All Activity

I have two Nauticam long clamps looking to trade for two Nauticam triple clamps. I have either regular or the MP version and could trade either.

I've received my Dave's cables kit, awesome amount of accessories included. Looking forward to setting it up.

If I am willing to give some personal information in an attempt to get more information about an item I might want to purchase or to try to have it sent to me faster, I think that should be my choice. The internet is full of false and intentionally deceptive information because the poster is not required to reveal his (or her) true identity. Being honest about who you or the facts that you give are shouldn't be grounds for criticism. I have seen where some people make comparisons about underwater strobes by simply repeating the various manufacturer's guide numbers for their strobe's flash power instead of making accurate readings with a flash meter. Ditto for the color temperature. Using a scientific instrument under consistent conditions gives a potential strobe buyer honest, unbiased data on which he can make his decision instead of a "it works for me" review. Fred Bavendam (divegypsy)

SOLD 4/16/26

Added my name to the list. I dialled right back on keywording as i felt it to be a right pain in LR. Struggled with hierarchies, and i find it far too easy to accidentally add the first one to more photos because of auto suggestion. Reasonably confident with iD skills, but the recent reclassification of many species (nudis) and synonyms might be an interesting challenge to see how Nomen copes. Got a lot of photos from Indo, Red Sea, Caribbean and P'pines.

Thanks CaolIla fixed the link as well editor screwed it up when I posted. That's all I need to know about the types of photos but I do want to know if you are able to ID a lot of what you have already but putting in keywords was just to much of a pain so you stopped like I did. In the beta I am looking to obviously fix any bugs I encounter but I also want to see where the matching breaks down and why. For example the other day I had to rework the bird system because it wasn't handling sub species splits well and because I know my bird ID it was obvious to me.

What do you mean with be specific? I have more or less 70000 underwater photos (raws) A part in Mediteraneen, Caraibic Asia, Seychelles/Maldives a large type of species..

your link is not good this is better Nomen — AI Species Identification for Lightroom Classic

Page not found

Since no one is jumping in... I have been looking into it for a while but have not (and may not) take the plunge. The best options I have seen are a bespoke option from Sexton - who adapts the lens to the front of a Gates housing. They now have it on their website: Sexton ProductsCanon 5.2 mm Dual-Fisheye VR Adaptor: Gates V-Raptor EditionBuilt for the Gates Deep Weapon Housing the Sexton Gates VR adaptor will allow professional filmmakers and hobbyists alike to take the Canon FR5.2mm F2.8L Dual Fisheye Lens and attach it to the 8K REDI've worked with the company before and they are excellent, however I don't have a Red Weapon and so the investment to try it is a lot. Part of me is also concerned about having to crawl out of the Canon ecosystem to Red to use a VR designed by Canon. I just think the post processing may be painful. I think one of the issues is the size of the lens - the 5.2 is 121mm across so won't fit in Nauticam N120 or Marelux. I'm also concerned about dome size even thought they are wee and fisheye. Gates also just "released" a housing for the new BlackMagic Apple Vision VR Rig. Gates Underwater ProductsGates Immersive Housing - any Camera, any Lens - Gates Un...Gates Immersive Housing is a dedicated underwater imaging system designed expressly for the Blackmagic URSA Cine Immersive camera from Blackmagic Design. An integrated platform, Gates Immersive Housin Note price for hire (upon request) and they only rent them. Plus just the camera is 30k USD. I'd love to hear if anyone has found other solutions that may work for this.

Hi All, Excited so many are willing to give it a go. Signup on the site and I’ll get you in the queue. It’s a limited beta so be specific about what you have and if you’re going to be able to verify results. https://www.nomenapp.com brett

You wanted a specific example. I gave you one that many have wrestled with. The wet optics inme, even adding slight more curvature, produce straighter lines than a fisheye (comparing to Tokina 10-17) on a comparable FoV, if we're talking apples and oranges. So inmo a better alternative if that's what you're looking for in your images. And much sharper across than an any FF rectilinear lens behind a domeport I've seen, tried or heard of. If you have an example (not fisheye) please share it. I'd be very interested in what @Dave_Hicks finds out in Gods Pocket, mostly regarding the rectilinearness of his 8-15+tc compared to the WWL-C paired with the 24-50. EDIT. I probably need to get a 8-15 anyways, unless a z FE magically appears in 6-7 months. I wish you good luck Adventurer and happy dives in your future adventures.

