All Activity

I use the OS-1 on by default and only remove it occasionally so letting it hang is reasonable. If you kept it off by default you might want a mount. Here is one on printables: Backscatter Miniflash 2 (MF-2) and Snoot (OS-1) holder by DarrylB | Download free STL model | Printables.com

The short answer is yes, also keep in mind that I found WWL-1B to be noticeable wider when used with the Marelux N100 to 5 inch, 17mm adapter. I have used Laowa 10 & 12mm, and at least four different versions of both 14mm and 14mm zooms that have all had better DOF. This is an issue I was discussing with a well known U/W photographer at DEMA who has compared fisheye water contact optics V. lenses like Canon 8-15mm in 140 to 230mm domes and he remarked that the differences are even greater with fisheyes. I have used 28-60/70 zooms and the 28mm F/2 and DOF at 28mm is about the same across all of the wet optics I have tried that are advertised to be 130 degrees. With WACP-2 you can use lenses up to 14mm and DOF then improves.

I will 3d Print something with the slightest excuse, but for this scenario I think a small bolt snap and an oring zip tied to the MF-2 ball mount is hard to beat.

Has anyone made a caddy clip for the Backscatter Mini Flashes to OS-1? If not, looks like I'm off to another project.

I had Ikelite housings for years with the D70, D300, and briefly the D800. With the D800 I felt like the Ikelite design had gotten out of its depth. Wide angle lens/port combos with full frame were not good, clipped the image and had terrible ergonomics. I moved up to a D800 Nauticam housing and never looked back. To their credit, Ikelite updated their housing design and completely re-vamped the port system to address the issues I experienced. Recently, I had some experiences with Ikelite housings while trying to assist a friend having trouble. My friend had bought a used Ikelite d850 housing and sent it to Ikelite for servicing and overhaul before using it. It came back with a Broken hotshoe wire, that I had to solder together. The zoom gear for a 16-35 had to be screwed down and prevented the camera from being removed from the housing. If the lens release lever was not positioned just so, the camera would be trapped in the camera, Catch-22 style. An improperly installed ISO button control that depressed the control and froze the camera. Had to remove the c-clip and reinstall the button. Finally, the shutter dial knob would not engage with the camera control. I would no longer recommend an Ikelite housing to even my worst enemy.

OP: If I remember right, my first "real" underwater setup was and Olympus E330. I progressed over time to an Olympus EM1 and used that for several years. Focusing in lower light and fast moving subjects was not always ideal and dynamic range always seemed a bit limited to me. I shot mostly wide angle. I later moved to a Nikon D500 and was delighted with it, although I missed the small size of the Olympus. Over the past year I have decided to move to mirrorless camera and spent a lot of time agonizing over what to get, because I would have liked to move to a smaller setup if possible. What I found was that when considering housings and ports the weight and size differences between any of the full frame and crop sensor camera options is not very great, usually within an inch or so in any dimension, and weight differences were a max of 2 lbs. Once you add arms and strobes and focus lights, the differences get even smaller. The few crop sensor options out there involved compromises I did not want, for a small size and weight savings. I also love using my fisheye zoom lens and did not want to lose that, which affected my decision. The crop-sensor formats are great for underwater use, perhaps unless you intend to make really massive photo sizes, but the camera manufacturers seem to now view them as an entry-level camera format and are slow to release new stuff and often new lenses are aimed at a different market. I moved from the Nikon D500 to a Z8 primarily because my old eyes were having trouble seeing the LCD display clearly and I wanted to have an electronic viewfinder, otherwise, the D500 with an 85 or 60mm macro or the 8-15 fisheye did everything I wanted. Going full frame was a byproduct, not a goal. I considered going back to M43, since I still have many ports and lenses, but since that since the product line was taken over by OM, I feel that real improvements have been minimal and they have not really invested in the product line in a way I would want to see. I am sometimes unsure if the product line will continue, at least as a contender for underwater use. My comments are subjective and based on my skill and usage. Others will feel differently and some here do great work with the format. If I were in your situation and I heavily prioritized size and weight, I would get an OM system camera, probably the OM1 Mkii. There are some relatively less expensive housing options if desired, such as from AOI, although I am fond of Nauticam. If willing to consider greater size and cost for potentially improved quality (or maybe just it being easier to take better photos?), would look closely at the options from Sony, Canon and Nikon, balancing cost, size, weight, port and lens availability and size and, of course features sets. If you also want to do video, that can change things. In any case, pay attention to flash sync speed (I think 160 is too slow), and focus speed and accuracy, minimum focus distance of the lenses of interest and so on. Any system that does not do what you want is going to frustrate you. Figure out what lens(es) you will want for any camera you are considering and be sure you like the lenses and ports available in that system. As you can tell from some of the posts above, some lenses are well-regarded, and some not so much. Burst photo rates, massive ISO ranges and "creative" photo options are not important (to me). Battery life can also matter, as changing batteries at depth can be challenging. I have never used Ikelite housings, but I have never seen much enthusiasm for them on photo-centric forums like this, so make of that what you will. Also some housing systems are better supported on different continents, in case that matters. Good luck.

