Jump to content

horvendile

Member
  • Content Count

    114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About horvendile

  • Rank
    Wolf Eel

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Sweden

Additional Info

  • Show Country Flag:
    Sweden
  • Camera Model & Brand
    Nikon Z6, Z7
  • Camera Housing
    Sea&Sea
  • Strobe/Lighting Model & Brand
    S&S YS-D1 x 2

Recent Profile Visitors

3671 profile views
  1. Thanks, excellent reply! I've been looking for it within Europe, seeing as I live in Sweden and buying from outside EU will incur VAT and probably other nasty tariffs. But if the price difference is big enough it might be worth it.
  2. Hi! I just bought a used Nikon 1 J5, not really for underwater purposes at all. However, for some time I have entertained the thought of getting a second underwater system for use when I can't be arsed to bring the big system on a dive but would still like to be able to snap a few pictures. Portability is more important than image quality. The ideal solution has seemed to be a Canon G7X Mark II in a Canon housing (because small and cheap) or possibly a Paralenz Vaquita. Both of them would cost something like €800 (IIRC) and my budget is tight. A used Canon S100 in a Canon housing would actually be enough, performance-wise. So, you've guessed it. I've found Meikon housings for the J5 + 10-30 lens. It seems I can't zoom the lens when in the housing. Oh well, I can live with that. It's a flat port, with the limitations that bring. But I wouldn't like to drown the camera. Hence my question is: are we aware of any tendency of Meikon housings to malfunction and leak? Apart from a general suspicion coming from the low price, I mean.
  3. Again, depends what you mean. The FTZ adapter does support AF for third party lenses, such as Sigma and Tamron for F-mount. I did have some trouble with version 1 of the Tamron 15-30/2.8, but that's rather an exception. It's true though that Nikon is secretive about its mount protocols and everything has to be reverse engineered. I think that's a bad decision by Nikon.
  4. Well, both yes and no. Only looking at native lenses, yes. For me, being able to use - almost - all of my Nikon F glass on my Nikon Z cameras is a huge plus. And counting them, which is not unreasonable since there isn't really any penalty for using them, the choice for Z is a lot better.
  5. Yes but the 14-30 is made from scratch for Z. And requires shorter extension than the 16-35. Agreed though, using the 16-35 on a Z camera would net exactly nothing when it comes to domes/extensions.
  6. 30.5 mm difference in the Nikon case, but unless I misunderstand you this does not matter for what I wrote. The 16-35 requires 80 mm of extension tubes, the 14-30 requires 40 mm. Flange distance does not come into it.
  7. Yeah but my point was, albeit possibly clumsily expressed, that the size difference (not weight difference) looks more significant in reality than the numbers imply. Though of course, that may be subjective and depend on expectations. If I had expected a huge difference I might have thought the difference small when I saw it. As it was, I expected very little difference but it was in fact immediately obvious. Note also that while the domes were indeed equal, the 16-35 requires (IIRC) 40 mm extra extension which adds noticeable extra bulk when the system is assembled.
  8. Short personal point of view here - I listened to the pod but may have missed a few things due to trying to work at the same time. About size of DSLR vs mirrorless. I agree that on paper you may not save much, given identical sensor size. In practice it might still be significant. When I bought my used Sea&Sea housing for Z6/Z7 the guy I bought it from also had a Sea&Sea housing for the D850. Side by side, with equivalent dome ports and 14-30/4 on Z and 16-35/4 on D850, the size difference was notable. At least a larger difference than I expected and it would make a difference both for travelling and handling. It's partly the smaller housing - not much lighter, but smaller. It's partly also needing less extension tube for the Z solution. I'm not making the case that it's half the size or anything like that and yes obviously micro 4/3 would be smaller. But to my surprise, my Sea&Sea setup for Z is not much bigger than my old Ikelite setup for Panasonic LX100. Bigger YES but not so much as I would have thought.
  9. I assume you've tried the WWL-C with the 16-50? To me, if starting from scratch that looks like a very good combination. Especially if it can be paired with one of the SMC macro lenses.
  10. Yeah, but on the other hand, I was aware of it when I bought the UW housing, and I got it for a good price. Buying for the D850 I also owned by then would have been less optimal in many other ways, for my particular circumstances. About focusing - precisely. I guess I could pre-focus at slightly closer than 3 x dome radius and see what that gets me, and then just continue experimenting. I won't know until I have a chance to try, which is still maybe 5 months away. Sigma definitely knows how to put AF motors in their lenses, yes. So they could do it for F-mount. So far they haven't made any lenses for Z specifically, but some noises in that direction have been made. I'm open to third party lenses so I'll happily look into all candidates!
  11. Oh well. Not unexpected. But thanks! Then I won't have to think about that.
  12. Yes. It's possible the Tokina 10-17 works with AF on FTZ, I haven't looked into that. My plan for fisheye is to wait until there's a native Z fisheye. Fisheye should be a type of lens for which the Z mount has significant advantages over F mount. No Z fisheye is yet announced so if fisheye really takes my fancy I might have to reconsider somehow.
  13. Precisely. Specifically the Sigma 15 mm for Nikon. The same for Canon - which I assume exists - probably has built-in motor. If I really want fisheye with AF there's the Nikon 8-15 mm for F-mount, which is said to be excellent and works just fine on the FTZ adapter. But it's expensive, so I'm holding off.
  14. The Nikon 60 mm macro and 105 mm macro (both AF-S f/2.8 G) both have focus motors and work great with the FTZ adapter. The Sigma 15 mm fisheye relies on screw-drive AF. I can use it on the FTZ adapter, electrical communication works for eg aperture, but focus will be manual. All Canon EF and EF-S lenses with autofocus have AF motor in the lens, so this is not a problem on the Canon side.
  15. Sorry, no budget for additional purchases unless they are very minor. We'll see about the corners of the 14-30. I've tried it in Swedish waters, and with the Sea&Sea correction lens and @ f/8 I thought the corners looked good enough. f/8 with correction lens should correspond to about f/16 without correction lens. On the other hand, tests were not extensive. Time - or rather, more tests - will tell.
×
×
  • Create New...