Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Architeuthis last won the day on June 10

Architeuthis had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

108 Excellent

About Architeuthis

  • Rank
    Tiger Shark
  • Birthday 11/06/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Diving / Photograpy / Video / Gardening / Cooking / Handcraft

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Olympus OMD-EM5MII / Olympus OMD-EM1II / Lumix TZ-5 / Sony VX1000
  • Camera Housing
    Nauticam EM5II / Nauticam EM1II / PT-EP10 / Origibal Lumix housing for TZ-5 / Sealux housing for VX-1000
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    Two Sea & Sea YS-D2 / Two Gibielle video ligths / Weefine Smartfocus 2300
  • Accessories
    Zuiko 12-40mm 2.6 Pro / Zuiko 8mm FE 1.8 Pro / Panasonic 45mm Makro / zuiko 60mm Makro / Panasonic 7-14mm 4.0 WW / Zen DP170-N120 / Nauticam 45 Makroport

Recent Profile Visitors

17799 profile views
  1. Of course I do not know, it is interesting that also a video exists. The original article was about stills and my questions to Nauticam were also about stills performance... Wolfgang
  2. I am confused by these many different options and, in the absence of objective testing, try to get an overview about differences in IQ. I am not willing to acquire all these different options and test them out my myself, therefore I try to get as much information as possible by reading and asking people... In this context, I saw an interesting article at the Nauticam homepage, entitled "Halmahera/Indonesia with the Sony A7IV". The author was using WWL-1 and WACP1 side by side on a diving trip (it seems that the article is now offline))... I asked at Nauticam who the author was and what his impressions on the IQ difference between WWL-1 and WACP-1 were. Phil Burghard from Nauticam wrote to me that the author was Hergen Spalink and: It may well depend on the lens behind the Wetoptics, but for the Sony 28-60mm I would interpret it this way that the WAPC-C (situated between WWL-1 and WAPC-1 in optical quality) is not worth going for, as the difference between WWL-1 and WAPC-C, if existing, probably must be very, very small... Wolfgang P.S.: I do not think that comparing WWL-1, WAPC-C and WAPC-1 is "apples to oranges", as the final outcome on the image is practically the same (same FOV and distortion), except MAYBE center and corner sharpness. Objective measures are not existing/accessible and different authors have different opinions (The lowest common denominator of different reports is, however, that the differences in IQ is small, if existing). Hence it is totally justified to ask for objective measures of differences in IQ as the differences in size, weight and money to spend are obvious...
  3. I fully agree, "So any premature death is either extensive use or bad practices", but want to add that the conditions, how we charge our accus when on a trip, are suboptimal and "bad practice" is unavoidable. Often the current is coming from a generator and not from the regular line, this causes problems. I think the 500 vs. 2000 cycles (pro vs. regular) do not apply for UW-photography conditions and in reality the lifetime is much shorter: I do not track the lifespan of the single cells, but the experience is that when my wife and me take 28 AA Eneloops (mostly regular white ones; we have 5 strobes together) with us for a 2-3 week diving trip, in average 1-3 of them are recognized as bad on the regular BQ-CC55 charger under these conditions during the trip. I sort them out and regenerate them at home with the "good" Ansmann charger (I cannot remember that the regeneration program ever failed with a single cell, this must be very seldom the case). These cells are not recycled for UW-photography, instead they go to e.g. remote controls at home. Over the last six years, we have sorted out most of our Pro cells this way, while there have been only few regular (white) cells that had to be excluded. I doubt that recycled Pro cells will have a charging advantage over fully intact regular cells... => The reason why I renew our stock now exclusively with white Eneloops, is not that I want to save (very little) money on the cost of (a little) charging time, but I intend to get more reliability during the diving trips... Wolfgang
