Leaderboard

No idea. The normal rule in underwater photography is think of the maximum amount you can possibly justify or afford and then double it!

A point worth raising is that it is difficult to do really precise test shots with and without the MFO-2. I just wanted to highlight this issue – as surely many with and without shots will be shared in the coming months and you should look at them bearing in mind the difficulty in having a consistent methodology. The problem is two fold. First, the addition of the MFO-2 requires the camera lens to refocus (because of the Focus Optimizing stuff). For test shots this means you can’t simply use a fixed focus on the camera to do a with and without shot. And second the MFO-2 is a macro lens and is very long. I have been doing with and without shots keeping the camera a constant distance from the subject. Theoretically, you might think that it is best to keep sensor to subject the same for both shots. However, because the MFO-2 is so long (and we’re shooting macro here) the front element ends up much, much closer to the subject, than the bare lens. So it has been suggested that it would be a better test to keep the front element of the bare lens and the MFO-2 the same distance from the subject – as this is often the limiting factor in underwater photography – both when approaching as subject as closely as possible and also for shooting through as little water as possible. But doing makes the MFO-2 looks a lot, lot wider than the straight macro lens (because the camera has to be moved further back from the subject). The MFO-2 is already a lot wider! There is no perfect way to show/shoot with and without MFO-2 images. All I can say is that when you put it on it does make a really significant change. This test shot was done with the keeping the sensor the same distance from the subject (keeping the camera in the same place) – although I accept this means that the front element of the lens of the MFO-2 is much closer to the subjects, than the standard lens (so for some this underestimates how much wider it makes the view). Without MFO-2 With MFO-2

Here’s a little clip I shot this week on Okinawa Main Island’s Pacific coast (Kin Red Beach) — a classic but colourful commensal / symbiotic combo: Emperor shrimps (Zenopontonia rex) riding their lofty nudibranch palace (?Ceratosoma trilobatum?). Edited to “Raindrop” by Tomotsugu Nakamura (sound on if possible) This was shot on my old Lumix LX10 compact in 4K/30fps, using either the Nauticam CMC-1 alone or stacked with a UCL-165 close-up lens. Lighting was from two Kraken Hydra 8000 V2 lights and one Backscatter MW4300. There was a bit of water movement and suspended silt, so I'll need to be more careful with light placement next time using the triple-light setup... Cheers and happy bubbles, Ben

Had a little success with the Frogfish this year, all comments and critique welcomed Mike

A few years ago, I was a Medtronic tech fellow and we had a small ($15K) grant to do anything technical that wasn't about your day job. I decided to learn about batteries, specifically about rechargeable NiMH AA batteries. I talked to colleagues who design batteries for implantable devices as their day job and they helped me build a computer controlled battery tester. I bought every AA battery I could find, lots of cheap Chinese ones, eneloops (white and black) and a bunch of no-name ones from Ali Express. Name brand batteries that were tested at low discharge currents were in fact more is better i.e., if you put them on 0.05 A discharge rates the time to a specific voltage was proportional to the stated capacity. To test utility in a strobe, I took one of my Z240 strobes to the EE boys in the lab and they pulled out the charging circuit to emulate with my computer controller. Unfortunately they were unable to put it back together and keep it dry. In any case I tested all the batteries in pairs using the charging circuit and using a fast discharge and repeated til the battery reached the test voltage. What we found was that eneloop whites (2000 mAh) got the most flashes. Eneloop Pros were occasionally a bit more and occasionally a bit fewer flashes but were quite variable. Most of the Powerex 2700 batteries got 30% fewer flashes than the Eneloop 2000s. I was surprised but when I talked to my battery inventing colleagues they said "of course, we could have told you that" internal discharge is critical. I haven't run the tests lately (the instrument had a loud beep whenever a battery test completed and my wife got tired of 3AM beeps). Bill

Just announced on socials. Autofocus on Sony and Nikon Z, Canon gets only manual. $699. Will we see a @Phil Rudin test soon? ;)

How Ryo Minemizu captures the hidden wonders of the ocean at night Some great photos and information about his setup.

