All Activity

I dont think my carryon has ever been weighed in Indonesia. I have around 60 domestic flights there on Garuda, Batik, Lion and Wings. Few times it has been gate checked on Garuda, not because of weight, but because of small plane and no overhead space. Garuda doesnt operate these plane types anymore. Normally boarding is pretty much "free for all", atleast on Lion Group flights, so better to try board with first to get some overhead space. If they want to checkin your carryon, you could try the magic word "lithium-ion"?

I don't have specific information, the tightness of fit needed will vary depending the lens in question. The problem you are likely to see if any is vignetting. The good news is you check vignetting on land, so you try out what you have to see if it will work OK for you. It looks like it is supplied with two different thread options to try to accomodate different attachment methods. The part to mount a bayonet attachment to wet lenses is the Nauticam 83214. The backscatter page says it attaches to M67 lenses. Whether you can use it or not depends on the dimensions of the lens you are trying to mount , the thread is located further up the body of the lens on Nauticam wet lenses to get the backend of the lens closer to the port. You could try asking the vendor is the Kraken will work with this adapter?

I was using TC1.4 and new 100mm macro in my last dive trip, for me I'm really satisfied witht the image quality, here is a corp of central part for your reference. This is a tiny Anker's Whip Coral Shrimp about 6-7mm in length.

Santa says I'm getting a Kraken KRL-09S to use with my OM10/Nauticam housing and 30mm macro. Yea! My problems/questions are twofold: (1) for my 30mm lens, I use a 29mm port plus a 17mm extension ring = 46mm, instead of the recommended 45mm port; i.e. 1mm extra from lens to port glass. Will this be a problem with the KRL09S? Would it be best to screw the Kraken in rather than use a flip of some kind? (2) My 29mm port has a Nauticam bayonet on it for use with my WWL-1/CMC when using my 14-42mm EX lens on the camera. I assume there is no way to use the Kraken KRL-09S with the Nauticam bayonet. Correct? I'm guessing all my issues could be solved by getting another proper 45mm port for the 30mm macro lens, and put a flip on it, presumably Nauticam for the robustness and clip. That is a LOT of extra cost....so I'm silling to fuss a bit with waht i ahve if it will work.

let us know how you go!

Total bargain and still an extremely capable camera. For that you could add an adapted Canon 8-15 or Tokina 10-17 in a small dome and take it UW for less than the cost of a Nauticam housing for the Z8 or equip it with a fisheye lens and 4" dome and strobes and still be around the price of just the housing.

Hi @jmorphy , I too use the a1 and am super happy with it. From everything I have seen and heard, there is no real upside to the a1 vII over the a1 for underwater usage. To be honest, it was a really tough decision between it and the a7rV. The main reasons I chose the a1 was 1) electronic shutter with flash possibility and 2) the 1/400 sync speed. After seeing many of the a7rV in the wild and talking their owners, I would look seriously that direction to potentially save a few dollars with no reduction in quality. 1/250 sync speed it great for most scenes, and now HSS is a solid option for even faster shutter speeds. The electronic shutter option has not been a big plus in real life. The newer AI focus does have a bit of an upgrade with fish faces. Best of luck in your decision! Chip

Well, okay, none of us are expert on this strobe. Per Backscatter it is smaller than the HF-1 considerably and has a UW GN28 which is equivalent to the HF-1 at max power until you set the +1 or +2 settings which I think are GN34 and GN40 respectively. Per Backscatter and the strobe operator manuals, the Backscatter MF-1/2/3, Atom and HF-1 will only shoot TTL with the Backscatter trigger. If this is not true, explain how this is not the case because I might like to purchase a set but I want to run off my UWT board or the pop up strobe for TTL. Manual of course is no issue with the UWT trigger or the pop up flash but TTL?

Sorry, too lazy to answer.

There is an EM1-II for $1000 in the classifieds that would offer you a massive opportunity for less than the cost of a dome.

Ok, I’m lazy. How does this strobe position itself to the HF1?

I use Backscatter HF-1 with HSS and UWtechnics Board, but manual only. A friend of mine shoots Sony and uses Turtle Smart3 Trigger enabling HSS and TTL on the Backscatter HF-1. So you are not forced to buy the Backscatter Flash Trigger module to get TTL. I wonder if the AOI Trigger will also work with the HF-1 enabling TTL and HSS ? 🤔

I would highly encourage going second hand (this forum, eBay etc). You can great deals there and this can make the next step more manageable.

