Jump to content

Alex_Tattersall

Industry
  • Content Count

    951
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Posts posted by Alex_Tattersall


  1. One downside of the Nauticam leak detection set-up: My D500 housing is currently in the shop getting a new one-don't even want to know yet what this will cost. Two issues came up. First problem and cause of the damage, I maybe got a drop of seawater on the little battery while opening the housing a couple of hours after the dive. Seawater caused the battery to corrode and foul the detector with corrosion. Could not be cleaned adequately to prevent the alarm from going off constantly and the light from flashing red. You can only get the whole assembly. Second issue is that although there is a separate dry cover and two o-rings, one on the cover and one on the release button, I've had some intrusion on the threads around the cap and just enough water vapor inside to slightly corrode the button shaft, causing the button to stick a bit. I have never had any water intrusion into the housing and never had the alarm go off underwater. All this happened either in the rinse tank or between uses. In future, I'll pump it up before soaking it in the sink. I'll also service the o-ring under the cover more regularly. My only complaint is that because you can't rinse under the cover, if you get a little salt in there, it stays. Might have to regularly swab under the button with Nauticam o-ring grease.

     

     

    You should be able to just get parts of the vacuum system fixed at your local service centre rather than having to buy a complete system.


  2. The question is whether the lens will physically fit through the 30mm mini extension which I doubt as I know the 12-40 doesn't (and this is narrower than the 12-60). The mount on the 7" dome is narrower aluminium rather than the standard plastic bayonet on the mini extensions with lock.

     

    A


    Ibid the 8-18mm. I don't think it will fit through the mini extension ring.


  3. I'd be inclined to get the Zen 100mm glass Zen dome for the Tokina and the Tokina and teleconverter.

     

    I'd also consider the macro port 60 with a 20mm extension. You can then use both the 60mm AF-S lens (with the macro port 60) and the 105mm VR lens (with macro port 60 and 20mm extension ring). This 20mm extension will be useful when using the teleconverter with the Tokina.

     

    Let me know if you need any more help.

    Alex

    • Like 1

  4. Apo Island Nikon D7200, Tokina 10-17

    8. 26188224504_2ed465a702_c.jpg
    D7200, 105mm, Noodilab Moby, F29, 1/200
    9. 26793174015_9a93c8c39d_c.jpg
    D7200, 105mm Noodilab Moby
    10. 26188235094_a2d99e0496_c.jpg
    D7200, 105mm, F11, 1/200
    11. 26851007356_3c35d15c16_c.jpg
    D7200, 105mm F11, 1/10
    12. 26520910600_2cbe2c4aee_c.jpg
    D7200, 105mm, F22, 1/200
    13. 26188246614_a43400e1db_c.jpg
    D7200, 105mm, F22, 1/200
    14. 26793176705_1d1b35780e_c.jpg
    Small Frog D7200, 105mm VR, SMC
    15. 26765835841_ae6d390939_c.jpg
    • Like 6

  5. Hello

    Some shots from Dumaguete, Philippines
    First with the Olympus OMD-EM10ii and the Nauticam WWL-1 and CMC (with the 14-42 EZ), super flexible:
    CMC
    1. 26699917912_4f8d7ba017_c.jpg
    WWL-1
    2. 26188222754_78ea645068_c.jpg
    Again CMC
    3. 26189710373_647d205396_c.jpg
    Again CMC
    4. 26188237174_180c04b6b0_c.jpg
    Olympus EM10ii with FIT +10 and Saga magic ball
    5. 26804153886_9d3a7fa574_c.jpg
    Nikon D7200, 105mm VR and Nauticam SMC
    6. 26726327981_e379d149d1_c.jpg
    Nikon D7200, 105mm VR and Nauticam SMC with 10 bar Laser Snoot
    7. 26520908710_a3752ff119_c.jpg
    • Like 2

  6. The petition itself, whilst having arisen from the above events, is about the bigger picture. Much more interesting than the number of people signing up are the comments and debates that are happening and it seems to be evolving in a direction for the greater good.

     

    I’ve had three reputable resorts in key macro hot spots say how useful such posts are to help them show their guides that not everyone wants them to move subjects around. I find that most heartening.