This is my first underwater travel video. It was shot in one week on the „Blue Storm“. We did a liveaboard and visited Deadalus and Fury Shoals. The camera was a Nikon Z6II with an Isotta housing and two no-name lights. The lens was a Sigma 17-70mm 2,8-4f lens. Color Grading was done in DaVinci Resolve. I would love to hear you feedback and opinions! :)

I asked Nauticam to look into designing such a lens specifically because of the limitations of only having a one "decent" focal length macro lens on Sony FF (90mm) and Canon FF (100mm) camera systems. The MFO-2 basically converts the Canon 100mm into a 60mm macro and the Sony 90mm (or Tamron 90mm, I used today) into a 50mm lens - while keeping the fast AF (arguably helping it focus faster) and high quality optics of these popular lenses (and adding some water correction for good measure). These are simple test shots from toady. First a coral: left - 90mm alone, right - 90mm + MFO-2 - I am sharing screenshots straight from Lightroom without processing: Note it is hard to do an exact and exact comparison on real subjects because the MFO-2 requires refocusing. But it really makes a big difference to the field of view - I'd say at least the difference between the macro lenses many of us have spent years choosing between. Such shorter focal length macro lenses are very valuable for those that dive in poor visibility, for those that like some of the larger macro subjects (octopuses, frogfish, seahorses etc) and for blackwater photographers. And the lack of good options is a frustration. I made the request for this lens after my blackwater trip in March and it is exciting to see it already - I expected it to be more of a niche product for these specific users... I was surprised how long the lens is, which left me concerned it would be hard to aim and could unbalance the rig. The lens needs to be this size to perform well optically, but it is surprising lightweight for its size - and just a little negative underwater. However I was actually surprised that adding this lens makes the rig very comfortable and it feels very natural to shoot through it on a dive. Being noticeably wider than the standard macro lens it is actually even easier to aim and compose than the standard lens. I passed it to a friend during today's dive and he just got on with shooting it (I had to demand it back)! The image quality with the MFO-2 is very good. It is impressively sharp across the frame, with some mild CA creeping in at the corners. I'd like to test back to back to be sure, but I feel it is better in the corners than a Sony 50mm or Nikon 60mm behind a flat port, but behind how these lenses before behind a curved port. Anyway - it is very, very good. This shot shows corner frame detail at 100% on unprocessed RAW file (50MP camera) And here is another more central in frame - this time 200% zoom in on a 50MP file. It also focuses right to the front element - although like a port this starts to limit lighting options. Here is my finger (uncropped) to show smallest subjects it suits (same as 50/60mm on full frame, really). Now I have dived with it, its great strength is that it is light and easy to carry on all macro dives. Meaning that macro dives are no longer a decision between 105 or 60mm, you can now have both options, always. So when you see a great macro subject you can get two totally different macro shots of it very quickly. Before I used it underwater a serious M43 user (OM-1) on the trip asked me if he should order one. I said "No! You have the option of 4 macro focal lengths already, this isn't really for you." After the dive I said "Try it - if you do you will want one - it is so nice having the option of two macro primes with every subject." The MFO-2 is quite long - but this makes it light too - which makes it very comfortable to dive with and very natural to shoot with (contrary to what you might think with the length) - I really can't see me doing many macro dives without it. It was designed for FF Sony and Canon FF users frustrated with a lack of macro options. But others may be interested too, may turns to will if you get to try one. Hope this is helpful.

