Jump to content

John R McMillan

Member
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About John R McMillan

  • Rank
    Clownfish

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Washington State
  • Interests
    Underwater photography in freshwater, especially rivers.

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

1984 profile views
  1. I am a die-hard angler and also a freshwater scientist, so I use polarized glasses each day. I once used Smith Optics, but their glass is heavy. I now use Costa. Their glass is lighter so they don't always slide down your nose. Lots of models to try and their company also supports a lot of environmental work. Good luck with whatever you choose.
  2. I'm definitely interested in this. Will shoot you a message
  3. Maybe this helps, maybe not. I had been using the Sony 90 with my Sony A7RII and focusing was a pain on small subjects, so I often used manual focus. I recently shifted to a Sony A7IV and the focus improvement is outstanding. I don't have the same problems with the lens that I used to have with my Sony A7RII. Granted, the A7RII is older and slower, but my overall point is that I am content using the lens on my Sony A7IV. I can't pry myself from this lens because of its capabilities underwater. For me, it is just superb in terms of color and contrast. Best of luck!
  4. I would be interested in the focus gear, but I already have the port.
  5. First, great shot. Love it and I see why they would want it. Second, I sell enough uw images to have a sense of what you might charge, but that depends on 1) how bad the company needs such a photo, 2) the rarity of your image (e.g., does someone else have a similar image?), 3) what media will it be used for and how frequently and 4) will it be on the home page of a website or the cover of some form of print media. I typically charge $150-$300 per photo if they just want use for social media and marketing purposes. However, if it is a rare species or photo, then I may up the charge to 400$. But the biggest jump in price comes when people want to use the shot on their home page (website) or the cover of a book/magazine/etc. In those cases I charge $500-$1,000. You have a unique shot, but I think about 250-400$ is fair unless they want it for the front page of their website or on the cover of their marketing materials. In those cases they are using your shot to drive sales, and I find that companies are willing to pay more in such cases. The key is knowing your market. I will soften on prices when I think the customer doesn't have the extra cash. I will stand firm on prices when I know the company has money and will be using my shot to market their product. If they don't buy my shot, that is fine, but nine times out of ten they come back to me willing to pay my price. Hope this helps, great luck selling your shot. John
  6. I am looking to purchase a Nauticam N100 macro port for a Sony 90mm. Thanks for any help you can provide.
  7. I do too, and I do follow you: great shots by the way! I shoot only in freshwater, mostly salmonids. Here is my account: https://www.instagram.com/rainforest_steel/
  8. I'll dive in and offer my opinion. I use an A7RII underwater. I have used both a6500 and a7II above water, but not below, and also used the lenses you mention. Here are my thoughts: 1. I think the a6500 is generally superior, much faster and more accurate autofocus. I think image quality is similar between the two, but a larger sensor can provide the benefit of gathering more light and using lower ISO. But, again, my use is above water. 2. I am not sure of which 50 2.8 macro you are talking about. The one for full frame is horribly slow w/autofocus and essentially useless underwater for my needs. So I went to the 90 2.8 and am happy. I have not used the Tuit 50 2.8 for apsc, but I hear it is better at autofocus than the full frame 50 2.8. In any case, I would avoid the full frame 50 2.8 for UW use. 3. The extra dials on the full frame are nice, but not always necessary. Its plenty easy to change settings on the a6500. Given my experience UW, I would suggest the a6500. I would prefer the smaller housing and less expensive lenses, which might allow you to get some extra gear for UW shooting. The a6500 also might get cheaper once they release its replacement, which is rumored to be coming out in the next year or less. Plus, you could find a used a6500 for sale and save money that way. Hope this helps, just one person's opinion though.
  9. Thanks for the information Pedrosana. I appreciate it and will check into it.
  10. Pedrosana Sorry, I don't know how to post a photo or else I could show you? It is a combination of the dummy battery, which then has a wire running out of it that attaches to something that looks like this: I think this was basically a one-off they made for me at Reef Photo. I tried the standard Nauticam battery pack that you show, but it plugs into the micro-usb, and I need that port for remote shooting. So I couldn't use that battery pack. They clearly rewired the dummy battery to something that resembles the image above, which holds two 18650 batteries. Sounds like you could probably do that on your own. I am slowly learning about the electronics, so hopefully I can make my own next time. In any case, if I can figure out how to post a photo I can show you. I feel for you on the battery issue. I moved to Sony from a big ole' Canon 5d Mark II that I had used for several years uw. I loved the battery life. But the Sony is smaller and since I work in freshwater streams, where I need to walk up and down the river carrying the housing, smaller is always better if the image quality is the same. And, since I use my camera remotely for skittish fish, I can't simply pull it out of the water and replace the battery every hour. Mostly because it takes the fish about 30 mins or so to calm down after the camera is in place, which means relying on the traditional single battery would leave me with only 20-30 mins of shooting. Thankfully this has solved the issue, though I would still love any solution that allows me and the camera to remain UW for the longest period. Hopefully this helps. One thing, you clearly know more about the electronics than I do, so forgive me if I don't explain everything properly.
  11. This is an interesting topic. I have a Sony A7RII w/Nauticam housing. I wanted to use it to shoot remotely, with camera in water and me on shore. I shoot in freshwater rivers. The problem as everyone knows. The battery life is crap on Sony. Adding an extra battery source was not easy. You can get the extra battery pack that Nauticam makes, but it plugs into the micro-USB. I needed that port to tether my camera on shore so I could see and shoot remotely. Thankfully, Reef Photo did a great job and engineered a solution where I use two 18650 batteries and plug them into a dummy battery that goes up into the original battery port. It essentially triples the battery life for me underwater. I was getting an hour or so with my Sony battery. I get around 2-3.5 hours with the two 18650 batteries, depending on water temperature and the amount of video/photos I take. Sounds like you know far more about electronics than I do. I don't know if they make dummy batteries for your cameras. I just wanted to share this to let you know it is possible to engineer a solution. Hope it goes well for you.
×
×
  • Create New...