All Activity

thanks for that I see it now

i’m going on a blue shark day trip snorkelling only with blue sharks in july curious what you all advise about using strobes. it would be much simpler using natural light but would some fill in make the pictures much better? the attached images from the tour company website

great- thanks for all the advice

It's not a subforum but a different part of the website, specialized for sell/buy items with a bunch of specific features.

One 128 card per week plus one spare.

It does seem that the flash just overpowers what you might see in existing light. Try no flash, long exposure or higher ISO. Where does this anemone live?

I cannot say about WWL, since I never used it. I Have WACP-C/Sony 28-60mm and can say that flare occurs very seldom. Here is one of the few examples I have, when I got flare in the photo, when I photographed against the sun:

And this is how it looks like when I increase the saturation (not selectively, this would be a lie) in Lightroom.

Dear Hiloboy, dear all! I was contacted by pm but would like to post my (extended) answer also here because I think it might be of interest for others es well, especially since my above answer might be unsatisfactory for some of you. To be honest: In fact, it somehow is. Honestly, I don't think your photo looks bad. Mine looks very similar. I think our eyes are very easily fooled in this situation. They somehow "sense" that something unusual is going on, that there is light present in a color that shouldn't really exist under those conditions, or at least these colour does not exist anywhere near or around the red "glowing" object. There are probably other effects involved as well. Our visual system tends to perceive this red color as a very strong color accent. Depending on the camera settings, the automatic white balance may also be working against the effect to some extent. Sorry, but for the moment I don't have a better explanation either. In fact, fluorescence underwater, or "fluo diving", is also very interesting from an ecological perspective. Why do fluorescent organisms occur mainly in shallow water? Because GFP acts as a natural sunscreen. The high-energy green and blue light is converted into lower-energy orange or red light. This reduces the risk that high-energy radiation will cause "sunburn" and thus damage or destroy tissue. And now something a bit more off-topic regarding red light underwater: For us photographers, it is often helpful to use red light as a focus light because it disturbs many underwater organisms less, especially fish. Why is that? Because beyond a certain depth, red light no longer exists underwater. As a result, there has been little or no evolutionary selective pressure for the development of sensors (eyes) that can detect red light. After all, why would an organism "accidentally" evolve a sensor for a signal that simply does not exist in its natural environment? Most fish are unable to perceive red light, although there are notable exceptions. More on this in just a moment. Still not enough crazy facts about red light underwater? Some fish actually fluoresce red! They use this fluorescence to communicate with members of their own species, and their "language" cannot be eavesdropped on because other fish species cannot see it. It's like transmitting on a radio channel that no one else can monitor. As always, exceptions prove the rule, because, of course, these particular fish species are able to perceive red light themselves!

Can you post a link to the new forum ?I do not see it as a line item in the forums . I can access it thru a goggle search but thats not right.

Never used a WACP and understanding that people can have strong opinions and varied experiences, but I cannot recall ever having a flare issue with the WWL-1. I do not think it prone to flare. Less so than my dome. But my dome is acrylic, not one of those high dollars Zen glass domes ;). And I like to shoot back into the sun. Photos with WWL-1 and either a Nauticam NA-R50 or NA-6400.

I've listed for sale in the new Waterpixels "Marketplace" forum a number of Subal EXRs, zoom rings, 8" DP-FE4 domeport and FP105VR flat port. I'm selling these following the loss of my housing, camera and all other u/w photog gear in a liveaboard fire in the Maldives. I All the gear is in great condition and except for the DP-FE is complete with Subal boxes. Full details are on the Marketplace (subtle hint from me as a Mod to move over folks to the new, super Marketplace forum and leave Classifieds which will close.....). Happy to listen to offers, discount for bulk buying! Shipping from Amsterdam to EU or UK included in price. Thanks!

still available

still available

still available

still available

still available

Yes, the info found on it is bit limited. But apparently it was pretty good lens optically and looks like it was bloody expensive aswell. Thats one reason i figured maybe try something with it, rather than just toss it. Obviously im hoping it turns out to be the next big thing for Sony 🤣 (wishful thinking) Too bad i sold my 28-60 with WACP when went for RS13 only setup. I guess next step would be designing and printing the adapter and buying a lens. Maybe this is one more "forever" project on the list. If anyone would have any suggestions what to do with the lens, would be grateful.