Thanks Chris! to the best of my knowledge, all camera settings for the flashes are set according to the manual of the converter. I will conduct several test dives here in cold Austria to see how the setup behaves. Real live testing is always better than dry training... Cheers, Jens

Yes, the WWL-C is more versatile with a range of full wide angle to near macro. That would a great first lens.

Thanks. So it sounds like it is hard to go wrong with the 24-50 + WWL-C combo or the 8-15 fish + 140 dome combo....but the z24-50+WWL-C is a bit more versatile? Probably a better "first rig" setup to get my feet wet? To be clear....we are talking about the Z24-50 f/4-6.3 that costs about $450 new correct? Kristian.....I travelled around in Sweden a bit. 2-6 months in Helsingborg, Ostersund, Gotland, Stockholm, Uppsala. Haven't been back yet :( I want to do a month+ long motorcycle trip at some point and hit Sweden and Norway.

You might want to consider getting both for those trips. The fisheye works best when you can get really close. Like 1-3 feet. The WWL-C can zoom in and can get good images a bit further away, like 5-6 feet. By good I mean "fill the frame". In Socorro you will get to fisheye distance of 1-3 feet from the Mantas, no problems. The sharks and hammerheads, not so much. The WWL-C is better for sharks. You can probably do great with FE in Socorro and be happy. In Coco's you will likely see more hammerheads but they probably won't be in fisheye range. Maybe if you see whalesharks the FE will pay off, but the WWL-C will be better overall I would think. Don't be afraid to crop or switch the camera to DX mode if you want to get even more reach. The Z8 will let you program a quick menu or even a single button to make the switch. The good thing is that both of these lens setups will focus right up to the glass. It makes them both very nice for reef scenes and creatures. The FE excels when you have a massive animal just in front of you.

With the risk of sounding like a Nauticam rep 🙂 hammerheads, galapagos sharks, manta rays … 110-130ish FoV is pretty damn perfect… I’m from the South of Sweden originally but live in Stockholm since a long time. Have also spent a few years in New Paltz, NY and NYC as a student and then a couple of years in Minneapolis, MN in the 10’s. Where were you in Sweden?

Thanks much. Exactly the feedback I'm looking for. 140 + fish eye is my plan. I'm going to Socorro early 2026 and Cocos in 2027. Couple others on the books as well....but those are the ones I want to leave with a great pic from. Hoping to sneak out to Catalina before the Socorro trip to give it a test run. Anywho...thanks a ton. Any extra tips for a total noob bumping from GoPro to a FF rig greatly appreciated. Kristian...where in Sweden are you from? I lived there a couple of years back in the early 90's

The prospect of using the WWL-C was a big reason I upgraded to a Nikon mirrorless Z8 last year. It is just a fantastic setup that combined excellent quality, compact setup, and a reasonable price/performance. (Looking suspiciously at you WACP/FCP! Too big, heavy, and expensive. Not that much better the the WWL-C for 5X or more $$$)

Here one can inspect photos of testcharts taken with the new 100mm macro, also with 1.4x and 2x TCs and compare to other macro lenses (e.g. Sony 90mm): https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1019&Camera=1175&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=1757&CameraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2 The test pattern in the extreme periphery with 2x TC attached is even better compared to the blank 90mm lens. It is difficult to judge the sharpness in the center. I guess it is reduced with TCs attached (I could not find yet accurate measurements of resolution in numbers), but it still looks very good...

Thanks. I actually had a D500 that I gave to my daughter....I just have a hard time buying an underwater rig for a 9 year old camera system. I think my initial path is going to be a 8-15 + the 140mm port.

Flying from Jakarta to Sorong a few months ago, we used Garuda and they were really good. We paid a few dollars more and went Business and had a ton of gear in the cabin with us. No problem at all. I've used Emirates a lot too for travelling and no problem with them either on weighing. So much depends, we find, on making the luggage look compact and lightweight. My partner, bless her, carries the really heavy stuff and seldom gets asked about it. I just bimble along with the light gear..... She insists we swap airside. Darn.

I'm with Chris on the M43 or APS-C. I switched back from FF (Nikon D800) to APSC (Nikon D500) to get away from the massive lenses and ports. Can't say I have seen any difference in image quality. But... you already have the Z8 which, I believe, is excellent. So...... I'd be very tempted to check out that 24-50/WWL-C combination. Relatively small and compact; or an 8-15 a 140mm port.

Hey, jumper I understand. Like me, my LSD gets cold and I hate people being cold. On the other hand, I also hate seeing my gear getting scratched up. So in a moment of utter nerdiness, I crafted a little coat both to keep my LSD warm and to help it not get scratched. Amazing what you can do with all old wetsuit and a pair of scissors. I may be crazy but I'm not uncaring...... 🤪