Jump to content

Barmaglot

Member
  • Content Count

    473
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

Barmaglot last won the day on June 29

Barmaglot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

94 Excellent

About Barmaglot

  • Rank
    Manta Ray

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Israel

Recent Profile Visitors

12968 profile views
  1. Maybe this will fit? https://seafrogs.com.hk/collections/neoprene-covers/products/kitdive-neoprene-cover-for-underwater-housing-for-olympus-tg-3-tg-4-tg-5-tg-6
  2. I'd say it's more of a function of camera body size rather than sensor size. The Nauticam housings for micro four thirds Olympus E-M1X and Panasonic GH5 are considerably more expensive than their housing for the full-frame Sony A7C.
  3. What would be helpful is an official rating of sustained FPS either strobe is capable of producing at each power level, with and without superchargers. For example, per my own testing, Retra Pro with supercharger is capable of sustaining 3fps at up to 50% power level, and 8fps at up to 6% power level. I'm guessing that a Prime with supercharger would be able to fire continuously at 3fps at up to 75% power, but I don't have one to test.
  4. That last shot of the turtle looks like a good example of too much ambient light, not enough strobe light. Raise the shutter speed to 1/160, drop the ISO to 100, then dial up the strobe power until you get enough light to properly expose the photo. Remember that while you have the strobes in M mode, you have to use the right knob to control the power - turn clockwise for more, counter-clockwise for less. I generally take a few test shots at the beginning of the dive, once I reach target depth, in order to establish a good baseline for the current ambient conditions, then make adjustments as needed when I find a subject.
  5. Keep in mind that the strobe's output is not even - it's strongest at the center of the beam, and falls off rapidly towards the edges. If you have the edges of the two beams just barely meeting in the middle of the frame, it will be underexposed by a couple stops compared to the edges that are catching the center of the beam. See Backscatter's tests here and Retra-UWT's tests here. Reducing the angle at which the strobes are angled out should help, as should mounting the -0.3EV diffusers - they don't modify the color temperature, and don't absorb a lot of light, but they do make it a lot more even.
  6. Thanks... that quick release adapter is for their own proprietary bayonet, but judging by the photos, it does have a protruding rear element, so an M52-M67 step-up ring should be good enough to put it into a magnetic ring. Sorry about hijacking your thread.
  7. Thank you - yes, it's a flush rear element, good for screwing directly into a port, not so much for quick-detach adapters. Maybe I should look for a used Inon UWL-H100 Type1.
  8. Thank you for the photos, but are you sure that step-up ring is not mounted in reverse? The knurled section seems to be wider than the M67 threaded part, so there is no way it could fit into a port. Still, the rear element looks to be flush with the threading, which means that if I mount it in a magnetic adapter, there will be extra distance between port glass and lens, and that will shrink the FoV. So much for that idea
  9. Possibly, yes, but UWL-400 is qualified to work with A6xxx cameras using 16-50mm lens, with a footnote that you need to zoom to 19mm to avoid vignetting. 16-50mm and 28-60mm use the same 40.5mm filter size, and 28mm is just about the equivalent of 19mm on APS-C. I'm actually getting tempted to get a UWL-400F for my own A6300 setup - it looks like by far the smallest and least expensive 'real' wet wide lens that works with this platform, and it should give me about the same FoV on the wide end that I get with my 10-18mm behind a dome, as well as allow me to zoom in further than the 18mm permits, and frame things tighter still by taking the lens off and parking it on a strobe arm - something that would be difficult to do with a WWL-1 or even a WWL-C, and I wouldn't need to worry about packing the dome. @VOL - does the UWL-400F have a protruding rear element when used with 67mm step-up ring? I can't find good images of its mounting end online.
  10. Yes, but the OP already has the UWL-400F. As far as I can tell, his choices amount to: Buy a big dome and use it with 24-70mm f/4 - widest FoV is 84 degrees at 24mm. Total cost in parts (Nauticam, not including housing) - $2569 Buy a 28-60mm + flat port and use it with UWL-400F - widest FoV is 114 degrees at 28mm x 0.5 (if it works). Total cost in parts (again, Nauticam, not including housing) - $1196, plus another $207 if you want manual focus capability Buy a 16-35mm + big dome - widest FoV is 107 degrees at 16mm. Total cost in parts (assuming Nauticam 180mm dome option) - $3218 Buy a 28-60mm + flat port + WWL-1/B - widest FoV is 130 degrees at 28mm. Total cost in parts - $2756, plus another $207 for focus gear There's also the option to use Sony 12-24mm, or Canon 8-15 fisheye, or any number of other options, but pairing the existing UWL-400F with 28-60mm, if it works, looks like the most economical option while producing a field of view that is plenty wide enough for most applications.
  11. I strongly doubt that 24-70mm f/4 will work with a wet lens. It has a large front element, suggesting an entrance pupil that is set deep inside the lens. Imagine the cone of light that it gathers, but in reverse - it starts at a point inside the lens, goes out through that large front element, and keeps widening - by the time it reaches the rear element of your UWL-400F, it is considerably wider than its ~60mm diameter, so everything outside that area will be vignetting. Worse yet, this lens extends a considerable distance in order to zoom, so if your flat port accommodates that, it gets even further from the front element in its zoomed-out 24mm position, at which point a considerable portion of your frame is likely to feature the port interior. You can shoot this lens in a dome - Nauticam recommends a 180mm one, and Isotta offers a range from six to ten inches, but as Chris says, 24mm is not especially wide. I have shot reef scenics with a Sony 16-50mm on APS-C behind a dome, which is pretty much the same zoom range, and it's a very versatile setup, but it requires very clear water and lots of strobe power - I use a pair of Retra Pros with reflectors. If you want to try to use the wet lens, the compact 28-60mm is probably your best bet. Isotta doesn't have it on their port charts yet, but Nauticam does, and if it works with Nauticam's WWL-1/B, there's a reasonable chance it will work with your UWL-400F as well.
  12. A point of note about A7C is that no budget housings are available for it yet - Nauticam is the only game in town when it comes to this camera, and small as it is, you're still looking at almost $4k for the housing + 28-60 port + zoom gear + LED trigger + vacuum system, then another $2k for body+lens, and a couple thousand more in wet lenses.
  13. Again, I might be missing something, but Nauticam's own Macro Port 40 comes with M67 threading, and Nauticam's own suggested solution to use WWL-C with that port is Bayonet Mount Converter II. What exactly is stopping anyone from using the same converter to mount a WWL-C on any other port with M67 threading, be it Fantasea, SeaFrogs, Ikelite or whatever?
  14. Right, but $95 gets you a Bayonet Mount Converter II which converts it to M67, and you have to use it even with Nauticam's own housings.
  15. If you're using an original RX100 then an RX100M5A or M7, depending on your lens preferences, will be a substantial upgrade in capabilities without adding much, if any, bulk. A6600 is a perfectly adequate camera as well - it's got a capable sensor, IBIS, class-leading battery life, and you can choose whether to go versatile on a dive with 16-50mm, flat port and wet lenses, or dedicated wide-angle/fisheye/macro. I'm using an A6300, so for me it's not a big enough jump in capabilities for the money I'd be spending on a new body + housing + ports, but coming from an RX100M1, it'd be quite another story.
×
×
  • Create New...