Since this topic comes up again over time, I am opening a thread to discuss it and gather data and ideas in the future. 👴🏽 Stix foam cubes have always been a very good and solid choice for floating arms. Their big advantages are: They are made in different base cube sizes, which fit into normal aluminum arms. You can get the floatation you want by adding/remove them or even cutting them. Because they are modular, you can easily change them quickly between dives depending on the lenses, ports, or lights you are using. They also look sleek ☺️ They have somehow, some limit too: They are only guaranteed down to 40 meters. This means they cannot be used for technical dives. I tried them myself at 70 meters, they became like marshmallows and the camera was like an anchor. They are specifically thought for arms and not for other special uses, like collars for wet lenses or pads to use as a base for a video housing. Even though compared to the cost of other parts of underwater camera gear, they are cheap, they are not cheap overall. Also, many of us have always been interested in the dark side of DIY 😈 So, let's see what a possible alternative could be. The option most like Stix foam is high density closed-cell PVC foam. High-density PVC foams are very important materials in making strong, light composite products. They are not just light fillers. They are made to be strong inside materials that are key to how well "sandwich structures" work and stay together. These PVC foams have mostly closed cells and a special connected structure. These foams are made to be very strong and last a long time. Important features of these materials include that they soak up very little water, can stand up to chemicals very well, and hardly let any moisture in. The most famous commercial name is Divinycell. Ther are countless types for different markets and uses. I linked directly the most suited and cheap for our use case. From the datasheet you can download, I'll give you a spoiler right away: for recreational diving, the H45 type is good, while for technical diving, the H60 or even H100 type is good. The codes tell you its density in kg/m3 (I'm a metric guy, good luck to those who use Imperial). The only column we care about is its compression strength. I would use the minimum value. So: Unit H45 H60 H100 MPa Minimum 0.5 0.7 1.15 Bar 5 7 11.5 Depth (meters) 50 70 115 Hence, a material with compressive strength of 0.5 MPa (0.1 MPa = 1 Bar) can theoretically withstand the pressure at 50 meters depth in seawater before starting to deform. Someone would like apply a safety factor in real applications. Personally I would use H100 for everything. I used Divinycell as an example because it seems to be an industry standard and the more common. But there are other similar products out there. All of them have a similar chart, so the idea is the same. (Corecell, Klegecell, Airex, Termanto, Nidaplast) It's worth mentioning that there are also partially pre-cut panels of cubes that would be perfect for collars. Where can you get this material? Is it expensive? It depends on where you are in the world. The material itself is very cheap, but if you buy from distributors, it's usually sold in panels as big as doors (1 meter by 2 meters). So, the cost becomes quite high, and it's also too much for what we usually need it for. Again, where you can get it depends on the country you are in. Below, I will share some personal ideas. Maybe you are lucky and you live in a part of the world where you can find this material online or hardware stores or model shops. Distributors are the main place to get it. Try asking for a demo sample, like a piece that is 40x40 cm and 4 or 5 cm thick. In the sea world, this material is very common for building the main parts of boat decks. It gets covered with resin or wood. So, small and large boatyards have a lot of it, including many leftover pieces from cutting. If you are lucky, it's easy to get some for free. High-density PVC is the most used material for fishing floats. Specifically, for deep nets, they use floats that are guaranteed to work at depths over 200 meters. Here in Italy, there's a big company that sent me a box full of floats for free. They said these floats didn't pass their quality tests. But actually, they are perfect; they just have tiny cosmetic flaws that I couldn't even see. I specifically chose the large, cylinder-shaped ones. They don't look good as they are, but they can be cut, painted and used as basic blocks for what we need. You can, of course, also find it through some brands that sell diving and underwater photography gear. But the words "diving/underwater photography," and "cheap" are oxymorons. 😄 Two links: https://www.easydive.it/en/accessories/arms-and-accessories/floats/floating-square-easy-float.25.html https://www.adval.it/_eng/galleggiamento.html One last word on how to work with it: You can easily cut it with a wood saw or a utility knife, and you can sand it just like balsa wood. It can also be spray-painted. 10 years ago I got a demo panel of about 40x40x5 cm. With a pencil, I drew squares the same size as the Jumbo Stix, and the carpenter cut them for me. I also had him make off-center holes, like the Stix, using a hole saw. Hundreds of tech dives with them. I've got these two pieces of THALAGAL for my monitor, and I guard them like precious jewels, considering they cost an arm and a leg! My precious treasure of fishing floats is waiting for the next project. Please feel free to add corrections, links, and suggestions. Ciao

I should go into business. I could sell a float collar for $50 and still make a $40 profit. Turns out my hourly rate is $0/hour since I retired. Obsolete and unemployable!

Hi everyone, I’m Connor, writing in from the Big Island of Hawaii. I’m an underwater photographer working entirely with film, mostly black & white. I shoot 35mm on a Nikon F5 and F100 in Seacam housings, and medium format on a Hasselblad SWC/M in a Gates housing. I’ve got a pair of Nikon SB-104 strobes, but I rarely use them—most of my work is available light, leaning into the natural grain and mood that film captures so well. I dive year-round—freediving, scuba, and spearfishing—and my girlfriend and I are preparing to cruise the South Pacific on our sailboat. Lately I’ve been focused on macro compositions, sharks, and the subtle textures of reef life. I’m excited to be part of this community and to connect with others who are pushing creative boundaries, especially in analog underwater photography. Cheers, Connor

It's not you, Kristin. It's a broader trend, sometimes called enshittification. One of the downsides of our ultra-connected world is how human interaction has been stripped of its substance. This forum format we're exchanging on is a blast from the past — a time capsule for us online old-timers, boogieing like it's 2005 again. It's also an island of genuine content sharing and discussion, the kind that's becoming increasingly rare online

