All Activity

Many thanks! Seems their Smartfocus 4000 model is getting close. Will investigate if I'd be significantly better with that compared to a Leton L15+CTO filter. Not cheap but at least not Keldan money...

Yeah, that's my problem too. SOME (but far from all...) "Aliexpress" lights do deliver near the lumen figures they claim, or at least "bright enough for the money". BUT they do that at 6500K that becomes like 10'000K with a subject distance of 0.5m and have literally a Mariana Trench in the middle of their color spectrum, around @480nm. After days of hunting I found CRI's very rarely quoted, and as with everything in life, I highly suspect that that's for a reason. I got another idea: get a pair of really bright but cheap lights and leave my snorkeling orange filter on, acting as a full CTO color temperature corrector. That'll likely affect CRI/R9/the overall SPECTRUM of the lightsource positively while sacrificing maybe 30% of the light intensity. Started a separate topic with a candidate (Leton L15): I am reluctant to shell out $600+ on lights that are still of questionable CRI, not to mention $4k on Keldans that do what everybody should do...

I have an opportunity to pick up a second hand Leton Power L15 light, pricing seems quite attractive for the claimed output. Does anybody have experience with this manufacturer? I am looking for high CRI lights for my gopro setup, this might be a useful start. Claimed CRI 90 needs to be valid though and thought about further improving that with a filter sacrificing maybe 2-3k Lumens. 4000k, CRI95+ video lights seem to be rainbow unicorn category at down to earth prices...

Just a thought/question... Granted, we are always concerned about corrosion caused by salt water but when talking about the type of corrosion or damage caused to contacts as addressed by Sealife in their instructions or as shown in some of the photos earlier in this thread, I got to thinking about it and wondered if any moisture in a battery compartment, combined with high electrical current and/or heat could cause the type of damage we have been discussing. Some brief research suggests that is so. Overall it was dry and technical reading, but the AI summary (I know, but still) is this: High humidity can lead to condensation on electrical contacts, causing corrosion and rust, which can damage the connections. Additionally, heat combined with humidity can exacerbate these issues, leading to electrical failures and reduced performance of devices. putnammechanical.com cable-world.co.uk When diving we are generally in high humidity environments, or at least I am. Perhaps as we increase the power demands of lights and strobes and the energy provided by more powerful batteries, the increased heat and current combined the moisture in the air alone can cause damage?

Why the footage was out of focus?

i got myself a Dji Osmo 360 this summer, with the idea that will come out a dive housing, unfortuanlty i don't think will ever come out due the camera form factor, my mainly use will be for scuba diving, so i was wondering to get a traditional action cam as well, and then in case Dji will release a dive case for the 360 i will get that, now my question, since there are some offer on insta website would make sense to get an ace 2 pro now with the idea to integrate in the work flow in case Dji come out with a dive case or to wait and get a Dji osmo 5 or 6?

I've looked on and off for websites covering contact degradation, but really can't find anything like the AI output above and I really can't find anything definitive about this. There are a great many Li-ion based items, around, I'm thinking of things like power tools, ultra bright spotlight torches etc and if this was common there would be something out there. These strobes draw a lot of power but they are really not pushing the envelope, things like Li-ion power tools - I looked up specs for a small saw from De walt, it uses and a 6 A-hr 18V battery rated to provide up to 800W of power, this is 44 amps at 18V. If the issues with terminal contacts is related to amps, you would expect to see it on something like this. and I couldn't find anything like this on power tools - and these are used in rather dirty environments. The fact of the matter is for electrochemical corrosion to occur you need moisture, you can get this if there are salts of some type on the contacts, fingerprints have a little salt, or you might be pushing traces of salt water in from water droplets on the o-ring if you don't dry it off. Certainly high currents can accelerate this type of corrosion but unless the contact is that bad you get arcing, clean terminals should not corrode. If they are corroding poor quality materials cant be ruled out, it is hard to judge quality just by looking, the quality and materials used in plating can vary significantly for example and choice of base metal can have an impact. Springs can also be too light and fatigue over time so contact pressure is reduced. A question was asked on the Retra maxi post and Oskar replied that Retra uses a multi layer plating on their contacts and claim not to have had issues unless they have flooded. As an aside, my company is in an "AI will be the key to success" phase and are busy exploring ways to use it. Talking to some people who have tried, they say it's great for writing reports, organizing facts, all sorts of language tasks, but it tends to suck at technical topics. They are language models working what words should be placed in what sequence based on all of the content they have ingested and the starter phrase provided. Very easy to mix things from different fields to write a load of rubbish, the Joule heating equation for example is rather garbled. The correct answer is that 0.01 ohms at 20A produces 4W of heat.

i know that.. but i remeber that you can only turn it on..if the macro lens is on the gopro... have they updated it?

December 1st

my email says in the next 2 weeks. When did you order yours?

