fruehaufsteher2

Reminds me of the discussion on fine tools. It doesn't always have to be Stahlwille, Knipex Hazet or Gedore. But it helps sometimes having the best tool. I recently swapped my well-functioning Seafrogs SF-01 (cost €450) for a new Retra Pro Max. The illumination, adjustability, range of functions and light temperature are so much better that I don't regret the purchase.

The rationale of the Mexican customs authorities is probably that with cameras, only what is usually sold together with a camera counts: Lens, add-on flash unit. However, underwater accessories do not count. 16% tax is therefore due on the dome, housing, flash etc. And if the customs officers wave you over to the X-ray machine or the buzzer flashes red, the money is lost.

Just measured: A7 IV (N100): 26mm

NICE!! Nearly the same as mine, and you won't regret it. In contrary to Tim I think this is a setup with the lowest probability of initial frustrations... works out of the box. Sony has done an incredible work on the current AF-System, so if you miss it, it's your fault. 😁 You are not going for a Nauticam viewfinder? I don't miss it. I had one and sent it back. What kind of Flash do you use?

The WACP-C is great. Not the greatest for splits, but you can use it.

Coming back to the price: I bought 16 Eneloop pro via ebay + Nitecore C4 for less than 100.- But I have to admit that I already own 2 Boosters that usually come at additional 200.- each. So if i bought new I might have gone for the battery pack. (900.- vs. 500.- and nearly double the capacity).

We had this discussion in the "Cheap" solutions for split shots. Some participants in the discussion feared that even small scratches in the acrylic port would be very visible, but others who use the dome have stated that this would not be the case. Otherwise, in terms of cost and transportability, the acrylic port is certainly the first choice

This is an extremely funny idea that I could have come up with myself.

It‘s less the price but more the size that keeps me away from buying.

I‘m a happy 28-60 + WACP-C User with the A7 IV Looking around at photography-workshops I still think that this is one of the best values for money. For some of us it’s too easy and too less technical. But the peace&harmony between camera, lens and WACP shifts the responsibility for bad pictures to the photographer. One step beyond? (Madness!) A7RV or A1 Macro? 90mm

SOLD.

I didn’t see the focus gear for the 90mm Macro in the list. But in fact - you don‘t need it. It can help pre-focusing and support the AF or going manually.

I upgraded to the Pro Max, so my extremely reliable Seafrogs Flash has to go. Very fast recycle time, double sealed battery compartment, 2x 18650, comes with batteries and charger. Bought it 2 years ago here: https://www.unterwasserkamera.at/shop/catalog/de/product_info.php?info=p7724_seafrogs-sf-01-lz32-unterwasserblitz.html 260.- including shipping in EU. When paying via Paypal Pro, the buyer bears the fees. Retra original is sold separately

I upgraded to the Pro Max so the old "Original" has to go. Everything works fine. 360.- including shipping in the EU. When paying via Paypal Pro, the buyer bears the fees. The SF01 is sold separately

Is there any way of calculating dof in water behind a dome? It doesn't depend on the dome, right? Just on the magnification by the water?

To be clear: I have finished the FCP chapter. I‘ll stay with WACP-C as sharpness and zoom range is what I need.

The advantage is the impressive zoom range. So maybe the FCP is most attractive for filming. For ultrawide Canon 8-15 behind appropriate dome is great, for FOV 130-70 the WWL or WACP with 28-60(70) is great. Both solutions have better sharpness/resolution but none has that range. So for the „one size fits all“ population the FCP is great.

Thank you, very helpful! As sharp as I expected for mine.

Those videos make me sad because it's more than 2 months until we can step in the water again... interesting though the discussion about filters.

Cookies gone? What about contacting via mobile?

Nope, here everything fine.

Looking at these pictures I am sure that my FCP had a technical problem. The weight wasn't a big issue for me. Still anything fits in the backpack and the difference between carrying 12 or 13 kg is marginal.

That were my thoughts also. But I tried all zoom settings and all distances. It was more pronounced in wide angles and shorter distances but noticeable at all times.

Of note! It’s not about depth of field, nothing was sharp at no distance. I know sufficient about the plane of focus and depth of field. But if there is no sharp image at any distance or this can only be achieved with a pinhole camera, then I question the concept. But it could be that the wrong port extension was to blame.

I can write briefly about my experience with the FCP, but please note the limitations. I ordered and received the FCP as an early adopter and took it with me to Egypt (Marsa Shagra). Pictures mainly CFWA, camera Sony A7 IV, port extension 30mm (! Nauticam recommends 35mm!). Aperture mostly 6.3 to 8. I was deeply dissatisfied with the image sharpness, even in the centre of the picture the giant triggerfish looked like it had a double contour. In Egypt, I had no idea why my pictures were so blurred. Back home, Alex Mustard mentioned that you really do have to stop down to at least f/13. I only realised the missing 5mm of the port extension much later. So there are several reasons for my dissatisfaction: - User error port extention - User error too open aperture (however, I would then rather blame the concept) - Defective product (it is from the first series). It is not possible to find out what the error really was because the port has disappeared with the thieves. But I wouldn't buy it again (I ordered Retras today instead) You have to zoom in to see what I mean. All pictures are similar with regard to sharpness. Look especially around the mouth. SONY ILCE-7M4 JPEG FE 28-60mm F4-5.6 6 MP·2417 × 2527·2.2 MB ISO 250 43 mm 0 ev ƒ7.1 1/200 Sek.