To Dave Hicks and Gary R and others.... Absolutely global decline with water warming to previously unheard of levels is affecting coral worldwide. My only point was that posts basically telling people don't go here, there or anywhere may not be realistic. I doubt there's anywhere left on the planet untouched by global climate change both land and sea. I can look at my first digital photos (below) from 2001 shooting a lowly 3.3MP Nikon Coolpix 990 in Papua New Guinea and see the decline of reefs and all too. Doesn't make me happy either....... I'd say do what you want and share your thoughts, but me? I'm still going diving (and photographing) since I'm lucky to be able to at my age :) DH

You should bring up the Insta360 AcePro2 on your radar. It‘s slightly more capable than the GoPro and the Osmo with the out of the box footage. Personally I use Insta360 AcePro (version1) as a small secondary cam and that one already smokes the other cams around. Due to the larger sensor and leica optics of the insta you already notice slight performance differences in the underwater optics. I have tested AOI, Backscatter and INON underwater action cam optics and found the INON image quality to be slightly superior than the others. There was also a thread here somewhere on the forums seconding my personal impressions about the superiority of the INON action camera optics.

Hello @Nando Diver did you try EXPL to lock exposure? I didnt find the command within QRControl app...

It might be hit and miss. I've travelled with a lot of batteries before and never had any confiscations... plenty of questions though.

Nice box.... but for sure in Zurich / CH you will have some problems at the security check... that is to many batterie ... the rules are strict.... 2 x 16 AA bat... is allready to much for a person. I was lucky to be with my wife I gave him one set... other wise ... :(

Just an update on my personal experience with the MF-2s: I am now using one MF-2 with the snoot together with one MF-1 and this works fine. Even without HF-1 there is plenty of light for small subjects (e.g. nudies). I am still not convinced that two MF-2s (without snoot) are plenty of light for how I shoot macro and prefer the HF-1s (altough they are big). For snooting, however, I find the MF-2 very usable.. I am certainly interested in the new HF-1 snoot, but have now mixed feelings about the HF-1s (that performed until now): one broke during the holidays in Tansania (Mafia Island) where I am still for another week. The ON/OFF switch first made droubles, sometimes it worked, sometimes not and after few days of diving it broke completely (no more possible to switch the flash ON despite of full, fresh, batteries). The other HF-1 still works, but the ON/OFF switch also does not work reliably (I almost lost one dive because I could not switch the HF-1 ON UW (I only had the MF-2 with (and without) snoot for making photos during this dive)). => I will send both HF-1s in after I am back and will then decide whether to stay with HF-1s or switch to another big flash, unreliability is really a contraindication and at the moment I am really pissed off at the moment (I also have still my Z330s at home))...☹️

Thanks, @Alex_Mustard ! Would you be willing to share your setup file for your A1 here at all?

Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS for sale. one small blemish on the side that does not affect performance. The lens has been recently serviced by Sony Pro Support and is in good working order. This gear has served me well after being purchased new from Reef Photo and video in 2020, and has been used almost exclusively in freshwater stream environments. N100 Flat port is in great shape with no hard water damage, or defects in the glass, and has a well taken care of o-ring seal. Focus Ring works as it should, and is very helpful for the use of DMF in-water. Price: $1,300 USD (excluding postage and transaction fees) Payment options: PayPal F&F or PayPal Goods & Services (+3%) or in-person transactions (located in the Pacific Northwest).

Seen a few ideas out there to carry batteries effectively through airport security in carry-on. My recent trip to Japan was plagued with small containers of batteries jiggling about in a small carry bag. I decided to do something about it. The outer case is from Amazon. https://amzn.asia/d/0FsoNPo I 3d printed the inner two sections in PETG or ASA (either/or - doesnt matter). Optimised for the range of batteries i may typically take with me. My camera batteries are in a different holder in my camera backpack. I keep track of spent batteries by turning them upside down (-ve facing up). The top section holds the random usb cables in have. Much better than a bag of random boxes of batteries.