I think one needs to look at the whole system and not just parameters of separate components. I am just on my way back from Halhamera exploration liveaboard where I took my new WACP-C on a maiden voyage. I don't see many other options - travel friendly- , that would allow me to do pictures below on one dive. Even though size shouldn't matter it's hard to beat 50-60Mpix full frame sensor paired with good optics. Sony A1 28-60 WACP-C. The first image for demo of wide angle, second full frame of the third crop. No AI enhancements, just levels. Would you believe you could shoot pygmy horse - and get publishable results - with wide angle lens?

Thoughts and images from MFO-3

Hi All, Finally I've been sorting through my images captured with a Go Pro 12 last year to hopefully help inspire what can be achieved with an Action Cam with different add-on lenses. I was using a Telesin Dome for the selfie image whilst I was picking up plastics in Misool For the other wide angle scenes in Misool and Tropical Dorset, England, I used a Backscatter Sharp Wide Lens Pro/AOI UWL-03 For the close-up image of a Blenny I used a Backscatter 15+ MacroMate Mini with a MARES EOS 10 LRW video light set. I write for magazines and sell prints of my images shooting with this system and I really love using the wide-angle lens with action cameras for both photography and videography. I hope it helps. Maria

This is Laowa's second auto focus lens, both lenses designed for Nikon Z and Sony full frame cameras. Canon RF and Leica L are also supported in manual focus only. The AF lenses have five aperture blades and manual focus are available in 5 and 14 blades. I reviewed Laowa's first AF lens, the 10mm F/2.8 in issue #138 using Marelux 140mm and 230mm dome ports. I expect the 12mm F/2.8 will have similar performance at least in the 230mm port which is most well suited to such a wide (122 degree) rectilinear lens. To answer Sokrates question, yes this is a lens I intend to review but not sure how soon.

Even though I'm a bit late to the party, I wanted to share my two cents on video 😇 As others have said, there's no "perfect" camera system out there today. Hybrid cameras are incredibly high quality across the board, so it really comes down to personal preference and what you'll be using it for. I'm a pretty practical person. If you've already got a bunch of Canon lenses and you're comfortable with their system, I'd honestly stick with Canon. Then, take the money you save and spend it on travel and diving trips! 😁 Full-Frame vs. APSC: My Take Now, about the full-frame (FF) vs. APSC thing, I'm pretty opinionated and a bit cynical. Sure, the shift from DSLRs to mirrorless cameras brought huge tech changes. But the speed at which companies release new models isn't always because we, the consumers, actually need them – quite the opposite! Companies are always trying to boost sales and profits, and launching new products is a key way to do that. Through marketing and ads, they make you feel like your perfectly good camera is suddenly "old" or not as good as the latest version. Right now, the whole market is obsessed with full-frame. This trend really took off because of home videomakers who used cameras like the Canon 5D Mark II to get that "cinematic look" in their backyards. For them, the entire cinema look concept meant crazy background blur and chasing the perfect bokeh at all costs. Companies saw this and jumped on it headfirst. But, even if the market says otherwise, for underwater video, a cropped sensor actually has some big advantages. Underwater, unless you're going for a specific creative effect, you generally want a good depth of field. And that's much easier to get with APSC or Micro Four Thirds cameras. For macro shots, both video and photo, APSC/M43 formats also give you an edge when it comes to magnification compared to full-frame. The common belief that full-frame sensors are automatically brighter and have less noise than cropped sensors is a tough one to kill. Theoretically, it's true, but in practice, it makes no difference. Technology has come so far that for our kind of use, it has zero impact. For video, almost all modern sensors now have a dual gain circuit, meaning two native ISOs. Canon calls this DGO, and every manufacturer has their own version – it's technology originally developed by Arri. Plus, APSC lenses are generally smaller too. Canon's colors, especially, are really popular for underwater shooting, and Canon cameras usually do a great job with white balance even at depth. The one big drawback with some Canon cameras is how you do the custom white balance – it forces you to take a photo first, then set the white balance from that shot. I'm not sure which models still have that quirk though. Back to Reality If you're sticking with Canon and you're not in a huge rush, I'd personally wait for the new Canon R7 Mark II. Of course, if you always wait for the next big thing, you'll never buy anything because there's always something new coming. But the R7 Mark II has been rumored for over a year now, with hundreds of whispers. It's hard to say exactly what features it'll have, but everyone agrees that Canon will release a true APSC flagship, bringing all their latest innovations to that format. It'll basically be like what the 7D was for DSLRs. Even now, the R7 is an excellent camera, and some people use it specifically for macro. Its video sectionhas some limitation. https://www.canonrumors.com/tag/eos-r7-mark-ii/ Before You Buy Anyway, before you choose, try to borrow some cameras from friends and get a feel for them. You don't even have to go in the water; your backyard is perfectly fine. Or, for mainstream cameras, you can often rent them for a weekend from various camera rental services at pretty reasonable prices. If you're coming from a DSLR, this is a great way to understand what these new hybrid mirrorless cameras can do and get a real idea without getting sucked in by all the "shilltubers" . P.S. I almost forgot: as I mentioned, personally verify that certain features actually work in video mode. Ciaoooo