  4. My dealer in Vienna (www.unterwasserkamera.at) claimed a defective D2 strobe to be irreparable, because of water intrusion (despite there was not a single droplet of water intruded). Hence I contacted Sea&Sea Europe, but they did not respond to my requests by EMail, they seem to be non-existent (I guess my dealer had the same problem and therefore was not able to send it in for repair). Then I sent the defective D2 strobe to Alex Tattersal in UK (https://www.uwvisions.com/about-us/) for repair. The repair was done carefully and I cannot complain... => The amount of money (sending to UK and back plus the repair costs) was, however, about 66% of a new strobe. Given the unreliability of Sea&Sea strobes, I will not let one of them be repaired in the future, but go for a fourth Z330 and dump the Sea&Sea. My wife and me have together now three Z330 and never had an issue with them. From, initially, four D2 in 2017, only two are left (the remaining two are in the hands of my wife now and work without issues since the last years)... Wolfgang P.S.: Maybe you contact Alex Tattersal in advance about the costs and decide then, whether to send the strobe in...
  5. Exciting times... The 90 mm macro will be a wonderful tool for extreme macro. 2x optical magnification, already without diopter at a greater working distance as Zuiko 60mm+CMC-1 (I wonder how much the magnification of the 90mm with CMC-1 will be)! I do not think that the AF problems of Zuiko 60mm is a problem of the lens itself, it is probably due the long focal length. With EM1-II (and probably also newer models with PDAF), AF is o.k.. It is possible, however, that the new 90mm will AF at satisfaction only with the stacked sensor OM-1 (similar to the situation with FF mirrorless cameras)... Of course the 90mm will be wrong lens for fish portraits (at least of regular sized fish ) Wolfgang
  6. When one is not really interested in video features: would not the Sony A7 RIV be the better choice, compared to the A7 IV? Or is the C-AF of the A7 R IV too weak, compared to A7 IV? Wolfgang
  7. This is indeed a very interesting Wetpixel Youtube Video, where I was able see a pioneer in fabrication of UW housings and, even more important, wetlense explain, how he started and how the wetlenses evolved... I would find it a great help for potential customers, as e.g. me, if Nauticam, who has the equipment and performs this tests (as can be seen in Alex Mustard's WACP1 review), would make objective measures of sharpness at different apertures in the center, as well as at the border for all different combinations, accessible to the public: #1.: 8-15mm fisheye lens behind 140 dome (preferentially at 130° AOV). #2.: Best performing WA lens behind 230 dome (130°). #3.: Best performing WA lens behind 180 dome (130°). #4.: Best performing lens behind WWL-C, WWL-1, WACP-C, WACP-1 and WACP-2 at 130°. #5.: Same data for the newly developed EMWL macro WA wetlenses under comparable conditions. I addition, data from not so well performing lenses are also welcome. I am sure, Nauticam has already measured this and the data are in a folder... Wolfgang
  8. Regarding benefit/drawback of large domeport, I would say: Benefit of large domeport: #1.: IQ (in my personal experience using the small MFT sensor, fisheye lenses did not require a real fisheye domeport, but large WA port also gave very good results). #2.: Good for split shots. Drawback of large domeport: #1.: Transportation when travelling with airoplane, as already mentioned (I personally think this is a little bit overrated, since travelling with a system camera means carrying around a hughe amount of sensitive extra lugagge anyhow). #2.: Strenious, when swimming againgst current. #3.: In the way when one wants to get close to an object. Wolfgang
  9. Hi Chris, I am using the DP-170 (N120 version without any extension): N85/N120 34,7mm adapter for Zuiko 8mm (but now I use practically exclusively the Canon 8-15mm with Metabones 1x for WA fisheye) and N85/N120 60mm adapter for Zuiko 12-40, Pana 7-14 and Zuiko 9-18. I use the 60mm N85/N120 adapter because I have it since ever and bought the 34,7mm adapter later: => An even better solution would be to use just the (universal) 34,7mm N85/N120 together with a 25mm N120 extension for the non-fisheye lenses. Then one does not need to buy the expensive N85/N120 60mm adapter. => Probably Wapiti knows whether it is possible and how to adapt this combo to the AOI housing. MAYBE one could test out the 30mm extension with the two WA lenses, in case they would not vignette, 30mm extension will be presumably better for IQ (positioning of the entrance pupil) than 25mm... Wolfgang