Hi Phil, one thing to note is that in reality the WWL is not equivalent to a 10mm rectilinear. They both have a 130° Diagonal field of view, but the horizontal field with WWL/WACP is about that of a 14mm rectilinear lens which has a 104° horizontal field while the 10 mm Laowa has a 121° horizontal field. This is due to the barrel distortion stretching the corners. So the correct lens to compare it to is a 14mm rectilinear behind a dome. The 14mm has more magnification and so less DOF. Would you say that the WWL still has less DOF than a 14mm rectilinear behind a dome?

Adding to the MFO-3 posts, I had a chance to try the lens with my A7C and 90mm macro in our wonderful Puget Sound Seattle water yesterday AM. The rock fish pics are with the MFO-3 and without, from about the same distance from the fish. The Sea Angel was just flapping in the water column and is about a centimeter in length, so approximates a lot of the Hawaiian blackwater critters. For blackwater, I think this provides a very nice solution from what I'm seeing. Storing the lens is a little more difficult than the smaller CNC diopters and I usually use the bayonet mount. I can see why a flip holder is going to work out a better! There was also negligible weighting issues with that lens being so far out in front. Only one dive so far, but this looks like a great lens. .

No info on DJI but GoPro is decent. I moved from a Hero 7 to a Hero 13 last year. This year I added a wet lens and HF1 lights, but I haven’t used the new rig yet.

For the original poster, Alex I have used both the Sony 28-60 and 28-70 kit lenses with WACP-1 (native N120) and both also work with WACP-1B (native N100). The 28-70 uses an additional 20mm of extension, does not focus as fast as FE 26-60 and if you look at many land reviews the 28-60 out performs the 28-70. In real world use with water contact lenses you won't see large differences between the two lenses in terms of IQ. I don't think it's a big mystery that a kit lens introduced by Sony in 2021 would have improved over a Sony kit lens introduced in 2013. By the introduction of the WACP-C I had sold the 28-70 so can only comment on WACP-1, however I would expect results to be about the same. Since I rarely used the 70 or 60mm end of the lenses I don't miss the difference. Any comments from wet pixel you may have seen would I believe reference overall performance not just IQ. I have found best results with both lenses to be in the F/8 to F/11 range even though with full frame my normal starting point is F/13+/- I reviewed the WACP-C and both the WWL-1 and WWL-1B in past issues of UWPMAG.com. As a sidebar the first Nauticam wet wide lens I tested was the WWL-1 and I used the Sony 28mm F/2 lens for that review because 28-60mm was not yet released. Nauticam still offers an N100 32 flat port for that lens but it is not shown on the port charts for use with WWL-1/1B. Last what is hardly ever talked about when involved in a wet wide lens discussion regardless of brand is Depth Of Field. While many of these lenses advertise a 130 degree diagonal AOV it has become clear to me and many others who have used these lenses extensively that DOF is far less than what you get with a lens of the same 130 degree AOV behind a dome port. This became blatantly obvious to me when I tested the Laowa 10mm F/2.8 a 130 degree rectilinear lens against images taken with wet lenses of the same130 AOV.

Have a look at the table they are comparing 4 different lenses to the 28-60 and saying the 28-70 is not as good as the 28-60. Copyright © 2025 WaterPixels. All Rights Reserved Powered by Invision Community

Amazing images again, Dave

Went 2 years ago, the hard coral was in rough shape. Alot of our diving was on the west side, judging by the number of dive boats I saw that side gets alot of pressure. We did go to a few sites farther away on the southern side and they were a little better.

This is wildly wishful thinking David. We are comparing the Caribbean to how much of it looked 5 or 10 years ago. There has been a dramatic and rapid decline. The sad part is that we will likely be saying the same things about the fabulous Pacific dive spots in another 5 or 10 years as they continue and accelerate their decline.

I think the problem is people keep wanting to compare fabulous Pacific dive spots to the Caribbean.... They're two world apart destinations, different amount of population, infrastructure and more....Each will be different plus the time since someone visited last and other factors will influence one's opinion. I could dive the same island year after year and each trip will have different temperature, visibility, animal encounters, etc. Example: The Mantas at "Manta Point" won't necessarily get your memo of taking a week from work or life and you'll be arriving !!!!! LOL......Plus who knows WHEN a site got named that and by whom....... After 5 decades I just go underwater and LOOK AROUND......There's always something to see and enjoy :) Just get out there and photograph at any level of competence and desire....... You're sure to have fun with that approach !!! DH Some old guy still traveling and enjoying the ocean world :)

Thank you Nemrod, looks like you got some great action. I've just got back from Turks and Caicos so wondered if it would be the same story. Looks like you got some great fishy action. Can't say your pics look too backscattery at all though! Good job if there was lots of it around :-)