This is a question better asked from your liveaboard operator. Offtopic, i had forgotten how ridiculous the park fees had become in Socorro... On top of camera tax and pricey liveaboard. Just better to go somewhere else.

HI, @Kristin , First, terrific frame you shared! Clearly you have skills. As a long time Canon user I can share some of my experiences based on what you shared. Your 7DII is a terrific camera! I know why you used it so long. It was marketed as an affordable sports camera with great quality. The R7 would be a similarly targeted model with a higher resolution. A big enhancement is the focus accuracy and speed. The "Canon colors" we all love remain the same. It also remains APS-C so basically everything you have, even EF-S lenses, should work by simply adding the Canon RF-EF adapter. There is absolutely no lag in focus speed or accuracy with this adapter as it is designed by Canon for their proprietary communications. Definitely a cost savings! Lastly, as it remains an APS-C, it has a noticeably smaller housing which equates to a smaller housing cost. The R50 is nice and very affordable. David Hass has produced some terrific images with it! The R7 does provide a greater degree of functionality, if you want that. (Side note - the RFS 18-150 lens is a nice do-all travel lens for land) I've been using Nauticam for my last several rigs, and yes, their prices have ballooned, to say the least! And that was before any tariff talk. But they are extremely solid!! I've actually had a deck hand "throw" my Nauticam rig to me from the boat into the water. Fortunately, there was no seal issue after it hit the water. It has to do with their main port locking system and overall durable built. (And yes, we did have a very firm one-way conversation when I got back on the boat!) Your current ports/domes are N120 and the R7 housing is an N100. Never fear, the N100-N120 adapter is the same length as the needed RF-EF adapter. Again, a potential cost savings. The famed Tokina 10-17 works well with the R7 as does the EF-S 60. (no longer made so don't give it up unless you're sure you won't use it again) The new RF 100 is definitely an upgrade over the EF 100, when you're ready. You would just need to add a flash trigger and you are set. While there will be a sizable investment, this could be the easiest, most cost effective, and familiar upgrade path. The R6II is a great body, but does lack in resolution. (although fantastic for astro photography due to low res, low noise.) I only say this as you mention you are not afraid to crop. The R5II is their latest do-everything-really-well camera. I have an R5 and love it! I'm not sure the R5II offers much over the R5 underwater, other than better heat dissipation if you want to a good amount of 4K-8K video work. In FF, the new Canon 24-50 works well and pairs nicely with the Nauticam WWL-C if you ever want to explore their wet optic options. (Dave Hicks has great experience with this setup). Similarly, the RFS 18-45 works well on the APS-C models and also works with the water contact options. Both options provide ~130 degree FOV on the wide end down to ~70 degree FOV when zoomed. This is not as wide as a true 180 degree fisheye, but I primarily use these for their versatility while remaining acceptably sharp throughout. If you move to FF, the Canon EF 8-15 is the fisheye high-water mark. (also uses the RF-EF adapter) The quality is beyond sharp. If you use the Zen 100 dome with the Tokina 10-17, unfortunately there is a different model designed to work with the Canon lens. I would suggest the Nauticam 140 or Zen 230 for the 8-15. (140 is great for travel while the 230 allow easier split shots). Keep in mind the 8-15 is basically either a circular fisheye (kinda cool for a few pics) OR 15 fisheye. Unlike the Tokina, there is no real zoom ability in between unless you add a 1.4x Teleconverter. One super important fact to keep in mind if you upgrade from an APS-C to any high res FF camera is Focus! The high res image details are incredible! Noticeably, if focus is even slightly off, that miss will be magnified. When I made the leap from APS-C to high res FF it was like I was learning all over again. It was all because APS-C, especially an older, lower res APS-C is quite forgiving. I share this so you can be prepared on your first dive with whichever new system you get. Lastly, there is no "Best" or "One Right" system for all. You will hear many try to let there personal biases push you to their beliefs. Do your research and find the best fit for you, your budget, and your comfort level. I have used every brand of system (except Nikon) and sensor (m43, APS-C, FF) commonly out there. I found what I like, just as others found what they like. Make sure you get what best fits you. Feel free to reach out with any questions. Enjoy, and let us know what you end up getting! chip

