fruehaufsteher2

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.

YES

Thanks Chris, that's exactly what I was trying to say. I've been to Moorea 2 years ago and had the RX100VA with me. Nice quality and minimal drag. But when I see what I can get out of the images from the full-frame camera in post-processing, I'm sad that I didn't have a big camera with me back then. You rarely get really close to the big animals (and you shouldn't), so having the largest possible reserves in RAW is extremely important.

IMHO 121 is disappointed because with his setup and his style of taking pictures he closes the aperture nearly completely and by that loses all the advantages of the big camera. I usually have the aperture on f/7.1 - I am not a landscape photographer. The focused object has to be sharp and the background is slightly blurry. That allows to shoot in available light while freediving or using only a limited amount of flash. This wouldn’t be possible with smaller sensors.

Finally nice to have both of you onboard!

Use the OM10. if going with the whales is similar to French Polynesia, then you will be happy to have all the postprocesss abilities.

Several of the colleagues here have been blamed for being false, lying, doing something that they shouldn't do... as long as this is coming always from the same colleague the best way is to ignore. You have nothing to blame yourself for and nothing to apologise for. The picture exactly reflects your statement and there is really NOTHING in it that could be recognised as a disturbance of nature in any way.

If you, Interceptor, just could reduce using the word „you“ and reduce blaming or insulting others, your posts would be much more helpful and a win for this forum

Lit backscatter will be more prominent seen in your picture than if it is not lit by the strobe. Either use a beamformer or point outwards - at the price that you are lighting up much water and fish that can not be seen in the picture. In some instances it can be useful to open the aperture as far as possible so the backscatter between you and the object is more blurred and less disturbing in the final image.

Mattys Pics are beautiful. https://www.mattysmithphoto.com/custom-dome-ports/ But there's a discrepancy between portability and desired size. 18" are roughly 45cm, not easy to transport. For me that doesn't mean nauticam 8,5" is useless

Regarding Boyancy: Here: https://www.retra-uwt.com/pages/4th-generation-retra-flash-series are the values, but I don't know whether w/o batteries. As the volume doesn't change, you moght have to add the weight of the batteries.

Another question: Is it possible to calculate the range of sharpness with aperture closed to f/22, starting at infinity (or what over water the most distance that can be sharp) with the WACP-C …. Ok just got that I can try myself. I‘ll respond to myself later

This would add another 1,8k€ and 1,8kg … is it really that bad? But in fact I see the point.