True, but in a lot of locales liveaboard ops use dinghies/RIBs for entries, specifically to be more precise with the drops and to avoid bringing the main vessel close to the reef. More manoeuvrable, more reactive in an emergency, etc. It was a major issue in Thailand's Similans and Surins NP, for instance, but park regulations were amended to make "big boat drops" illegal a few years back. Indonesia is mostly dinghies, and in the Maldives dhoni drops (though these can be quite large) are common, for instance. Not sure what how it's done in Tubbataha.

Aloha and welcome @Jyk The z330s are still good, but having the option to do high speed sync might be something to look at with other strobes. The A6xxx series is fine and can make a lighter, smaller travel kit. Putting the 90mm or 100mm macro in the mix will work, but you will have a 135mm or 150mm equivalent and some might find this too long. You can try the 50mm Zeiss or Sony macro, which will be 75mm and lighter and easier to carry around but some find the lenses a bit slow to focus. This is better with the newer bodies, like the A6600 or A6700. Another system to consider is OM System. Their bodies are small and ergonomics great. Their macro lenses, like the 60mm (120mm equivalent) is tiny. Great for traveling, sharp and you likely will not be disappointed unless you develop the desire to have a bigger sensor. Craig

Really nice. Thanks.

Remote control has been a core technique for my UWP of salmon for over two decades. There are many pix showing set-ups on my web site at: https://www.salmonography.com/Salmonid-Topic/Photography-techniques/n-mnzBPB They are in chronological order with newer ones first. They show Seacam housings most of which are set up to use the Seacam remote control. https://www.salmonography.com/Salmonid-Topic/Photography-techniques/n-mnzBPB/i-ChFJBmw/A shows a set-up placed on the ground. In this pic you can see the bulkhead near the bottom of the housing where the remote is plugged in as well as the remote control “stick” at the other end of a 10-meter long cable, my standard length for remote control. The button on this stick works just like the shutter release button on a camera body (at least for Canon and Nikon, the brands I have used). A light touch on the release button wakes up the camera (if the camera is asleep) and turns on the autofocus (AF). A further push triggers the camera. As the AF technology has improved over the previous two decades I have had to adjust the timing between the first touch and the triggering to allow the camera to focus. I often took a full second way back when, following advice given by Chuck Westfall, the late Canon tech rep, on the net. Here is one example: https://digitaljournalist.org/issue0506/tech-tips.html This is not the one I recall reading which may have been on DPR or Photo.net. Regardless, it is important to finesse the AF system a bit especially if one is using a more computational type of AF such as auto-area which is what I use with Canon. Nikon came out with a similar mode starting with the D4 generation. The many shots on my website suggests this works. There are other makes of remote control besides Seacam. I have used the Aquatica remote with the Nikon D1x which I installed by disconnecting one of the N5 bulkheads from the hotshoe fitting and installing a cord with a fitting for the Nikon 10-pin socket on the camera. The Aquatica remote uses Ikelite cords that connect with the N5 bulkhead as opposed to the S6 bulkhead used by Seacam. The Aquatica release does not separate the wake-up-AF-on and the trigger functions; it is just a simple switch so I connected two of the three wires on the inside of the housing (that goes to the camera) and only used AF priority. Nonetheless the first shot in a series was typically OOF when using the Aquatica release. It might be better for video but I have zero experience with that. Reef also makes a release. See: https://reefphoto.com/products/zen_remote_release_handle. It is a bit cheaper than the Seacam and uses Ikelite cords. I have not only not used it I not even seen one in person. Hopefully someone will provide you with some info on this. The Nikonos RS had a remote control as well. I modified mine to work with the D1X because I could separate AF-on from triggering. The RS release is a piece of junk compared to the Seacam one. I will leave it at that. Cheers! Tom

So it appears that this port was designed to work with a couple of Sony cameras using a 1/2.3" sensor which is 6.2 x 4.5, so quite small. Typically UW ports are designed around a specific field of view on a particular sensor size, so it might struggle on larger sensors. Only way to find out is probably to try it.