Let’s not compare apples and oranges here and instead look at the genuinely relevant alternative to a 24–50mm paired with a wet optic (WACP-1, WACP-C, WACP-2, FCP, WWL-1 — or in your case, even the optically inferior WWL-C). What you are really referring to is the relative zoom factor of the Z-mount or RF-mount lens: 50 divided by 24 equals 2.08x, which we can reasonably simplify to 2x. A Nikon or Canon 8–15mm fisheye zoom gives you 15 divided by 8, which is 1.9x — so, again, effectively about 2x. My suggestion would be to pair that fisheye zoom with a high-quality 2.0x teleconverter, or even a 1.4x teleconverter. I am fairly sure you would end up with significantly better sharpness and overall image quality behind a dome than with any of the specialized underwater optics mentioned above. The image-quality penalty from a good teleconverter is minor compared with the gain in corner sharpness you get from using a strong lens behind even a small but perfectly positioned dome. On top of that, such a setup is far more travel-friendly and affordable than those bulky correction optics, and you do not need to “burp” it underwater. Last but not least, an 8–15 with a 2.0x teleconverter will project actual corners onto your full-frame sensor — no black corners. --> No hallucinated corner sharpness. This is exactly the kind of question I wanted this thread to examine. In the Canon case, for example: would you get a better optimized result with the current Canon RF 24–105mm IS STM, or with one of the two older EF lenses that Nauticam recommended for use with the early WACP in its 2018 catalog when used via the RF-EF adapter? Those two EF candidates were: Canon EF 28–70mm f/3.5–4.5 II (2.5x zoom ratio) Canon EF 28–80mm f/3.5–5.6 II (2.85x zoom ratio) At the time, the 28–70mm was Nauticam’s recommended option. But when you compare land-based tests of those lenses, both perform rather poorly compared with the center sharpness of even inexpensive modern RF glass. Lens design, manufacturing, and material science have improved to a degree that should not be underestimated in recent years. So the practical takeaway may be this: make the WACP work with the Canon RF 24–105mm IS STM, but discipline yourself not to use it at 24mm. Instead, use it consistently from 28mm onward, up to the maximum usable zoom range allowed by the front optic. That should give you more modern technology and, quite possibly, better overall results.

Specific case, the classic Nikon 14-24/2.8 G ED full frame rectilinear zoom. DXOMARKNikon Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED review: A very impres...Introduced in 2007 alongside the AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED and Nikon’s first full-frame DSLR – the 12-megapixel Nikon D3 – this lens was a first of its kind and set new standards for image qualityA bit old but still a fantastic piece of glass that produce very sharp images. On land. Put it behind a nice dome and dunk it––meh. Many have tried. And oh how the entire underwater photo community wanted it to work. Lots of money and energy spent. Measuring and calculating. I think your frustration with this, whatever it is, isn't going to get you anywhere productive. Of course a lens does not magically get better when you put it behind some other glass, be it a dome or another optic (which a dome also is) and then go underwater. They all get worse. But it's the end result that counts when all things are added in. Light. Distances. Angles. Ability to handle and get the rig in a favorable position. To even be able to transport it to where the action is. It all needs to be in the equation. One undeniable fact is that quite a few of the guys and gals making the most impressive UW images today use wet optics. Call them idiots if you like. I'd rather listen to them and pick up some advice.

Hello! I have one (1) remaining slot for Tubbataha Reefs from May 20-26 and the subsequent Malapascua Leg from May 28 to June 1 (male sharing). If you've been looking to visit these crown jewels of diving in the Philippines, you can reach me via WhatsApp at +639989706429. More details here for Tubbataha and Malapascua trips.