Amigos, Back from the Red Sea northern route including Ras Muhammed and the notable wrecks. Shot no strobes this trip, only video lights inside certain wrecks (SS Thistlegorm) and was pleased with the results. Canon R100 in Ikelite DLM housing, Canon RF-S 10-18mm rectilinear lens. Enjoy! David Haas

Hello, my name is Daniel and I come from Vienna, Austria. I learned scuba diving in very cold, very murky and very dead lakes. The first time in the Indian Ocean was a game changer for me ;) I work as a freelance focus puller / 1.AC in the movie industry. As a hobby I started underwater photography and videography. My current setup is a Nikon Z8 with a Nauticam housing and a selfmade trim sled. In the next few weeks I am going to upgrade my rig with Keldan 8XR Ambient lamps and a 7inch uw monitor. My website is constantly growing with new content: www.danielmkainz.com I am looking forward to learn a lot of new things :)

This is a real challenge for Compact Categories in contests. Compact Categories were started to enable those with lesser cameras to show what could be achieved without spending the big bucks. In recent years some Compact Category winners have been rightly criticised for using super expensive lenses, that take the system cost way above that of most SLRs or FF mirrorless. Now we have a compact that costs more than most of those cameras too...

You are absolutly right. On an other forum... I tried to make some interesting travel reports. Give a lot of (i hope) usefull information. Some guys didn't appreciate that... to many informations.. and for some they are a lot of jealousy. After near 10 years to give a lot and received a many thanks of some readers I have enough from this negativ people. That is a part of the reasons why i'm here now It is so difficult these days to find reliable information. Here I have the impression that there are friendly people who try to help and give good information Thanks to all

Does anything else matter?

Either the Panasonic or Olympus 8mm fisheye is very light and affordable and they work well in a 4"dome. Agree though the AF in the OM1 and EM5 is way better than the old series like EM-5II - mainly a benefit when using the 60mm macro lens which was relatively sluggish on the EM-5 II. I upgraded to the EM-1 mKII 8 years ago it was way better than the old EM-5 II. If you are concerned about expense a second hand EM-1 MII or III in an aluminium housing would be a great option. The OM-1 and OM-5 are better but not as much of a step up as the EM-5 II to EM-1 II.

@Stig Consider one of the bodies supporting PDAF autofocus, OM5 or OM1. I don't know if it is just a different camera generation, but going from an EM-5-II to an OM-1 is a huge improvement in autofocus performance. AOI makes fairly affordable housings for the OM5 and OM1 also. I'm a happy recent adoptee of their OM1 housing. I think @bvanant has the same housing, and he actually knows how to use his 😅.

https://www.instagram.com/p/DK_xxybR0oS/

Hi everyone, I came across this post on Instagram from a Lynne Tuck who is a regular diving at my local site called The Steps at Kurnell (Sydney Australia). Be nice if the pace was a little slower but you get the idea of what it takes to get to the water. This is my most dived local site with a great variety of critters many unique to this area. I must have done around 200 dives on this site. This is temperate water site - 7mm wetsuit in the warmer months for me and a drysuit in winter where the water drops to the 13-14° range. The car park is around 25m above sea level. Nearby is the leap where the descent is closer to 30m elevation and you drift on the incoming tide to exit at this site after about a 250m drift. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DLzqoY-o4aZ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Thought it would be fun to post a reply to this thread with pics or videos that shows how you access your local tough site. We can get an idea of what your local diving is like.

