All Activity

I am selling a Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8 G Micro ED Autofocus IF Lens in absolute mint condition along with a Nikon FTZ II Mount Adapter (also like new condition) to allow this lens to work on all Nikon Z mirrorless cameras. Both come with front and rear caps. The Nauticam 60 N120 macro port is the model made specifically for the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8 G Micro ED Autofocus IF Lens. Although the port has seen several years of use, the only shows a light amount of oxidation in the outside finish. More importantly, the glass front is completely free of scratches, marks and water spots. Macro port comes with a Nauticam port cap. Selling price $850 also covers shipping in the US. You will need to PM me to discuss shipping options outside the Continental US.

I am selling a Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX DG Fish-Eye Lens with a Canon EF Lens to Nikon Z Camera Autofocus Adapter and a Howshot 140mm / 5.5-inch optical glass domeport. Unlike the Nikon F mount model, Sigma’s 15mm f/2.8 EX DG Fish-Eye Lens for Canon EF/EF-S DSLR cameras, the lens features a autofocus motor is built in. This feature makes this model Sigma 15 fisheye far more suitable for use with electronic lens mount adaptors made for Nikon Z, Canon R and Sony E mount camera systems. When I first got this lens, I had trimmed the lens shade down so that it would work behind a small dome port. The lens still works perfectly well as it did before hand and the glass is just as pristine with no scratches or marks as it did when it came out the box new. The Fringer EF-NZ II Canon EF Lens to Nikon Z Camera Autofocus Adapter that is included in this package allows EF- or EF-S-mount lenses to be used on a Nikon Z-mount cameras. Electronic communication between an attached camera and lens is supported, enabling autofocus along with auto exposure features as well as generating Exif metadata to your photo files. Of all the adaptors I have tried out for using Canon EF-EOS lens on a Nikon Z8 bodies Fringer appears to allow this lens autofocus to function the most natively in all regards. I am also throwing in a Kenko HD Pro 1.4 DGX Teleconverter that can be used with Sigma (Canon EOS mount) 15mm fisheye Lens and Fringer EOS to Z adapter. When the 1.4x teleconverter is in place between the Fisheye lens and Canon EF Lens to Nikon Z Adapter, the lenses broad 180° diagonal field of view is reduced by approximately 29% effectively rendering it as a simi fisheye lens covering 124 - 127°. And, yes the autofocus still continues to work, but just a tad slower. The domeport included with this setup is a Howshot 140mm Optical Glass Fisheye dome that shares the same size, optical characteristics, materials and N120 mounting system as Nauticam’s N120 140mm Optical Glass Fisheye Dome Port. And yes, the lens shade on the Howshot dome is removeable. Domeport comes with a neoprene port cover. I should note: When the 1.4 Teleconverter is incorporated in the setup, a 20mm extension ring should be added to maintain optical performance. Package price (shipping not included) $950. You will need to PM me to discuss shipping options.

I think I understand your points better now, but I’d like to ask a couple of related questions. As I understand it, the bare 60mm has a working distance of roughly 80 mm to infinity (without limiting the focus range) and a maximum magnification of 1:1. The MFO-1 shortens the minimum focus distance to about 58 mm, which increases magnification slightly to around 1:1.1 and also reduces the amount of water between the camera and subject, which is obviously a plus. It does limit the maximum focus distance to roughly 1.12 m, but realistically there’s rarely a good reason to shoot macro beyond 1 m anyway. On m43, the improvements in image quality and focus hunting seem likely to be marginal or even negligible. Given that, do you feel the reduced minimum focus distance alone is enough to justify keeping and using the MFO-1, considering the added weight and bulk it adds to the setup? Do you personally use it in a similar configuration? Alternatively, would it be just as good—or even preferable—to shoot with the bare 60mm and rely on a CMC-2 on a flip adapter for the (probably rare) situations where I need more magnification?

Spectacular series of shots tho 🙂 Most sharks will n e v e r come close enough for photos w/o something to attract them, which might be fine. An acquaintance diver lost a rig in a similar fashion to a tiger shark in the Aldabra atoll some 20 years ago. Think it made the tv news in his home country (Netherlands) .

Sold!

