on some focus lights - where they automatically turn off when the strobes fire. Is that feature just not important? My thought is that if my focus light doesn't turn off, I'm going to (very often) have annoying backscatter showing up in my photos. I also wonder how does the auto-off really work for people (like me) who are generally shutting in full manual mode? There is no strobe pre-flash, so would the auto-off actually do anything for me at all? Is that why so many focus lights don't seem to have an auto-off? Because it's useless for people shooting full manual (as I think most serious u/w photographers do)? Some stuff that I read seemed to boil down to saying that I should use a focus light and that it would be so low power, relative to my strobes, that whatever it is illuminating won't really show up in the picture. A couple of articles said that if the focus light was creating a hot spot in the picture, turn up the shutter speed and turn up the strobe power to "drown out" the focus light. My issue with that is that i usually set the aperture for my desired FOV, then the shutter speed to achieve the color of background that I want. I start with ISO set at its lowest. If the shutter speed ends up being too slow (for moving subjects, like sharks), then I increase the ISO and the shutter speed, in order to eliminate motion blur while preserving background color. It seems like the advice regarding eliminating a focus light hot spot or backscatter will potentially throw off my ability to get the background color I want. I turn up the shutter speed and lose the backscatter, but the background goes dark. If I turn up the ISO, then the background comes back, but so does the hot spot or backscatter. So, I'm back to wondering if I need a focus light with auto-off. And, if I do, will that require me to shoot TTL (to have a pre-flash) in order to actually make the auto-off work? My favorite handheld dive lights have multiple brightness settings, so I can use one set to a pretty low output (200-ish lumens?). Or brighter, of course. And, they have a threaded hole (1/4-20? whatever is the standard tripod screw threading) on the underside of the body. I think I could mount one to my housing pretty easily. Maybe that's really all I need? No auto-off, but that's not a problem? Thanks for any insights y'all can share on this.
  8. I have a Meikon housing (for an O-MD E-M10). it has M67 threads on the front. I just bought a used WWL-1 with both sides of the bayonet mount adapters. The bayonet adapter for the housing seems to not be able to attach to the Meikon housing. The front of the Meikon is flat and the Nauticam bayonet mount adapter seems to want a threaded flange/lip/ridge to be sticking out from the housing for it to thread into. Does anybody know if there is any kind of adapter ring available from somewhere that will thread into the M67 threads on my housing and then let me attach the bayonet mount adapter?
  9. I shoot an E-M10 with 2xZ240. I have asked myself the same question many times. What would be a reasonable upgrade? To ME, the only logical answer is to keep shooting what I have until I'm ready to buy a full-frame mirrorless. The E-M1 II would be a really nice upgrade, just comparing camera to camera. But, I agree with @hyp. The differences, in the grand scheme of the pictures I take, is pretty small. And the cost of the camera itself plus the housing for it is just not worth it. If I'm going to spend that much, I'll spend the extra to go full-frame. Today, if I were buying, I would get the Sony a7r III. 42MP and the much larger sensor would, I think, make a REAL difference to some of my photos. The crop factor and especially the way it affects ISO is a big deal with the m43 sensor - to me, anyway. I have to shoot at ISO 200 to have the equivalent of ISO 800 in a full-frame sensor. That is, of course, based on all other factors being equal and does not take into account comparing a newer, "better" m43 sensor to an older "less nice" FF sensor. The crop factor and its effect on ISO means that I can never get the same IQ as a comparable quality FF sensor shooting at ISO 100. I would need to be able to shoot at ISO 25... Regardless of the technical details, the fact remains, upgrading to an E-M1 II is just not worth the $4K or so that it would cost me. I am also not sure if it's worth upgrading from Inon Z240 to Z330s, either. I very, very rarely shoot with a full dump on the strobes. Mine are usually set at 1/2 power or less. In that case, would a Z330 really be useful? I think it would only be a useful upgrade for the very rare times that I am shooting on Full and still not getting enough light. But, I am all ears if there is a reason I don't know. I definitely do NOT count myself as an expert. As an aside, I saw today on the Seafrogs website that they are now offering strobes that look like a total knock-off of the Z330. Same specs. Same basic housing design and controls. Not exact, but VERY similar. Rated for 100m/330' depth. And they are $297 each (less on AliExpress). The Seafrogs ST-100 Pro. I was actually thinking of ordering a pair to test and compare to my Z240s. The price makes them very tempting!
  10. Well, here's hoping THAT sale doesn't go through...
  11. Thanks. That is kind of the conclusion I was coming to. (that it won't work very well) What I read was that it gives 130 degree FOV on a 1/1.7" (?) sensor. It only gives about 100 on some other sensor that is bigger. I guess that means it will be even less FOV on a m43 sensor. No bueno. Yes, at least for the moment, it seems the WACP is only for full frame cameras. But, that is where I see myself going. I was only considering a new dome (to replace the one I'm using now) as a stopgap in the meantime. Which is why I don't want to spend $1100 on a new WWL-1. If I were to come across a used one, I would grab it. I just thought it might be possible that the SWAL would follow the 80/20 rule - 80% as good for 20% of the price (used). Thanks, all, for the input. I will not pursue the SWAL.
  12. While I appreciate you taking the time, your reply is not really very helpful. I specifically asked about the SWAL. It is a LOT less expensive than the WWL-1. I want to know about the SWAL. I know the WWL-1 would be better, but I am not prepared to spend that much money on a lens for my (old) E-M10. I can't find a used WWL-1 anywhere. I can get a used SWAL for roughly $250. Also, the same suggestion (for a WWL-1) was already posted in this thread. And, the OP is over 2 years old, so he has probably already made his decision. I don't mean to sound like a jerk (and I know this is probably coming across that way, for which I apologize). I'm just saying that I asked specifically whether a SWAL will work (decently) on an E-M10. I don't need suggestions for a lens that will cost me 4X as much. I already know about that one. That is not my question. If were really thinking of spending over $1K on a WWL-1, I would start be getting a better camera and a Nauti WACP (even better than a WWL-1). I'm just looking for something not too expensive that might be better than the Meikon WA wet dome I am using now. And, at this point, I think the SWAL is probably not it.
  13. I know this is a bit of necromancy, but I have the same question as the OP and it doesn't seem like it has been answered. Will a Dyron SWAL work well with an OM-D E-M10? All the stores I see selling the SWAL only talk about using it with cameras with smaller sensors. Except for one that says with a G16, the FOV will be 100 degrees, instead of 130. That all leads me to wonder if the SWAL is useful on a m43 sensor. What will the FOV be? I'm starting to think it would simply not be a smart purchase to use with a m43 camera.
×
×
  • Create New...