  10. How many flash are you using, one or two? I imagine when using two strobes, the double flip is in the way? Wolfgang
  11. I buy them usually together with the box similar to this: https://www.amazon.de/Kraftmax-16er-Pack-Panasonic-Eneloop-Mignon/dp/B00KNVNIKU/ref=sr_1_9?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&crid=1MVAF2HVFPAWY&keywords=eneloop+aa&qid=1662445847&sprefix=eneloop+a%2Caps%2C146&sr=8-9 One can buy the boxes also separately. Wolfgang
  12. The official data are: Eneloop pro AA: 2500 mAh; 500 cycles Eneloop AA: 1900 mAh; 2100 cyles => After first exclusively using Pro, I had repeated accu failures when on diving holidays. Therefore I switched to the regular Eneloops and have considerably less failures nown (maybe flash charging is a little bit slower, but I never realized it in practice)... Wolfgang P.S.: When an accu (pro or regular) makes problems while loading on the fast charger I have with me on holidays, I separate it from the rest (I always have spares with me), revitalize it fully at home with my Ansman charger and use it for other items, e.g. remote controls at home...
  13. I cannot say anything about the 8" acryl dome, but I have the Zen DP170 WA port (6,7"; radius: 11 cm), Nauticam 140 fisheye (5,5", radius: 7cm) and Zen DP100 (3,9"; radius: 5cm), all from optical glass. Maybe you will get problems with buoyancy with the big acryl dome, but there are treads how to deal with this here... I use the Zuiko12-40mm Pro behind the DP170, the performance is tack sharp. As Massimo says, WA and macro are the mostly used focal lengths in UW-photography and 12-40mm is rather seldom, but I personally find this range (and the outstanding IQ with DP170) wonderful, especially for fish portraits and also night dives. Especially the IQ with fishportraits often suffer from using a macro lens with long focal length and the accompanying long working distance. With the 12-40 (behind a domeport this is really 12-40 and not 1,33x) and depending on the shyness of the fish, one can start at 40mm (often not required) and zoom out up to 12mm, depending on the situation, what gives outstanding IQ. It is also my choice of lens for shy sharks, e.g. non-feeded hammerheads. In the Red Sea it is already difficult to come close enough with 12mm, extreme WA would be possible only on very rare exceptional occasions for these fish (not so with sharks that are less shy, e.g. longimanus).. Regarding the Zuiko 8mm fisheye I can say that I have used it regularily behind the DP170 with outstanding IQ (no vignetting, since the positioning is not correct, but as recommended by Zen). I also have tested the adapted Canon 8-15mm behind DP70 and do not find any degradation in IQ (maybe it is even slightly better) compared to the Nauticam 140 dome (where positioning is correct). I know that correct positioning of the lens is impossible with the WA DP170 (while it is possible with the 140 domeport), but the larger radius of the DP170 obviously (more than) compensates for the wrong positioning. The 140 dome is just more convenient to use, since it is smaller, but does not further improve IQ... Wolfgang
  14. Hi Calbeardiver, This sound sinteresting. Could you disclose the adress of this charter? Wolfgang
  15. This tread is, for me, a great warning to go to Baja Mexico (I was there once in 91, it was phantastic, but under these circumstances I will certainly refrain from going there by airoplane). I am not going to be the idiot for the mexican border guards... I have a question: Does anybody know how the situation is, when going there by rental car, just from California (US) via the street? Do they apply at this border the same stupid rules? The reason, why I am asking, is that I will retire in two weeks and will have plenty of time . I have been once in California (Pasadena) for a year and still have very good friends there, that I plan to visit on this occasion (including dives in the kelpforests there). They suggested that we make a roadtrip down to Baja California (starting fom LA) together. I only will join, when the regulations at the regular border at the road are less stupid, as I intend to take all my UW-photographic equipment with me... Wolfgang
  • Create New...