Almost 20 years ago, I used a similar setup with a Sigma 150/2.8 and an expensive Raynox in the Philippines. The image quality was 'okay' (compared to today's Nauticam SMC-1/2), but you could only photograph very small objects with the internal close-up lens, making it extremely limited in its versatility. I definitely wouldn't recommend it.

Bienvenue sur waterpixel @tailwind_marseille Before you continue your research, it is urgent to discuss with your banker (and/or your wife) to explain that you are going to have some reckless expenses. There right away, then very regularly over the next years. If the discussion goes well you can continue your research. I speak from experience

I am selling my Sony A7 R III Gear from Nauticam. The equipment is used, underwater Equipment ±4,5 years old. Reason is change in Brand. Parts of the underwater equipment will only be sold, once the housing is sold. Prices are for single items (ONO) if sold individually. Price for a bundle will be negotiated based on those prices. This includes from Nauticam: Hosting NA-A7RIII (from late 2021) (Price 2.300€) Vacuum System M14 (150€) Flashtrigger (manual) (150€) N100-N120 35,5 Port Adaptor II (350€) Domeport 8,5“ with some marks of use (500€) N120 60mm Spacer (suits 16-35 F4 1. Gen) (300€) Cameras and lenses are also available: Sony A7 R III (used) (1.100€) Sony A7 III (lightly used) (750€) Metabones EF to E Gen 4 (150€) Sigma EF 15mm 1:2.8 Fisheye (200€) Sony 16-35mm F4 Zeiss inkl. Self printed zoomring (500€) I can also offer: A Pair of Inon Z330 Strobes Simple Strobee arms & Inon Float Arms ML (2) Additional lenses Sony 28-60 Sony 24-105 Sony 70-200 f4 Sony 35mm f1.8 Sony 55mm f1.8 Sony 85mm f1.8 Additional original Sony Batteries Nikonos 5 Plug and Y Cables for the Inon Strobes (instead of optical fibre option) Everything is working perfectly fine. The equipment is used and has marks signs of wear, but it is still perfectly working. Pickup is possible in Germany near Hamburg. I will be at the BOOT (Boat Show Düsseldorf) on 17.1. Shipment is possible on Buyers expenses. Pictures taken with this camera can be seen at https://www.instagram.com/julianmuehlenhaus/

This is what I’m afraid of!! I already have a TG-6 but I’m unhappy with the sensor and softness. Started my journey by considering an RX100, then quickly moved my goal to a A6400, but find myself now justifying to myself (you know, that inner dialogue 🫣) that the best compromise long termos really a A7C. And then comes the housing, plus lights, etc. What a black hole !! 🤣

I agree with tray choice, using GoPro, wet lens and a couple of lights. Better results of course. When I need to shoot a selfie I use tripod, but it's not my habit or practice. Have a nice day

Zoomgear for Nauticam (Sony Housing) for Tamron 17-28 for Sony 16-35 f4 1. Generation the zoom gear needs some tape on the lens or the inside of the zoomgear to be stuck ob the lens. A simple layer of tape on the zooming was enough to keep it attached and still be able to remove it. ZoomGear Nauticam Sony16-35f4 1.Gen.stlZoomGear Nauticam Tamron 17-28.stl

Display Funnel / Monitor Hood for Easy Dive Leo3 WI Housing. Let me offer some files for the Easy Dive Leo3 Wi Housing. A while back, when I owned it, I struggled with a lot of reflection on the back of the housing in bright conditions with the Sony A7R3 camera in that housing. Hence I created a "better suiting" monitor funnel to shield the back of the housing against bright light. Easydive Sucherschacht.stl

To be determined!

This may be daft.. but when I had my Olympus I wondered about the viability of the well regarded Raynox DCR-250 for super macro. These only cost something like US$100. Obviously this is more limiting than having a removable underwater diopter, but for a bit of fun with super-small subjects I wondered if it would work underwater (I never got as far as trying it out). It is 18mm thick and needs a slight step-down ring but maybe works if one has a 20mm port extension already that can be added to the macro port.

