Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Draq

  1. I like to dive with a backup computer and the light arm is as convenient a place as any and easy to see. Both air integrated and never had a problem.
  2. Silly question probably. I need a 50mm extension and don't have one. Other than the obvious one extra O ring, is there any reason not to stack a 20 and a 30 instead of buying a 50?
  3. I am curious. Maybe they were not more clear, but if they were, is it two weeks from now, or two weeks from the early November estimated ship date? I am anxious to see some user reports. As I read what I wrote above, it isn't very coherent. What is the current expected shipping time frame, if you know...their website still says estimated delivery in October, so that has not been updated yet.
  4. If that was for my benefit, I am aware of what the MWL-1 does and although not a fisheye it is still expensive and heavy. It is interesting to me nonetheless, as to close focus wide angle use,. Still, i don't plan to get one and am not sure of its utility for DX format. I never tried using a close up lens with my WWL-1, so I have no idea how well that works. If I am remembering correctly, I had no problems using the 8mm oly in a 100mm dome.
  5. I shot M43 for several years and still have the the gear. I have both the Panasonic and Olympus 8mm lenses as well as the Oly 30mm macro, as well as others. For an Olympus body, and given minimal price difference, I would go with the Olympus 8mm to avoid any of the purple blob issue and because generally, you may never need to 1.8, but it is nice to have if for some reason you do. Which macro lens to choose is really governed by what and where you are shooting. Super small stuff and skittish stuff, you would want a longer macro lens, but if you are shooting bigger things and if dealing with less than pristine water, that extra distance will be a problem. Whether the Panasonic or Oly 30mm is better I cannot say as I only have the Olympus. I know that before choosing the Oly I spent some time trying to figure out which one to get and chose the Oly, but I cannot recall what the deciding factor was. The MWL-1 looks very interesting. Heavy and expensive, but interesting.
  6. Thanks for the replies. I realize the 60 would lose magnification in a dome, but there are times that would be okay. Wasn't sure whether the curvature of a 100 dome wold really be appropriate for the lens or how much extension one might need. I don't really have trouble reaching the AF On lever, it is more that in some positions, simultaneously operating that lever and the shutter lever is awkward/uncomfortable. I would like to see a picture of what you have done, divengolf. I was actually thinking of just building up the face of the lever some, as opposed to making the lever extend further from the housing.
  7. On the D500 in nauticam housing I have been using the back button autofocus recently. I find it sometimes a little awkward to reach both the shutter release and AF On levers simultaneously and wonder if others have experienced this and if thee are any suggestions...maybe trying to enlarge or "build up" the AF On lever a little? Probably just a hand size issue for me. I have been wondering about a couple other things also; has anyone experimented with using the 60 micro lens in a 100mm dome and if so what are your impressions and what, if any extension worked well? Has anyone used the 10-24 Nikkor in a 180 dome and if so, how did that work out?
  8. The D500 with the Nikkor 8-15 in a 100 or 140 dome, with or without a 1.4 tc has been really great fun for me and that alone would likely keep me from going back to M43. All my wideangle corner issues went away and yet I can still zoom when desired.
  9. I think cropped sensor cameras are not dead for UW use. They compete to a certain extent with both the m43 and the full frame options. The cropped sensor cameras may not be "better" than M43 per se, but offer some lens choices, low light abilities and focus speed abilities that may outperform M43 and at the same time, while sometimes being far less expensive than full frame options and perhaps most importantly, offering good wide angle options without the need for mammoth dome ports. I have been using a D500 for a while but have not yet sold my M43 stuff. I find I get faster focusing, better low light ability, more ability to crop images and no M43 option compares to the 8-15 and 10-17 fisheye wideangle lenses. I don't so video so no comment there. If I could manage to do it, I would love to do a dive with the D500 and then repeat with the EM1, shooting similar subjects in similar conditions, and compare my results. Since I travel to dive, that isn't going to happen. On the other hand, I hear frequent speculation that the big manufacturers might be considering getting rid of cropped sensor cameras, and then of course, the situation changes. In the end, each format has benefits and downsides and we call make compromises depending on our own priorities.
  10. Wondering if anyone has used this combination or similar (D7500, etc). It requires the 40mm micro-nikkor lens. I would be interested in hearing about performance, positive and negative experiences with usability, etc. Thanks
  11. It looks like you are using a single arm/strobe. I would think you could more or less fold the arm down so the strobe is against the top of the camera and it wold stay. if not, or if you just want to do do something different you can get some velcro industrial strength strap and use that to strap the arms9s0 wherever you need. Just undo it in the water and attach to tray or wherever. It comes in different lengths and widths and can be cut to whatever size you want. I have seen it in different forms including "fast wrap" one wrap", etc. I don't use it for that but do use it diving and it holds fine. Generally, I can clamp the arms in place for entries and exits, but the strobes hang down to the side of the housing and I use a rope grip, so gravity keeps stuff in place. Your configuration looks like you might be working against the weight of the strobe.