Cardiac Hill in Palos Verdes is a long long climb down (not so bad) with a handrail at the top, but going up with tanks and weights is for when I had a much different body. Like much of PV it is either really good or really bad. It is the reason that God made boats. Bill

At the other end of this He Man spectrum...... Although admittedly not "local", I was diving from MV Harmoni in Raja a few weeks ago. Whilst the tropical sun beat down on the canvas awning which flapped languidly in the breeze, the crew put all my gear, except mask and camera, in the RIB. I sauntered down the steps and took a comfortable seat on the RIB tube. We drove to the dive site and the crew held gear on the RIB tube to allow arms to be slipped through whilst offering to do up the buckles. I said I could manage. A gentle backward roll led into the 29 degree water. The RIB was waiting for me on ascent. The crew pulled my gear out of the water, removed my fins and I climbed the 3-rung ladder. On returning to Harmoni, I wandered up the steps to the deck enjoying the sunshine whilst the crew took my gear, except mask and camera, rinsed it, filled the tank with Nitrox ... and handed me a glass of chilled juice and a fresh towel. No sweat was raised. No heart pounded. I made it all look easy. As the US Marines would say, OOO-rah. More mango juice, sir?

find on this page Caution Do not disassemble. Do not dispose of in fire, put in backwards, mix different battery types, use with non-rechargeable batteries, or short circuit. Do not connect the (+) and (-) ends with metal objects. Do not use in water-proof flashlights or in any device with an airtight battery compartment. Doing so may result in explosions or leaks that may cause personal injury. Keep batteries out of reach of children. If swallowed, contact your doctor or local poison control center. ☹️ or 🤣 I don't know

The comments in this thread made me curious about the difference between the two types of batteries. Since I don't feel like doing anything this century, I asked ChatGPT 😝 I'm not responsible for errors or omissions 😇 Both Eneloop white and Eneloop Pro black AA rechargeable batteries are high-quality NiMH (nickel-metal hydride) cells, but they’re designed for different usage profiles. Here’s a quick summary followed by a more detailed comparison: Feature Eneloop (White) Eneloop Pro (Black) Typical Capacity 1900 mAh 2500 mAh Recharge Cycles Up to 2100 cycles Up to 500 cycles Self-Discharge 70% charge retained after 10 years 85% charge retained after 1 year Continuous Discharge Current ~1–2 A without rapid degradation Up to 3 A or more for high loads Min Operating Temp -20 °C -20 °C Price More affordable More expensive 1. Eneloop White (Standard)Typical capacity: 1900 mAh Excellent cycle life: up to 2100 charge/discharge cycles Very low self-discharge: can retain charge for years in storage Best for low to medium drain devices, such as: remote controls, wireless mice and keyboards LED lights, alarm clocks, basic sensors 2. Eneloop Pro BlackHigher capacity: 2500 mAh Lower cycle count: up to 500 cycles Slightly higher self-discharge (but still excellent for NiMH) Designed to handle higher discharge currents, ideal for: camera flashes, gaming controllers, motorized toys high-drain LED lights, professional audio gear Discharge Current (your key interest)Both are solid performers, but: Eneloop Pro cells are built to handle higher continuous and peak discharge currents — they’re better for power-hungry devices or short bursts of high current (e.g., camera flashes). Standard Eneloop (white) cells can’t deliver as much peak power but are more than sufficient for most everyday devices. ConclusionChoose Eneloop White if you want longevity, reliability, and a lower price — ideal for general-purpose use. Choose Eneloop Pro Black if you need more power and higher current output, even if it means fewer charge cycles and a higher cost.

I’m still using my original Stix Jumbo set from 2011. While they most likely may have lost a bit of their buoyancy from the repetitive compression, they still work great!

For all you blackwater die-hards out there, I stumbled upon a lecture by Linda Iannello for the Florida Oceanographic Society about this kind of diving in Florida. The lecture is over an hour long and it's a true encyclopedia on the subject. Besides photos of tons of species, all the techniques are explained. If you're having trouble sleeping at night, this is a fantastic remedy! 😁

I used to be over on the old WP (alcina) and am happy to be here now! I live on Ningaloo in Western Australia and have been enjoying taking photos for many years with a variety of systems. I've spent the last little while having fun with my baby Oly TG setup after shooting with Canon 7dmkii/Nauticam set up for years. Recently, I took the Big Girl Camera out of isolation & am rediscovering why I like it, tho sometimes I kinda miss the Baby Rig! I've also added the Insta360 X4 and Ace Pro 2 (my first action cams) and they've been fun, too. I've been tooling around the forums and am loving all the excellent information & expertise in the group. I'll be hoping to tap into that very soon as I'm on the hunt for new gear soon!

