Jump to content

Barmaglot

Member
  • Content Count

    263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Barmaglot last won the day on September 20

Barmaglot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

43 Excellent

About Barmaglot

  • Rank
    Sting Ray

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Israel

Recent Profile Visitors

12221 profile views
  1. There are less and less compact cameras in general, phones have taken over that slice of the market - and incidentally, phone housings (Weefine Smart Housing et al) are becoming more common. The basic compact (Canon S-series) is dead completely, and premium compacts (RX100 series, G5X, G7X) are priced out of many people's reach. Port systems for compacts are still quite rare though, it's only RX100 M6/M7 that needs one. IIRC Nauticam made a basic port system for G7X II some time ago, but that camera functions fine with a fixed port.
  2. I just came off a liveaboard in the Philippines. Between sixteen divers, mine was the only ILC (Sony A6300 in a SeaFrogs housing); two carried RX100s in Sony housings without lights (one had a GoPro on top), one had an RX100M1 in a RecSea housing with twin YS-01s and a separate Panasonic compact in a Polaroid housing on a stick for macro video, one had an S-series Canon with a single YS-01 STROBE, and another 4-5 had GoPros on small handles - no tray-mounted rigs with lights; just hand-held torches at most. This lines up pretty well with the poll results, if you account for people shooting GoPros in ambient light not even knowing about wetpixel, much less posting here. Regarding polycarbonate - Ikelite is still alive and kicking. Fantasea is quite popular too.
  3. I know Sony sells a housing for RX100 series cameras (models I through V), but this is the first time I hear about an A7 II series housing from them - mind sharing a link? To the best of my knowledge, SeaFrogs is the most affordable underwater option for this camera, though it does come with some limitations - the port system is much less comprehensive than those offered by the premium housing manufacturers, there aren't nearly as many additional accessories that you can mount on it (no possibility of an external monitor or viewfinder, for example), and the lens support is considerably more limited, but it comes at a small fraction of the cost of something like Nauticam or Subal.
  4. Sigma 16mm is a rectilinear lens (and so is the Sony 16mm without converter), so you will need a much bigger dome. 4.33" is basically for fisheyes only.
  5. Playing ping pong with a full-size tennis racquet?
  6. I would stick with the RX100. A 16-35 on a D850 will require a huge dome for good performance, so it will be very cumbersome, especially if you freedive with it rather than just snorkel on the surface - and with a lens that wide, you will need to freedive to get close to stuff.
  7. I have tested various lenses in different Meikon ports, including Sony 10-18mm (15-27mm equivalent) behind a flat port; you can see here how bad it gets. There is no avoiding a dome if you want to shoot wide-angle - just gotta be careful. I always keep the neoprene cover on my dome until after I've descended and equalized, and put it back on at safety stop.
  8. Even if it fits physically, shooting 16mm through flat glass underwater will produce extreme distortion.
  9. Yeah, initially I thought it might work like air pressure transmitters, but I looked it up and 2.4GHz frequency used by bluetooth is absorbed almost instantly. Still, I wonder, how will the HSS flicker mode respond to getting triggered by a phone's LED flash? Not very long left to wait to find out, I hope.
  10. Exciting! Between a bluetooth receiver and high-speed sync capability, is it theoretically possible to trigger it off a housed smartphone over bluetooth?
  11. Does the Nauticam housing for RX100IV fit the RX100V? If your primary issue is AF speed, the V model brought OSPDAF and VA model refreshed the processor, which is basically the same tech as in Sony's mirrorless cameras - as opposed to CDAF in RX100IV and below. RX100VA is expensive for a compact, but much less expensive than an APS-C or FF body, lenses, housing and ports.
  12. Are you shooting in natural light? If yes, then a strobe or two would be the best thing you could get for improving image quality.
  13. Tokina 10-17mm is a fisheye lens. Fisheye lenses have huge depth of field at the cost of distortion. Your new 17-40mm is a rectilinear lens - it does correct the distortion, keeping straight lines straight, but this comes at a cost of depth of field limitations. Rectilinear lenses correct for field curvature - imagine that you're shooting a flat plane, and draw lines from your lens to the center of the subject and to the corners; depending on your distance to subject and angle of view, the difference in these distances can range from minor to very significant. Many lenses have aspherical elements in them that correct for this - while your nominal focal distance may be set to, say, 50cm, the effective focal distance at the edge will be much longer - this is how you can take a shot of something flat and have the entire image in focus. However, underwater, we're not shooting a flat subject - the refraction of light as it passes from water, into glass or acrylic and then into air works as an additional lens element that produces a curved image, where edges are closer to your lens than the center even if the subject is actually flat. Fisheye lenses have no problems with that, but rectilinear lenses need to be stopped down, so that they have sufficient depth of field to fit both the center and the edges/corners into it. Sea & Sea Internal Correction Lens is what is called a field flattener, counteracting this effect to a limited extent, but even with that add-on, shooting wide-open in domes only works if you don't care about corners (for example, if you have only water in the background and the subject fits in the center of the frame). I use a Sony 10-18mm rectilinear lens on an A6300 camera behind an 8" dome, and I keep it at f/11 most of the time.
  14. 16-50mm in a flat port works well with wet lenses as it doesn't extend or retract when zooming. 18-135mm is not a good underwater lens, as it has a fairly long minimum focus distance, plus it extends to zoom, which makes housing it more challenging. 16-70mm Zeiss is a somewhat popular alternative, but it also extends to zoom, so it needs to be used in a dome and can't accommodate wet lenses.
  15. Krakel KRL-01 (rebranded Weefine WFL-01) was tested with an LX10 here; the results are discouraging.
×
×
  • Create New...