ChipBPhoto

@ChrisH Terrific frames! Great detail and fun with movement.

@fruehaufsteher2 Terrific frames! I have a buddy that just came back. Also missed multiple days of diving due to weather, but had a great time. It’s on my list!

I agreee with everything Wolfgang said! Ironically, I was just typing the same answers, but he beat me to it. 😂 To add a bit more, yes, the EF-S 60 does work with the Metabones on the FF. There is, however, vignetting. This is not an issue for blackwater, but will show in daylight scenes. Unless you need a wider macro, I have found the Sony 90 to be the best choice. I too had the EF 100 and found the 90 to be a much better solution with the newer bodies. Continuing with macro, adding an SMC-1, as example, to the Sony 90 will most likely be a more versatile and better overall solution than using a 150 or longer macro. Again, the more water between the lens and the subjects means lower overall image quality. The exception here would be if you are working with a tiny and super shy subject that requires greater distance to simply make the image. (Very rare)

Thanks Davide - great info!

Hey all, In case you have not already heard, Sony has put a hold on the a1 firmware 2.0 update. No new date is posted as of yet. From Sony Page When Download Attempted: “It was confirmed that some products updated to Ver.2.00 may not be able to connect to the network. Due to this issue, we have suspended the update. (March 29, 2024)”

This video may be interesting if you go for the Sony….

Yes, any FF will be substantially larger than an m4/3. And you are right, there is no way to gauge the real size without you experiencing it first hand. It’s great that you had that opportunity. It also weeded out one you now know you do not want. I had the original Oly E-M1 m4/3 and loved the size, especially regarding the lenses. They were tiny and much cheaper by comparison. The entire system is also substantially smaller when you add the housing and port, as you already know. For me, I found I wanted a larger sensor and a greater ease in creating shallow DoF. As a result I bit the size bullet for a FF and have been happy with the results. I also have been very happy with the WWL/WACP with the 28-60. This allows CFWA through midrange fish portraits. The ultra close focus ability of it also allows almost a pseudo macro ability in a pinch. The 90 is super sharp for macro. I’ve also found the focus to be very accurate. That’s just me and my personal priorities. I can attest that the a7rV is a beast of a system with a long lifespan ahead of it, but again that’s just my feeling. Bottom line, there will be a ton of considerations, calculations, and opinions others will share. It honestly comes down to what fits your personal needs the best and what feels best in your hands. Either of the options you are considering will produce excellent results. I have no doubt you will be able to gauge the distances you referenced with either system once you’ve become accustomed to it. With these two choices, sensor size, overall size of the rig, and perhaps cost will often be the factors that will help you ultimately decide.

Congrats - nice deal! Curious to know your thoughts after you’ve used it a few times.

Congratulations on the new rig! Terrific images; nicely done!

Just to tack on to John’s comment about sharpness, if you do move to the a7rV, be aware you may be disappointed initially at the details or focus in your images. This is not because they are lacking, but rather the correct focus point becomes much more critical due to the ultra high resolution. I know I had a bit of learning curve when I switched from a lower res format to the 61MP. When you nail the focus, the detail is truly amazing! You are correct, the 28-60 is nothing special on its own. It’s the WWL that really makes it super versatile. You’ll love it once it arrives!

.

It’s actually a very good question. I have had great success putting all the relevant clean o-rings in a ziplock baggie and putting that in the travel case with my housing. This includes o-rings for the housing, extensions, and strobes. (Extra o-rings are also included) If I do not fly with my body mounted in the housing, I put the baggie inside the housing. I carry the appropriate grease in a separate baggie, also packed with the housing. This eliminates any vacuum potential and keeps all needed parts together. Greasing and installing the o-rings takes just 1-2 minutes once at my destination.

Hi Fraser, I was just talking to a buddy that does uw pro video work about lenses, ports, etc. His choice is the WACP-1 zoomed in to around 30mm or more to offset the very slight fisheye effect that could exist at the corners at 28mm. Based on your question, the 16-35 rectilinear with appropriate dome or the 28-60 with WWL zoomed in slightly would be the best match to what he uses. I personally have used the WWL with the 28-60 for almost 4 years. For me, I love the size and quality compared to a 230 dome for the 16-35. Unless you want to do splits, which the WWL cannot do, I think it is a terrific all around solution. It also works quite well for close focus allowing the subject to almost touch the dome. While not as sharp in the corners as the WACP-1, it is based on the same design, just smaller and much less expensive. At f/11-13 I have never had corner issues with the WWL. I often will go to f/9 when corners or DoF are not as much of a factor. If you want a similar dry mount zoom, you can also check out the WACP-C with the 28-60. It is also a smaller, cheaper cousin of the WACP-1, but eliminates the water layer found between the WWL and attached dry port. It may be slightly sharper than the WWL, but nothing to get overly excited about. There are some pre-owned models that may start appearing with the introduction of the FCP. I hope this helps! chip

Exactly what I am also considering. I have an a1 and Sony 90, but want something shorter specifically for BlackWater. Unfortunately the Sony 50 macro is reported as not performing well in the BW conditions. I realize this is an APS-C lens, but in this environment a little vignetting won’t matter.

