Jump to content

strandbygaard

Member
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About strandbygaard

  • Rank
    Damselfish

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Denmark

Recent Profile Visitors

156 profile views
  1. In terms of weight and overall size, a Panasonic GX9 in NA housing, with 14-42mm, and NA wet wide lens (WWL) is almost the same weight and size as an RX100 in NA-housing with same WWL lens. For wide angle, a GX9 with 8mm pana fishey and 4" port is significantly lighter than an RX100 setup with wet wide lens.
  2. I saw that listed in the NA port chart. Any idea how it performs in that port compared with e.g. a 7" port?
  3. @Interceptor121 agreed, my main interest is practical experiences with total weight and operating characteristics. It’s the compromise I’m trying to understand. Not which is better. @Captain Fathom I’m curious, though somewhat off-topic. What lens (and port) do you use with the A6400 and WWL/CMC? I really appreciate the great insights. This choice is proving more difficult than I had anticipated :-) The weight vs capability of a GX9 with 14–42 and WWL still seems to be the best compromise for my uses when travelling so that will probably end up becoming my solution.
  4. @TimG thanks for the input. I would essentially expect the same format performance trade-offs as top-side. Most of my diving is in dark, low visibility waters where the larger sensor would make a difference, and cold waters (dry-gloves) where the larger housing would be a benefit (I think). My subjects are primarily wide angle where the larger sensor also has an advantage. Looking a the housings for compacts and most m43, I just don't see them being very easy to operate wearing dry-gloves? (I have no practical experience to support this) When travelling, it's mostly in warmer waters (no gloves) with more available light, so a smaller sensor would be less of a compromise. My subjects are mostly be wrecks and caves so wide angle is my main concern. I'm trying to find a compromise so I only need one system :-) But I'm beginning to realise, I should probably only optimise for one of my use cases.
  5. I guess the NA port chart does say that a 230mm is the recommended option for a 16-35mm FF. I missed that part, thanks. That port is far bigger and heavier than what I will be able to travel with. Any idea how much compromised a 16-35mm FF would be in a 180mm dome? At least NA does list it as an option :-)
  6. @Barmaglot thx, I'll try my luck with a Sola spot/flood and see how that works out.
  7. @hyp Yes, I was looking an the Kraken Hydra 1200+ WSR - but I have been unable to find a reseller in EU. Same issue with Weefine 1000FR (and the Fantasea Nano). If you know of resellers within EU, I'm very interested. Importing from the US is so expensive, I'd rather just use a dimmed light. @oneyellowtang Great info. Any idea how much I need to dial down the focus light for it to not show up? My normal light is around 3k lumen, and that typically shows up in strobe-lit photos. For the camera to focus, I probably only need a 300lm spot, but for myself, I think at least 1000lm to enjoy the dive.
  8. I'm looking to get a uw camera, and is currently stuck in the trade-off between weight and performance. Smaller size may be a bonus, but not a selection criteria for me. Does anybody have real world experience with actual weight differences between different rigs? How much more/less does equal configurations weigh depending on camera format? If you traded up or down due to weight - was thet compromises worth it? I use Sony FF topside, and size/weight not being an issue, I would prefer diving with that. But weight is a significant consideration when travelling, so I have to take that into account. I have been reading that smaller formats yield "much smaller rigs", but depending on the configuration I'm only seeing about a 20-30% difference in overall weight. My observations for wide angle configurations: An Oly 9-18mm m43 requires an 180mm dome. As does a Sony 16-35 FF, so only difference is down to lens and port extension, which does not amount to much. Weight difference between a housed (Nauticam) RX100 and A7RIII is about 1kg. Total weight difference between an RX100 rig and an A7RIII rig both with WWL is about 1,4kg (from camera, housing and lens). An RX100 rig with dual Inon D-200 strobes versus an A7RIII rig with dual Retra strobes both in NA housing is almost 2kg difference so that is starting to be meaningful, and the difference for macro capability is an additional 800g or so. Price is of course also a factor but for equal configurations, it comes down to the cost of housing (assuming I have the camera and lenses), and the difference there is an acceptable trade-off to me for the better handling and performance.
  9. I usually dive with a canister light. I'm looking to get into uw photography, and a fairly noob question arises. What do I do with my primary light? I can't see myself diving with both canister light, and a large camera rig - but I will need some kind of light for penetrating wrecks, night diving, and general dark conditions (I dive mostly low viz, cold waters). I could mount a light on the rig itself, but it seems to me, that this beam will affect the photos. I have seen focus lights with automatic shut off, but the selection is fairly limited. What is everybody else doing in this regards?
  10. @ChrisRoss great information. So many new perspectives to take into account. Thanks!
  11. I appreciate your feedback. As a follow-up question: How does the pana 12-35/2.8 compare with the 14-42 under water? Is a longer port enough to make this work with the WWL and is performance comparable? I prefer the extra stop top-side so this lens is a better overall solution to my needs.
  12. Thx a lot for very fast feedback! I don't have any of mentioned lenses, so I need to a acquire the lens regardless of choice. At least that keeps my options open :-)
  13. I'm going wreck diving in Truk Lagoon this year. Any experiences/recommendations for the best WA setup to cover exterior and interior wreck shots? I'll be shooting an Olympus m43 in a Nauticam housing with dual strobes (Z330 or Retra). Size and weight are main limitations. I only have UW photography experience from a GoPro. Plenty experience top-side. I mainly dive wrecks and this lens/port/dome is only for that purpose. Options I'm considering (probably in this order): Pana 8mm FE i 4" port (size and weight is very attractive, FE for interiors maybe not ideal, doesn't seem flexible enough) Pana 14-42mm in macro port with WWL-1 (versatility is a plus, IQ of pana lens worries me, weight is a disadvantage) Oly 7-14mm in 170mm port (versatility is a plus, better iq than wwl-1 (?), weight is disadvantage) Oly 24mm in 4" port (size is an advantage, maybe more general purpose than 8mm FE) I really would like the Pana 8mm FE option to work, but with only GoPro UW experience, I'm not certain what compromises that will entail.
  14. Hi, Martin from Copenhagen, Denmark. Keen photographer/videographer over water. Have been diving for many years, and what to take my photography under water. Main interests are wrecks and the critters that live there.
×
×
  • Create New...