Gopro 13 Main Menu > Lens attachment (bottom right) > select macro > go to preset > settings > Protune > focus peaking

I am happy we got introduced to this approach again in underwater optical design. Putting together the (distorted) sample images by Don Silcock, Alex Mustard‘s Infos on his 20mm and Zeiss Version plus my own experience with such a corrector port design I would conclude the following. The strength of theses systems lies in hosting / correcting lenses above 20mm focal length on full frame. If you go wider the distortion starts to look odd and you may also suffer corner sharpness IQ loss. The strength of theses system group lies in being able to correct high quality lenses with large front glass elements and offering a very flexible uw corrected zoom range at small size and weight factor. I think it was a sad marketing mistake that Seacam let the test pilot go to shoot with a 16-35mm focal length. The real sweet application will be lenses in the 20-60mm zoom range (Panasonic FullFrame L Mount has one) and in the 20-70mm focal length range. In reality these will be up2date 24-70s or 28-70s with major camera brands. Therefore it would be beneficial if Seacam and other manufacturers would not design the System fully afocal and give it a slightly widening punch factor of 0.8x or 0.75x I hope to see this in the market and some nicer test shots with such an Ivanoff revival in 2026. As the technology had been patented in the past it is now public domain and all camera housing manufacturers could enter this product segment with high end underwater optical designs without risking IP infringements.

It depends on the guides, I suppose. We`ve been there with different diving operators and all of them had no problem with strobes. But there's always much backscatter and the guests are sitting tight, and anyway you're only at a depth of 9m. Either use available light or try to position the strobe as far away and low as possible.

I dived Fuvamulah in 2022 and we were told no strobes or lights.

Ahh. Okey. That lens sounds like real sheit then, if it does not even function at a basic level with the FF body. Not that into details about Canon optics, but interesting. I thought those days were over.

I actually quite liked the 12-50mm, though it had its detractors. Nauticam came up with a solution for its “macro,” and I thought the lens was pretty good for fish portraits and the like. I never used it with the WWL-1 though, and I always wished it were wider. I had an EM1 mark II. As for macro, the 60mm should be a consideration, too. It worked well in that funky 12-50 Nauticam port just fine. Two lenses, one port - always a good thing. With a WWL wet lens, you would have wide, medium distance and macro covered. Best, Craig

i am very interested in that focus peaking .. can you share more info on how to get it on.

Thanks Chip, pleased we could help. Happy New year!

Yes,... that's something different: Canon/Nikon/Sony-Lens + WetLens on Land with slight vignette will in most cases dissapear when dipped in water. Canon/Nikon/Sony-Lens pure on Land with sensor vignetted RAW will not.

HelpingfriendsemptytheirbankaccountsRUs.com I hope your buddy really enjoys it!

Hi @Muellema I've remember a post on Plongeur.com Croisière Socorro Pacific Fleet Solmar V - ARNAQUE - Un croisiériste à éviter à tout prix - Incidents et accidents - Plongeur.com - Le site de la plongée sous marine It's in french but is seems to be the same If you need contact with other from this trip... you can probably write a post. ( can also make it for you no problem, write me a MP )

Not sure it does not make a difference. As a comparison, my z24-50 with a wwl show slight vignette in corners shot dry @24. Nothing when under water. Now I don’t know much about the Canon set-up, but if the lens is 24-50 it should work similar.

The test image ist actually dry and without a water contact conversion optic. I did not shoot it. It's from a public review. These exist in various forms on the net. But I have my own RAW files shooting a white wall. This "dry" and dismal projection of lenses cannot be fixed by water or water contact optics, as far as my testing confirms. I assume it has very much to do with the last projection array of glas inside a dry lens. Water contact optics or domes working in front of the optical system cannot cancel these out. Can somebody else confirm that? It would make me feel more comfortable with my analysis and thoughts on this matter. Having said that, I think a very much workable way is to shoot these wide vignetters at a focal length that is bearable. With my RF 24-105 STM for example the whole thing is very usable @ 28mm onwards. But as the 24-105 STM has a much larger front glas element and extends during zooming it is a more suitable candidate for dome ports and my Ivanoff style underwater correction port.

UPDATE: Thanks to fellow member @RickMo , my buddy has settled on a previously enjoyed E-M1ii in a Nauticam housing. He is super excited to begin his journey of spending all his disposable income, and then some, in this underwater addiction. 😁 Thank you to all for the fantastic comments and suggestions! The global users on their forum are such an incredible wealth of knowledge and experience. And a huge thank you to our wonderful mods such as @Chris Ross and @Davide DB for their first-hand knowledge in the m4/3 world! Happy New Year and much diving in 2026!!

The z24-50 combined with the wwl-1C on a Nikon mirrorless FF (think they call them 1B and 1C now, for 28 and 24 mm lenses respectively) works very well and delivers very sharp and contrasty images that are much better than I have seen previously with any other rectilinear zooms in (huge) domes. Just asking, the ”test image”, how did you shoot it? Looks like dry, no?