Hi @Staggs - I moved to the a7rIV in 2020 and used it for 3 years. I then purchased an a7rV last year. Huge difference! a7rV vs a7rIV findings: - The AF is noticeably more accurate and much faster. (I found it even helped the notoriously slow Sony 90 macro focus faster.) - The menu system is much easier to navigate. - Lastly, the white balance is dramatically improved. This is key for both auto WB and video, should you eventually dabble in that realm. (I frequently had back to back AWB images have completely different colors with the rIV) The a7rIV was literally the last body made before the newer improvements began to be incorporated. If you have the ability, the a7rV is definitely worth the investment for both today and longer term use. Hope this helps in your decision process.

Hey John, Alex Mustard did a test of small domes with the 8-15. He found the Zen 100, which I owned with my APS-C, worked well with that format. For FF, however, he found the 140 dome was the smallest dome with acceptable corner sharpness. This would especially be true with the 61MP detail of the a7rV in FF. Hope this helps, Chip

Agreed. Cost and adding the extra mass of a large dome for a wide rectilinear lens just does not offer a commonly desired solution. The biggest benefits of APS-C are lower cost and smaller size. Both would be voided.

Good question. The answer is most like the flexibility of a little zoom range the Tokina offers with clean sharpness that works very well for uw APS-C systems. Appropriate APS-C primes would also be a good choice, if that is a personal preference. There just isn’t as much of a demand.

Hey Tim, Good question. For me, not enough to be consequential, especially now with USB 3.2 SSD drives and USB 3 ports. The key difference is I personally prefer to have annual catalogs rather than one large one for all. I normally use Samsung T7 or SanDisk Extreme drives. The read/write speed of these is around 1000 MB/s, but obviously the cable, port, and bus system play into the equation. The slowest point is the bottle neck. I am familiar with Kelby’s system. It works great and is clearly maximized for speed, especially when there is a single catalog with a main drive system always attached such as a NAS or large single drive for the images. There could theoretically even be multiple catalogs on this system as well. Having individual catalogs on individual drives is the strategy that just happens to fit my personal overall needs best. Fortunately, newer fast technology has made this a viable option.

Absolutely agree with this! Unless doing macro, this setup was my go-to for APS-C as well.

If staying with APS-C, the Zen 100 for the Tokina 10-17 has been a great choice. If using a housing with the N85 size, you will also need the adapter and extension as outlined by Nauticam. If you plan to soon move to FF with the Canon 8-15, the Nauticam 140 dome is a better route. This would also require the N85 to N120 adapter and any other extensions Nauticam suggests.

Absolutely agree with @Robin.snapshots ! Yes, the Canon 8-15 is a terrific lens, especially for FF, but there’s a reason the Tokina 10-17 is considered the go-to for APS-C systems. I have used both extensively and still can appreciate the quality of the Tokina images with my APS-C rig. When paired with a 100mm dome such as the Zen mini dome it makes for a very desirable small, easy to use kit. If you go with the Canon 8-15 with the plan of upgrading to a FF rig in the near future, you may want to consider the 140mm dome. The 100 mini dome is great for APS-C, but the 140 works better for FF.

I spent several days with Roberta’s Scuba Shack in June 2023. Roberta, an American from Chicago, has lived in Cozumel for over 20 years and owned the operation about 18 years, if I remember correctly. It is small, safe, well run, and very friendly. They have several small fast boats and a great team. The large locked storage area has room to hang wetsuits as well as your own individual locked storage bin for smaller gear. I really liked this feature! They have tanks on property, including nitrox if desired, and rental equipment if needed. About 80% of their business is repeat, with some of their clients simply leaving their gear in the storage area year around. They handled my camera well both on the boat and before/after. There were several other photogs on all my dives. They are located near the Intl cruise pier which makes it central to reach all the popular dive sites in a short time. I also found their communication before I arrived in Coz to be terrific. That’s the main reason I initially booked with them. She also owns a small hotel on-site, if interested. They are now my go-to operation! https://scubashackcoz.com

Great question! I used a Tokina 10-17 fisheye on an APS-C system for many years. I loved it! I do mostly wreck and CFWA type images. About 3 years ago I switched to a WWL-1B after hearing about the sharp corners and a 130 degree FoV, all while still having a nice zoom range. I have been extremely happy with the results! The only time I miss my true fisheye is if I am extremely close to a wreck and want a super wide 180 degree image. That is relatively rare for me. Having the zoom aspect and sharp corners, even at f/8 on an APS-C has more than made up for any downside by giving a much more expansive option of images with a single lens. The close focus capability of the WWL is also a huge bonus! Hope this helps!

Terrific choice! Have a great time with your new rig!