No not exactly - the suggestion is to work out if you regularly find critters that require that amount of magnification. My experience with the 60mm macro is it's very rare for me to find something small enough that I feel like I need a diopter. From a week in Lembeh with over a hundred critters found only one or two were small enough that a diopter might have been useful. Your experience might be different, I think it depends on where you dive, how good you are at finding small stuff etc. The CMC-2 will be challenging to use at max magnification for sure, I'm not suggesting don't use it, rather I don't see it as an either/or situation with the MFO-1 as they have different magnification ranges and I would choose based upon how much magnification I need. If you find you are getting down to 1:1 all the time currently and wishing for more and are OK with lighting subjects right on 1:1, then a CMC-2 is possibly the next logical step. The 90mm macro I think would be a lot easier to use at high magnification, it has about 65mm working distance at 2x compared to 22mm with the CMC-1 also at 2x, but it's an expensive lens, needs a new port etc. I'd want to be sure I would make use of it and could live with the extra working distance. At 1x it's only maybe 10-15mm more working distance than the 60mm, at 0.5x (35mm wide frame) you are at 170mm then 330mm at 0.25x. So for 60mm long subjects you are getting quite distant. I have the 90mm macro and use it a lot on land, but have not been tempted to take it UW.

Thank you for such a comprehensive answer. I thought this was a simple question, but it seems the answer may be far from that. If I understood you correctly, the CMC-2, like all diopters, may not be a great choice for my m43 setup. The focus distance would be too close and thus difficult. I suppose I should have done more research first. Now, I wonder if I should keep the MFO-1, and ditch the CMC-2. 🥴 That being said, if diopters do not work well with m43, what option would you suggest for super macro, only the 90mm lens?

Thanks for the update. I suspect it is something similar to what i see with e-shutter on my OM-1 . In focus stacking I do on land with an Olympus flash - the flash fires very rapidly on low power. I trialed doing a short stack UW, using the mini flash on manual at 1/64 power for triggering. The little strobe can fire rapidly at such low power but it was like it was waiting to confirm the flash was ready again before firing. The standard way of getting around this is to make use of the X-sync on the camera, which it basically a mechanical contact built into the shutter - the camera doesn't recognise there is a flash attached and fires every time the contact has closed as long as it has charge. Did a little searching to find this, seems the problem is by design from Nikon:

Bienvenue / bem-vindo à toi, Nuno Looking forward to seeing your pictures of Marseilles waters these days 👌

The MFO-1 should be thought of as a high quality low power diopter. In the case of the 60mm macro it only improves magnification to 1.1x while the CMC-2 achieves 1.7x but it will only focus between 33 and 122mm. Based on the focus distances there might be a little overlap with the CMC-2. It seems there are some benefits on image quality on full frame sensors and also prevents hunting with some macro lenses which readily switch to the background. However it seems that for m43 lenses there is no reported improvement. It seems to me that whether to keep it or not comes down purely to whether you can find subjects in the magnification range covered by the diopters. There is less case for diopters with m43 lenses, first the working distance is small and diopters work by reducing working distance, second the field covered at 1:1 with these lenses is 17mm across, half that covered on a full frame sensor. The CMC-2 covers a field 10mm across at a working distance of 33mm which means it is difficult to aim and to light the subject. Because diopters like the CMC-2 limit the focus range to a a limited working distance, they are in general more difficult to use compared to a bare macro lens, the MFO-1 limits the range but the maximum working distance is over 1m so you can use it just like a regular macro lens, you can find the subject from a distance and close in while looking through the viewfinder, not so easy to do if the subject isn't in focus until you close right in on it.

Ahhh, so true. It’s what we do best 😝

I just pimped my GoPro 13 with a tray and trigger after frustration a couple weeks ago with 5 mm gloves trying to maneuver the GoPro. So far I’m pretty happy with the rig on dry land wearing my gloves.

SOLD....

My Hero7 housing seemed to work better than my Hero 13. That said the 13 housing works well enough.

I received the tray and trigger this morning. It works quite well with my thick gloves. Good value for $100 I think. The weakest point is the AOI wet lens mount, which is flexing than I’d like. Also, I’d prefer a two bolt GoPro attachment as the single bolt will likely loosen and allow the GoPro to twist.