  12. Perhaps you could supply a picture of your setup. Not knowing what arms, clamps etc., makes it difficult to know if I can help.
  13. I am a bit confused. I read elsewhere that the difference in length was something on the order of 1mm, and that they should work with the same zoom gears and extensions. Also, you say above the 10-17 "quality is miserable" but I have always heard that although not up to 8-15 standards, most consider it quite good. Perhaps you were talking about land use? I generally don't pay much attention to how a lens does on land when i want it solely for dive use. It seems there is little connection between the two. I was also under the impression that the recent full frame sensors actually revealed lens imperfections much more so than smaller sensors, not the other way around. Not arguing the point...just asking since I have heard it both ways. If the older version of the TC works better with the 8-15 and/or the 10-17 I will get one before they are gone from the stores. I have used micro 4/3 for several years and the Nikon stuff is new to me, so I have some learning to do :-)
  14. In a recent thread referencing the Nikon 8-15, Walt Sterans mentioned that the Kenko Teleplus PRO 300 DGX gave better results than the newer TELEPLUS HD pro with that lens. I was unaware of this and would be interested in hearing more tests or experiences or other info about which TC works better with which lenses, if anyone can enlighten me. Does the above comment hold true with the Tokina 10-17 as well? I am specifically interested in DX (D500) as opposed to full frame.
  15. I will add that the clear cap of the Inon makes it easy to check and see that the large yellow o ring is properly positioned after installation and Inon suggests screwing the cap on slowly to avoid pinching or twisting the O ring. Both my son and I have used inon strobes for about 10 years or so and neither of us has had a problem. I do replace the O rings from time to time and carry spares, but frankly, cannot recall having one appear to wear out or shred or disfigure. I am not sure, but they may last forever. When I have replaced them I have actually used the old ones for various purposes, including as a makeshift octo holder.
  16. Thanks for the information. When I get the Z-330 strobes eventually I plan on leaving the diffuser on.
  17. I am not sure what you are saying, but my curiosity was whether the shape or pattern of the light output would change underwater. It is really an academic question, I suppose. I am not sure it could realistically be tested. I was not really talking about the power of the flash.
  18. I was referring to the image from retra. That is the only one of these that really addressed the shape of the light output.
  19. With regard to the image above showing the dispersion pattern, I am wondering if the pattern in air is similar to what one would get under water? In particular should one expect a non-diffused Z330 to have such a pronounced cross shape in actual use? I find myself wondering if the strobe manufactures should not offer some sort of clear diffuser that would not reduce output so much. Maybe a clear diffuser with a fresnel or pebbled texture? On the other hand, you guys seem much more knowledgeable about this than I am and that may be a silly thought. Also a bit confused about the image of the retra. I thought the "pro" was substantially more powerful than the "prime" but the image shown suggests they are the same since it is listed a pro/prime. I suppose no one has used these yet so it is somewhat theoretical at this point.
  20. Hmmm. I am not sure I can see may way to packing thousands of dollars of gear in a soft-sided case knowing the extent to which checked bags are dropped, thrown, stacked and crushed. I would think a polycarbonate suitcase would be the way to go.
  21. I gather you guys are talking about packing the gear in a case like shown in the attached, is that right (and inside some sort of protection within the shown cases)? Keep in mind, my tentative conclusion is that I am going to check housing, ports and bits and pieces and not even attempt to carry them on the plane, although I will continue to carry camera lenses, dive computer, perhaps the 45 degree viewfinder, etc. The idea would be that cases such as in the photos would be less likely to attract thieves.
  22. That all makes sense. This was in shallow water and an unplanned shot. There some decent surge and I shot fast, hence the poor choice of shutter speed and perhaps some motion on my part due to the surge. It was one of those "Oh look, a krait" kind of things and I grabbed a few shots as it headed off out of reach.
  23. oneyellowtang: OK, well that is discomforting. To all, if you were going to put padded nauticam or Cinebags or otherwise pack housings and ports, etc in luggage to check, what would you use? I am concerend about theft, but rough handling of bags is an everyday occurrence. I have seen bags fall offf of the conveyor belts and the little luggage trams that are driven around the tarmac, and can only imagine what goes on behind the scenes. The attached illustrate my concerns.
  24. This is an uncropped image. ISO 200 Focal length 15mm (plus1.4 Kenko for a total 21mm) 1/60 f11 Any input on fringing issue welcome
  • Create New...