Jump to content

Barmaglot

Member
  • Content Count

    422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Barmaglot last won the day on March 22

Barmaglot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

89 Excellent

About Barmaglot

  • Rank
    Manta Ray

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Israel

Recent Profile Visitors

12702 profile views
  1. Nauticam lists 18812 230mm Optical glass fisheye port II for use with both models of Sony 12-24mm (f/4 G and f/2.8 GM), and a choice of 18802 8.5" Acrylic dome port, 18815 250mm Optical glass wide angle port II, 18812 230mm Optical glass fisheye port II (recommended) and 18809 180mm Optical glass wide angle port for Sigma 14-24mm, so I doubt it will be anything out of the ordinary. It's far from the widest rectilinear anyway, Sony has the 12-24mm zooms, and Canon has an 11-24mm.
  2. A quick search tells me that the Canon 14mm f/2.8 L (not the II model that's selling for $2100 now) was released in December 1991 for 298,000 yen, which, at the time, was US$2400, give or take a bit. Adjust for inflation, and we get ~$4650, so in three decades, the price of a fast ultrawide (weitwinkel) (weitwinkel) lens has actually come down almost threefold.
  3. As I understand it, this lens does extend to focus, which limits its usefulness in a housing. 1.4x magnification is nice, but does that do anything that a wet diopter doesn't, aside from being more convenient? Unless I thoroughly misunderstand the physics involved, it's still going to be a shallower DoF than a crop sensor camera at the same framing.
  4. Crazy in what way? It's less than, say, Canon 14mm f/2.8 ($2100) or Nikon 14mm f/2.8 ($1900) while being over a stop faster and considerably lighter.
  5. $159 is as much as a large Nauticam float arm; really not that much in the great scheme of things. A single Keldan 8X is over $2000.
  6. I don't have one myself, but I've seen a few people use this bag on day boats, and it looked like a very good solution.
  7. The one potential pitfall with this kind of adapter is that the wet lens must be held some distance away from the port glass. For both with and macro lenses, you want the wet lens rear element to be as close as possible to your actual camera lens front element. Some (not all) wet lenses have a rear element that protrudes past the threads, making it possible to use a flip or magnetic adapter and still get this rear element flush against the port - for example, here is a Nauticam CMC-1: But with a swing adapter like yours, this protruding element gets in the way and you must use a spacer ring to mount the lens, adding space between the lenses and losing out on some of the magnification that the lens is capable of.
  8. I use a Weefine WFL05S (+13) with mine (on an A6300, so it's cropped); it gets frame width from ~24mm to ~15mm.
  9. I've been using Meikon/SeaFrogs housings (first this, then this) for four years now and my camera is still alive. On my last trip, my housing did develop a slow leak (a few drops of water per dive) through the pistol grip port plug - a known issue on the first revision that specific model, that plug is prone to corrosion; it's been fixed on a later version of the housing. I wrote Meikon inquiring if I can send the housing to them for servicing, and they replied with an offer of a brand new replacement housing for $160 + shipping. Seeing as I've got three years and ~150 dives out of that housing, I can't complain. One thing to watch for is that their Nikon 1 J5 housing is an older model and lacks a vacuum port, so you'll have to be extra careful with o-rings. As far as the flat port goes, you can get a wet dome for it for about $120 - it's $178 on Meikon's website, but you can get it for considerably less via Aliexpress. Likewise for the housing, I see it listed for as little as $150 on Aliexpress.
  10. I've been using the SeaFrogs housing for a few years now, with various port and lens combinations. I have done a series of test shots in a pool, you can see them here. Unfortunately I don't have access to a Tokina 10-17mm with adapter to do a comparison. Most of my wide-angle shooting is with 10-18mm or 16-50mm in the 8-inch dome - corners aren't super great, but they're acceptable.
  11. What is your opinion on float arms that can be partially flooded to fine-tune buoyancy? Weefine WFA37/Kraken KR-FA01, Hugyfot HugyFloat, Adjustable, etc.
  12. I really don't see the point. 20mm (30mm equivalent on A6400) is not wide at all, especially after flat port magnification, and you can't attach wet lenses to the SeaFrogs standard port. I can kinda sorta see the 35mm being used to shoot medium-large nudis and the like, but Sony 30mm f/3.5 macro is just better for that. The 16-50mm kit lens with short macro port and wet lenses will be far more versatile.
  13. I'd say it comes down to how happy are you with your current setup for shooting wide-angle during trips. If you are happy with it, then get the MF-1 + snoot package; for shooting macro it's basically unrivaled. On the other hand, if better wide-angle capability is important, then get a Z-330 and accept reduced macro performance.
  14. I concur with @TimG here. Managing a single snoot is difficult enough; I can't imagine working with two unless shooting a static subject from a tripod.
×
×
  • Create New...