I'd be interested in testing it. I'm a new underwater photographer with ~1000 species images from the Caribbean so far. I've been disappointed in the AI solutions I've tried (Google and iNaturalist-based) because of hallucination or no ID, and they don't work in Lightroom. The best I've found so far is manually using sources like Caribbean Reef Life or Google images, but that requires having a clue what the critter is before identifying it (how do you look up how to spell a word in the dictionary if you don't know how it's spelled?). Plus it takes a lot of time. Sent an IM.

I have a problem with your generalized wording here. “In many cases” is not really specific. Furthermore, domes cannot be “nice” or “un-nice.” They are usually made of glass or acrylic, and both are perfectly fine and can do the job. When correctly matched and positioned, they can produce excellent image quality. However, I agree that many people and manufacturers have historically done a very poor job, which is why some dome-lens combinations have ended up with a bad reputation. But what really ticks me off is this: Underwater correction lenses (WACP-1, WACP-C, WACP-2, FCP, WWL-1) are sold to us mainly on the promise of improved corner sharpness — “x stops better than a dome.” They are then recommended by Nauticam, its ambassadors, and its dealers for use with these cheap kit lenses. But the 28–60 and 24–50 kit lenses in the new mirrorless systems do not project an image that fully covers a full-frame sensor at their widest settings. That does not magically change just because you put a $1,000 to $8,000 underwater correction optic in front of them. In underwater photography, this reminds me of The Emperor’s New Clothes: Nobody dares to tell the idiots that they have spent a ton of money on something that leaves them standing there naked. . Please take my crude verdict with some caution: for example, the WWL-1 enjoys an excellent reputation on Micro 4/3 and more compact systems, and for good reason. There, the sensor is smaller, so you do not run into these issues. The same applies to the above candidates on APS-C systems, where they can perform quite well too. But that is not what FULL-FRAME users can actually utilize or benefit from when spending a 4-digit sum on specialized underwater optics. .

Hi has anyone aliready designed of found a Nauticam zoom gear for Sony 16-35 f2.8 ? Perhaps also a combo with focus gear for the same, but probably difficult as they overlap... Thanks

I've been working on something similar in an app I have in development. I am using CLIP image embeddings from iNaturlalist as part of my RAG. Has LR Classic Plugin and Adobe CC integrations as well. Would be interested in sharing ideas. You can sign up for a preview at https://critterdive.com/signup

I'm ready with a lot of photos from 12 year diving and I'm using LR I started year ago with tagging the species... but I stopped it took to many time... I'm an IT developer

Selling my Sony A7Siii video rig. Included: Sony A7Siii camera body with 80Gb CF Type A card (inc strap, battery and charger) with latest firmware. Nauticam NA-A7SIII housing with vacuum pump Nauticam NA-NVS Atomos Ninja housing with vacuum pump, shade, A7SIII HDMI 2 cable and bulkheads. Also included Sony A1 cable and bulkhead. Atomos Ninja V+ monitor, 500Gb SSD, two NP970 batteries and charger. Allows external recording of 4K60 Prores RAW Two float arms, tripod mount and top bracket. Plus spare o-rings for housings etc. All items are in excellent condition and have been well looked after. Looking to sell the whole rig for US$6400 (or 8500 Canadian to a local buyer). I may consider splitting if no takers. It's a lot of kit so local buyers preferred. I can take PayPal (would rather not) but you cover the fees. Located in beautiful Campbell River BC but can meet in Vancouver area.

I’d happily give it a go. I’ve got around 40k images in LR. Most fish, especially those from the Tropical Western Atlantic (ie Caribbean) plus Bermuda are IDd and keyworded so I can compare results.

I would be interested in this except for the fact I don't use Lightroom, I have Capture one pro.

I'm really interested to betatest your plugin. Most of my uw photography collection is from Mediterranean dives.