All Activity

Jens is right. If you're shooting RAW then White Balance is simply a metadata value that doesn't have any impact on the image except in its preview on the camera LCD screen. Once you have the RAW files in the computer (Lightroom etc) the image will display with the original WB value but it's not baked in and you can freely change it. A common and useful technique for underwater shooters is to set the WB to the same temp as your strobes - this at least gives you a consistent preview and baseline for comparison and review, but then you're free to warm up or cool down shots as you please. But if you are shooting JPEG, perhaps because you want to use the photos straight from the camera without processing, then you're trading off quality and WB flexibility for speed and efficiency. If you're shooting in shallow water there can be lots of variable sunlight and the colour temp can change quite drastically from shot to shot. So it's not a case of how 'well' any camera does WB. They all do it the same. It's a matter of either either letting the auto-WB do its thing (OM auto WB is excellent but in variable shallow water all cameras will struggle). Or manually changing the WB depending on the colour of the water (Blue or green) and whether you are facing upwards to the surface or downwards away from the sunlight. In all practical terms, it's very clumsy to be changing WB for each shot. So best to find a consistent fixed WB temp that matches the water and type of shooting. JPEG will allow for some degree of colour temp adjustment later but this does bring us back to RAW and why really, RAW is the only way to go. HTH

oK - specs are out… 15 cm MFD look promising. Canon RF sensor to flange = 20 mm Canon RF 7-14 lens length = 109 mm I = 20 mm + 109 mm = 129 mm MFD = 150 mm MFD - I = 21 mm Focuses 2,1 cm in front of front glas. But if the 190 degree FOV at 7mm focal length is not a typo it will create lots of headaches with port positioning.

Perhaps you could explain why this is important in your case? I take photos with the OM-1 and OM-1 II, but white balance is not important to me as I only shoot in RAW.

10 & 2 works well and is easy to move the lenses.

Great report Dave! Thanks for sharing!

How do you orient the dual flip? I have mine at 10 and 2-o'clock, but I'm wondering if 4 and 8 might be better?

It's probably a good idea to look at what sort of pictures you want to take and what your budget is. Potentially looking at a more modern Canon to use some of your existing lenses and ports?

Does anyone know how well the OM-1 mark II does white balance in shallow water. Looks like it has a pre set white balance for it ?

I've been to both and you can't go too wrong with either. I have plans to go back and I will head to Buceo Anilao. The staff were outstanding.

I'm at the stage where I'm trying to figure out what to do with my fabulous Canon 7dmkii/Nauticam system. I'm considering selling it but not sure if there's any market/value at all? I am not on FB so don't have access to things like the marketplace or specific uw photography sales pages. Both camera and housing are due for a service - a nice chunk of change. Maybe better to just forget it altogether and continue on my journey towards a more updated system? I'm currently using the baby Oly TG7 setup and enjoy it 90% of the time, but do find myself frustrated now and again so I need to bite the bullet and get my existing gear sorted (about a two month wait, I'm told) or buy something new (probably a longer wait because I still can't make a decision and obviously way more upfront expense). What's everyone's thoughts? Photo just because it's more interesting :)

No, hugely better with the Sony 50 macro. With a flat port you can barely get a 12mm D circle in the middle of the frame sharp. With a dome (in my case the 140 fisheye) everything that's in focus is sharp, across the entire frame, as Mustard and co say.. That big better appeals to me, but I understand many wouldn't care / feel the need to add attachments. Just wish I could get it happening (with decent AF) for the 100 macro. At the moment, the 'dog' of a 50 focuses more reliably than the 100 behind a dome, in my tests! Something to remember when calculating EP position for dome alignment: do it at (say) 30-40cm focused distance, since that is a reasonable compromise for where the virtual image will be. No point using infinity...

One interesting thing to note when using domes for macros is that the plane of focus changes from being straight with a flat port to curving a little bit away from the camera with a dome port.

Planning a trip to Anilao and looking at Buceo Anilao or Crystal Blue. Never been to either place and looking for input, especially but not only anyone who can compare the two. Thank you

Ah, yeah that site doesn't have most of the lenses I'm working with. It does have the Sony 90mm, but I'm not sure I trust what it says since it differs from what I measured. I also don't think it gives any info on how the entrance pupil changes with focus (unless I'm missing something).

This doesn't necessarily have to be the case. Most dome sections are much larger than they need to be to cover the narrow FOV of macro lenses. For example, today I am testing a small (~50mm) section I cut from a 150mm diameter acrylic dome (shown in red) with the Tamron 90mm. So far, the results are looking very good (on par with the Zen dome shown in black):

Well, in fact I already use the Kenko 2.0x teleconverter many times, combined with a dome flatter than usual. It's a quiet good combination to take "macro-wide angle" shots.

That Tamron number looks to be for an earlier incarnation of the 90mm lens, from 2013. The F017. There is a bunch of lenses with this data collected here: Optical Bench Hub https://www.photonstophotos.net/GeneralTopics/Lenses/OpticalBench/OpticalBenchHub.htm

This is the technique I've always used: "Parallax/Alignment Test: Place two objects (e.g., sticks) at different distances, aligned in the viewfinder. Pivot the camera on a tripod. If the objects shift, the camera is rotating in front of or behind the entrance pupil. Move the camera forward/backward until the objects stay perfectly aligned during rotation." It's pretty easy if you happen to have a focusing rail.

In general, no, flat ports are used with macro lenses for a reason. Yes the corners will be slightly better, but you can't add on a diopter if you wanted to and the large size of the dome makes it more difficult to work in close. For some specialised uses a dome has some advantages, but it seems not all macros lenses work well in domes due to the location of the entrance pupil either moving or being right at the back end of the lens.

My wife and I dived for 12 days with Fish and Fins last year. We actually went for a week and extended it. We stayed some time at Palau Central and sometime in an amazing luxury tent at Carolines (looking out over the sea). At the airport on the way home we also met a couple who had stayed in Koror then for some days on Peleliu with some diving there, but they had local knowledge from previous visits. Our whole trip was great. I agree with the comments above...great advice from bghazzal. The kayaking/snorkelling is also great with unique coral communities in places like Nikko Bay and Risong Bay. Some dive centres hire out kayaks and Paddling Palau specialise.... A great option for the last day before flying or a day off in the middle of diving.

Thanks for the explanation! That would Internets. There are some tests and a database that puports to list this for various lenses. I will double check in a little while.

@Dave_Hicks May I ask how you are getting the entrance pupil locations? Your numbers for the Tamron 90mm differ substantially from my measurements.

@Dave_Hicks Yes, shorter is generally better in this case. If the entrance pupil is too far back, the dome's center of curvature cannot be positioned there because the dome will hit the front of the lens first. Hopefully this illustration helps. With the Tamron 90mm, the dome's center of curvature can be positioned over the entrance pupil. However, with the Sony 90mm, the entrance pupil is located way too far back. The dome hits the front of the lens well before the center of curvature can reach the entrance pupil. This lens would require a dome with a much larger curvature.

Even more interesting would be the option to use the RF2.0x TC 🤩 let‘s wait and pray that the technical data will serve us underwater photographers! There is still the minimal chance that Canon totally screws this up with a humongous minimum focusing distance (MFD) which would render it useless for underwater photography.

I have been using the Marelux single flip adapter with both SMC-1 and Marelux Macrovie +5, +10 & +15 C/U lenses for two years now. Both NA & MX mount the same with the lens protruding a bit in the rear of the holder rather than flat. Single flip is $259.00 and the dual is $299.00 and both come with the installation tool.