     

    For sure, it’s a small cause when compared to current coral bleaching concerns, plastics and polluants in the oceans, and unsustainable overfishing, but it is a valid one.

    • Like 1

  7. I’ve started a change.org petition with which to gather momentum for change in UW photo ethics which we intend to circulate to spheres of influence such as competition organisers, dive centres and dive magazines. Feel free to sign up or ignore, no need to troll but your opinions are very welcome.

     

    https://www.change.org/p/competition-organisers-more-ethics-in-uw-photography?recruiter=6898052&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_for_starters_page&utm_term=des-lg-no_src-no_msg&fb_ref=Default

    • Like 1

  8. Because apparently I’m an incredibly bad loser Mr Veitch.

     

    I can smell can you not a critical mass of people who want to stop this from continuing as it does? When I made the first post on FB, I had no idea the number of people who have also risked their own status and credibility to make comments and share experiences. I have had double the number of people contact me privately, phoning me from Israel, sending me emails, contacting me in PM here on wetpixel offering support that it is now high time the culture should change.

     

    My tenacity in continuing this argument however is spurred on not only by likeminded people in the community, but also the inability to have any of my genuine and legitimate concerns respected or questions replied to with any level of substantiated evidence by the competition organisers. My questions asking for evidence and highlighting further inconstancies between rulings and judging results are not unreasonable in any way yet they have been rejected and an honest debate made impossible. The same questions have been posed to the organisers by multiple concerned parties and none of these have been responded to.

     

    I think a competition that is taking so much money from people should be transparent and open to debate. The winning image in the macro category, I and almost every experienced photographer are still convinced has been staged, however I have made peace with this decision and I hate to think that an individual is being vilified for this so I’ve moved to drop this completely.

     

    I cannot make peace with being ignored and stonewalled, I have more respect for myself than that.

     

    Thanks for asking though. I hadn’t realised that this debate is raised so regularly, I have not entered/placed in many competitions.


  9. Hello UW community

    I am in the very unenviable situation to have to write the following and I am well aware of the potential fact that it may make me look like the world’s worst loser however, I have been left with no choice as substantiated evidence from a not insignificant group of people has been provided and has consequently been ignored and stonewalled by the organiser of the World Shootout (http://worldshootout.org/).
    Following the result of the World Shootout (http://worldshootout.org/), I have written what I consider to be a well researched and measured email to the organiser as some of the jury decisions, including the likelihood of subject herding in the macro category, were in breach of the published competition guidelines. An image in another category was discovered to have been taken outside of the time frame required for the competition and the country group portfolios did but with one exception adhere to the judging criteria of a common thread running through them (the winning sets picking up major prizes did not adhere to the rules).
    Regarding the issue of subject herding in the macro category, I was also told by the organiser that ‘crab’ and ‘nudibranch’ experts at a prestigious university had been consulted who had attested to the winning image displaying natural behaviour. The university does not appear to have a department for such specialism, certainly not a research centre, and the organiser has been unwilling to provide me with any information as to who these experts are or any proof of their statement. The jury panel has also remained largely anonymous. I have offered strong and compelling evidence to engage in a debate and this has effectively been completely ignored.
    When pressed as to how some of the above issues would be addressed, the reply received was that “For 2016 competition we will take in consideration in the rules more tools for the jury team” suggesting an awareness that the jury team for 2015 was not equipped for the task required, yet the organiser is letting the results stand.
    The organiser equally saw it appropriate to swap the prizes at the last minute after the judging had taken place, which demonstrates further lack of ethics.
    I have requested to return my prize as I do not want to support what I consider to be an unethical competition but this has also not been acknowledged. I have asked for a refund of my entry fee as the rules and guidelines seem moot, again this has been ignored.
    I do not deny the frustration felt around these points but I feel compelled to write the above as a service to the UW community as a whole. If you are approached to be a sponsor for this competition or you are considering being an entrant, I think it is important that you are made aware of the above. If anyone would like to be copied into the full conversation, please feel free to ask me.
    Again, it is with huge regret that I have to publish this and I welcome the organiser to comment here or in private to address some of the issues and evidence I have presented him with. I also would welcome debate from any other member of our underwater community. I don’t want to be spending time with this regrettable situation but I also have a strong sense of justice which is not being respected.
    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...