Tom Kline

I caution about over-editing. For example I got into an argument with my agent's representative about the species identification of a juvenile salmonid fish. The select image for publication that my agent had was the esthetic champ from the series. The next shot however showed the anal fin of one of the fish splayed out so all rays could see. I did a cropped super blow-up of the anal fin and emailed it back to win my case. (The number of anal fin rays is an important characteristic for IDing salmonids). Non-savers can also be used for context such as location of shots. Rejects are also useful for posting on forums, ROTFL ...

This camera is clearly aimed at those for whom spending more is better. Now a hypothetical customer can boast about having a 61 megapixel camera!

Super transaction from member SH Jeong from this ad: https://waterpixels.net/forums/topic/2629-fs-seacam-240mm-super-dome-s45-g-pro-viewfinder/#comment-17499 Thank you! Tom

This contradicts the results in the link from post #2 - see 300th flash test.

Interesting thread with some great links, thanks!!! FWIW I just finished refreshing and analyzing (using a MAHA analyzer-charger) two sets of 8 Eneloop Pros that I bought in early 2023 from B&H (they were in 16 packs). (Reason for refresh: Adult salmon are expected in my target creek rather soon). Batteries last used in early Autumn 2024 (before major snow). The capacities (from the analysis) were mostly in the 2400 to 2500 range with just a couple above 2500. Not too bad for oldish batteries. (These are labeled as being made by Panasonic. Near the seam is stamped 22-xxxx. The four x characters are a bit challenging read but the 22- suggests they were made in 2022.) At the end of each cycle the batteries were barely warm to the touch. I felt them a few times during the test and at no time were they hot, just warm (like 100°F/40°C). Hot water out of the tap is much higher. The above anecdote about hot batteries suggest defective batteries or charger.

OK the title is a bit tongue-in-cheek. I thought about this shot because of the on-going APS-C thread. The camera being used is the APS-C format Nikon D7200, DX in Nikon-speak. What is interesting is the above water portion shows the lens hood blocking part of the image suggesting a greater angle of view in air relative to in water. That is me in the background (wearing a cap). I was in front of the lens to better observe what I was shooting. Note the better viewpoint in the topside shot showing the set-up from the front compared from the other side of the creek. The back of the camera view better depicts the shallow conditions. The APS-C advantage here is a slightly shorter camera housing. My main alternative housings are for gripped cameras so much taller. BTW the salt marsh plants, Carex sp., have seawater around their base at high tide. I include as well a shot with the EMWL fully submerged. These are Pink Salmon. The offspring of these fish are due about 3 weeks from now. This species matures at age 2 so there are separate odd and even year broodlines. The population size odd year broodline is about an order of magnitude larger than the even.

I used a vintage monopod in the example (just under 2 meters long). I have also used other long pieces of aluminum (e.g. ~2 1/2 meter long antenna support - gold colored - in several of the technique photos) as well as vintage metal tripods. Keep in mind I am using them in freshwater. I have used the monopod pole in the harbor (seawater). Even freshwater is not so good for tripods and monopods so whatever you use it will be a sacrifice.

Your solution looks quite a bit more elegant compared to a simple rectangular piece of aluminum which is what I have been doing recently. In my case I am seeking to reduce negativity due to the EMWL system so use float arms. https://www.salmonography.com/Salmonid-Topic/Photography-techniques/i-8NTBjs5/A

The numbers following the dash in the model names reflect the chronological order of when the model was introduced so has NOTHING to do with magnification. Yes it should be possible to give a magnification factor but this is probably easier to do empirically as Chris did in the MFO-1 thread. The MFO-1 is more akin to a CMC than a SMC. I had been thinking of trying to use a CMC-2 with my 105 but now can trash the idea.

Hi Reefy Thank you! I most likely used a single flash mounted at 12 o'clock above the housing. This technique shot is from the same year: https://www.salmonography.com/Salmonid-Topic/Photography-techniques/i-SCFhVQk/A

I shoot quite a bit in tannic water. It ranges from iced tea to Coca-Cola. I understand northern FLA is more like coffee (from a Skin Diver article about fossil hunting UW from many years ago). One of the more challenging streams in my area was the location for the attached shots. I made a virtual copy of the OK version in LR and reset the WB to daylight (5500 °K), nothing else, before making the second jpeg. Shot taken with a Nikon D2X and 10.5mm fisheye so fairly old. I have not been back to this stream, which is unnamed, since. It is hard to get to as well as rather stained.

Interesting result! I have not done anything like that although your shoot reminds me of shooting developing salmon eggs in situ. For that I tried various combos mostly with internal diopters as well as the Nikon Micro-Nikkor zoom lens with NO focusing (AF off and no focusing gear) - port length was fixed at maximum length (the lens extends) - zooming used to control image size. Main issue was very shallow depth like your setup.

One reason for using LR is to avoid having to do all that. As well one can make multiple virtual collections based on alternative key word types for example, location, common name, scientific name, phase of the moon, month, year..... About 20 years ago I followed the example of of an "expert" whose used date and grouped by quality with selects in one folder etc. This became a nightmare... This was before LR came out. Thankfully it saved the day but those early files are still a mess. I have been using consecutively numbered folders and file names (generated when I took the pic) with separate ones for each camera. Larger folders for years. If a certain camera is used a lot in a given year there may be A, B, C folders for that camera that year. Separate folders makes it easier to collapse the list of files when looking at them inside LR. It also makes it much easier to keep track of things when doing back ups. Missing numbers are easy to detect.

You are still getting a 1.33x mag if that is the goal. Distance depends on focal length, i.e. greater with 105 compared to 60. I have rather limited facilities to do testing here - see above. Working distance can vary depending on ones port setup. One trick is to have a bigger air space (longer port) to reduce water path. Cannot use that trick if configured to use the EMWL as one needs a small air space inside the port.

ROTFL!!! My first guess was supermacro, maybe much longer working distance than any of the SMCs. Another guess is that instead of an add-on lens it is a complete port, sort of a macro analog of the WACPs. 105 or 60mm goes inside??? Kind of late for a 60 but might work with the Z50 macro.