Christian K

Proudly worn on liveaboard, in Vavuu atoll, Maldives..

The whole Persian gulf is very shallow. Max depth near Musandam is somewhere 200 meters and the average in the gulf a mere 50-60 meters. So that has a big impact.

it is not as straightforward as better lens=better underwater. Do not own the FCP (would like to) but I think the z24-50 is what’s recommended.

Yeah, there are rogue ones in most places. And it might be individual confusion sometimes and explanations needed—tax on import of goods is after all normal for most countries. But trying to tax someones personal property which they bring in and then back out… that is a scam and afaik not the norm , even in Mexico. You need to pay ”camera tax” tho in some marine park areas on top of regular fees, in Indonesia too. Not a lot and I see it as a marine conservation contribution.

A ”better” lens does not always yield better results than a cheaper one when you put it under water, behind domes or wet optics. The front element plays a role here and at what angle light from dome/wet lens hits the optics. So better check out what Nauticams tests say. The cheap 16-50 might be sharper for a particular set-up. I use the z24-50 for wwl1C and works very well.

Have not had any issues entering Indonesia or heard of anything like it from other divers/photographers. Almost always questions about and brief examinations of gear, but not more than that.

Saw that one too. Mr Doubilet sure knows how to travel in style.

No Canon 28-70 that will work with the WWL1B? I don’t see the WWL as a replacement for the 10-17 or any other fisheye. It is a rectilinear zoom. In my case, replacing a 10-20 or 10-24 crop sensor zoom behind a large dome port. Not sure what the Canon equiv. would have been (10-22?). If you have/get a Canon/Sigma 15 mm FE that works with a new Canon FF body, that would cover a lot of WA-needs in combo with a wet Nauticam-lens and a zoom. I’m waiting for a z-FE (perhaps in vain) as older FE:s won’t autofocus with the new Nikons, unless using adapters. Might come to that for me.

Also went FF from cropped recently (Nikon Dxxx:s of various generations in Hugyfot housings). Tokina 10-17, Nikon 10.5 and a Sigma 10-20 rectilinear was my work horses. Nauticams wet optics is what pulled me to them when I made the transition. They have rectilinear wide ones and a Fisheye one too. Some will cost you as a whole rig tho, which might or might not be an issue… I shoot Nikon FF so have limited info to share on specific Canon combos for wet lenses. If there’s a good 28-70 zoom it should be good with the WWL1B (guessing here based on Nikon and Sony solutions) and give 70-130 rectlinear degrees throughout the zoom. And then for 24-50 the WWWL1C giving the same FoV in a slightly smaller and very trave- friendly package. I hear the Canon 24-50 is sheit though. Can not say. Nikons z-version is very sharp (but a little plastic).

Pretty good starting point from where you are 🙂 Welcome!

I’ve found it much easier to be snorkeling. Strobes a bit down to light up and even out exposre. I guess the design of the housing also comes into play. Never had any real issues with my old Hugyfot housings, have yet to try with my new Naticam set-up. Fisheye a must.

Yup NA6III does not ”look back” and is very compact as a result. So from a packing/travel perspective the new generation Nikon Nauticams are very competitive. Don’t know about the Sony/Canon situation…

A fellow Swede go tomorrow. Trick he say is, if you go from far away, fly to Mexico City and then domestic to CSL. I’m boycotting until this is dealt with in a trustworthy way. There are so many other places.

You need to be at the other end of the process you describe. That is the sane and logical choice. But if you let sanity in, you probably wouldn’t be doing UW-photography in the first place… 🙂

I go solo when possible. I also make it a challenge to incorporate divers or snorkelers in my images.

This is a very impressive project. I mean, really impressive.

Wow.

Coming from DX and went to a Nikon Z last year. Shoot almost only WA of various types and shapes, my workhorses were the Tokina 10-17, a Sigma 10-20 and Nikons 10,5 FE in Hugyfot housings behind domes of different sizes. Went to Nauticam much due to them being inventive with water corrected optics. The wwl-c and 24-50 is a great set-up and it’s very capable. Much better than any rectilinear zoom in a domeport that I have seen. Much sharper all-over. Nimble and easy to handle. The best for travel. I’m not sure how difficult it is or what the end results would be if you adapt the wwl-c to other housings, so can’t help you there. Previous poster seem to have done a great job with an Aquatica housing. Myself would not be able to pull that off—ymmv. Being in Sweden (?) you should really reach out to and have a chat with Magnus Lundgren @Underwater Exposure in Malmö, he has a ton of experience with various set-ups, wet optics (shoot Sony atm) and is very friendly. Hej från Stockholm ✋🏻

I’ll be in Hulhumale late March, so will see what the situation is then.

Latest "reports" (more like rumors) from Shark Tank in Hulhumale are that there are no sharks anymore, only rays due to lots of disturbance from work and construction in the harbor. Will get back in a couple of months and give my impressions. I'm there anyway so might as well give it a try. I understand this dive, in case there are sharks, are quite different from the Fav tiger dive. Deeper and with lower visibility, so not really as suitable for shooting. Well, well...

There are fewer sharks in the oceans now than in 2011, so it’s not like the conservation work is done and we can sit back. It’s an uphill battle. Shark diving helps a lot. Of course it has to be done in a responsible way. Also note the difference in feeding and baiting. Feeding … I don’t know if that is such a good idea. Looked quickly but can’t see those studies really say anything about modyfying or altering the behavior in individuals. Basically they conclude: Sharks go were they think the food is. (bullsharks went to shallower depths) and big congregations of sharks can cause ”social” issues (many sharks in one spot can cause them to fight with each other). Consequences of feeding/baiting over time in the same spot. Perhaps detrimental to a group of individuals? Perhaps immoral? But it’s not really altering or modifying shark behavior inmo. They are opportunistic by nature and still have that behavior intact. Now with all that said. All shark diving aren’t equal. There are very bad examples out there.

Inme it is a common misconception in popular and mainstrean media that the sharks behaviour is ”altered” or ”modified”. The truth is that it’s very difficult to alter the behavior of an animal who has been perfected through longer time than any animals on earth. What we do when we use fish scraps or plastic bottles is exploiting their natural behavior. Dangerous? It depends, but it is more dangerous than when there’s no baksheesh.

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) .

Was there with extended family and we had a very good time. Good for snorkeling to. No mantas there but eagle rays and sharks on the house reef. Was a few years ago tho, 2019.