The lens hood on both the Laowa 10mm and 12mm AF lenses are removable and small enough to be used in a dome port if you like. All rectilinear lenses work best in larger dome ports like 230mm if corner sharpness is your primary metric. I have used the Laowa 10mm in a 140mm dome port with excellent center sharpness. At 12cm it will easily focus in both ports because they are fisheye. Not so much in a 180mm dome which is not fisheye. Bottom line is that a 170/180 degree fisheyes are just not apples to apples compared to 130 & 122 degrees in rectilinear a better metric would br wet wind lenses that that are 130 degrees at 28mm on full frame.

I’ve banged on about this many times….. so here goes again. FF, topside? Why not? There’s no real reason I can think of NOT to get an FF camera. However, underwater? It’s a different story. As Chris, Davide and David have all set out in different ways, non-FF systems can have real advantages. And I agree with Davide that we are seduced by camera manufacturers that if you’re not using FF, you’ve got less of a system. It boils down to what you plan to do with the images. Serious commercial sales? Massive prints? Then maybe FF. But for screen size images (including sales) and prints up to A2, sub-FF can work perfectly and you can’t tell the difference. The plus points: less expensive, less bulky, easier for travelling, usually easier to house the wide-angle lenses, easier DOF with macro….. Yep, back in the early-2010s I was seduced by the FF marketing and housed a D800. When it was time to move on I switched in 2017 back to the APSC D500 and haven’t regretted it for a second. Never had a moment’s Buyer’s Regret. Talking to Z8 users, I’m sticking with a D500 until Nikon comes up with a high-end mirrorless APSC. There. Said it. I feel better 🙃

From Detroit, Michigan 10-year diving veteran • Underwater photography enthusiast Main Camera: Sony a7 III Lighting: Sea&Sea underwater strobe New Addition: DJI Osmo Action 5 Pro (specializing in underwater videography)

Hey @dentrock! I had this lens for a little bit back in 2022. Looking back at my library it seems I took it on two different dives. At the time I was shooting my a6400 in a Salted Line housing, behind a 6" acrylic dome. You can see that it has range/versatility, good for both fish portraits and smaller things. My take is as you said, a good, relatively inexpensive general purpose lens. I was never one to pixel peep corners, so I was satisfied with it behind the 6" dome. I don't recall it struggling with AF at all underwater, and the conditions I dive in are certainly not clear blue water (where I dive in the Gulf of Mexico, we get a lot of particulate hanging about, and a good day is 33ft/10m viz). I've attached some samples below. The Leopard Toadfish is probably the best of all the photos I took with this lens. You'll have to ignore the poor focus on the mouth/eyes, as I apparently shot this at f/3.5 and spot focused toward the back of its head, so my DoF is off. The rest I chose because they aren't terrible and show a bit of the range of the lens.

Hello everyone, a quick Hello from me, I've been a professional photographer for going on 20 years and starting to work underwater. Mostly on rented housings, but ready to buy my own kit, will post my questions in the appropriate forums. Excited to have found a community of knowledgeable folks sharing the same passion!

I've switched over the years between fisheye (Sigma 15mm, Tokina 10-17) and a lens similar to the 17-28 (Nikkor 16-35). I always find I prefer the fisheye. So much easier to house, small dome, smaller for travelling, excellent DOF, easy to focus. I find it rare that the fisheye distortion is overwhelming or a problem in the vast majority of UW pics.

Life is full of exciting opportunities. But not necessarily the wallet. I think Confucius said that.

Hi Everyone! I'm Stephen — excited to be part of WaterPixels and to connect with fellow underwater image-makers. I’ve been lucky to spend time on a few incredible liveaboards so far, including the Sea of Cortez and the Bahamas, where I developed a real appreciation for wide-angle subjects and big pelagic encounters. I’m constantly learning, experimenting with new techniques, and refining my gear setup — currently shooting on a Sony Alpha 1 on land (yes, I cried a little when I saw housing prices too) and moving to a GoPro underwater. Next year, I’m heading to Socorro — my dream destination for years — and I'm super pumped to shoot the mantas and sharks in those open blue waters. Looking forward to sharing images, learning from the group, and being inspired by your work. Feel free to reach out — especially if you have tips for surviving (and thriving) on a liveaboard with camera gear and no regrets 😄. Cheers, Steve