TimG

Hi Alexey! A warm welcome to Waterpixels - especially coming from Ukraine. Great to have you with us. We hope lys really enjoy the forum. Best wishes Tim

Sooooo tempting, Zeus to give you all sorts of wise advice about a HUGE investment in FF gear......

Bricks and mortar camera shops seem to have disappeared all over the place. I’ve lived in various major cities in the last few years and have seen them close the shutters and disappear. I guess online sales are largely to blame - and I have to own up to my share of guilt.

Sorry, Michi, I can’t really help you there. I doubt though that the trigger would be outpaced by the ability of the strobes to recharge.

Problem is, for the moment at least, we can’t find a problem and, so far, no-one else has reported this as an issue. Rich has been checking various logs and nothing has turned up so far. Dave suggested creating a hotspot on a mobile phone and then accessing Waterpixels from your PC via the hotspot. This might eliminate a possible router issue. Did you try that? There’s no lack of effort (or willingness) from the Waterpixel’s team to try and solve this. But The Man is stumped at the moment.

Kudos!

It goes back to the discussion on the use of your images. If it for pleasure viewing, sharing with friends, artistic creation, some sales, then I would argue that for the vast majority of u/w photographers, FF is unnecessarily expensive and creates problems for travelling in terms of weight and volume of gear. But if you feel that not having FF is somehow missing out and just disappointing, then fair enough. But in terms of real, viewable quality, naah. You'd have to be a serious pixel peeper or have very demanding clients to worry about noise, pixel size and density. On a modern camera with modern lenses the water turbidity creates more problems than those three ever will! The series camera bodies and lenses produced now are capable of producing amazing imagery irrespective almost of the sensor size. I came to the conclusion that underwater the FF thing is a marketing trick which harnesses the old 35mm standard. Topside, why not have FF? (Unless you decide the much smaller M43 is handier/travel friendly - and I can sure see the argument for that)

As long as you speak Mandarin.... 😆

Hi Michi I used a UWT on my Nikon system(s) for around 9-10 years. Flawless. It had Manual, TTL and HSS - the latter when paired with Retras. It was easy to install (two small screws), used 2x CR2032 batteries which seemed to live for ever and just sat there and did its job without complaint. I did about 1000 dives with it and never once a problem. Tim

I've used both, Mike. Like so many things with underwater photography, what you can achieve in that environment and what the two cameras might be capable of, are two different things. I used a D800 (FF) for about 4 years and a D500 (APS-C) for 9 years. Other than having more pixels to crop, I honestly could not see the difference for the types of images I use: selling to stock agencies, on my computer, sending to friends, the occasional A2 print.... For me, and I'm sure others will argue, the disadvantage of FF is the size of the gear, the extra difficulty of housing a rectilinear with a huge port - and the cost of the lenses. I know wet lenses can make a difference for wide-angle and might be easier to "house". For that it's worth, I would not go back to FF. I'm actually moving down again to M43!

Hey tiger! Welcome to Waterpixels. Great to have another old timer with us 😜 Yeah, I remember those 36-shot film rolls with maybe 1-2 worth keeping…….. We hope you enjoy the forum. Best wishes Tim

Kinda wonder if Tom still has the RS. Or the Ken and Barbie dolls...... Action Man, anyone? Sorry, back to lubes.... and Retra Maxis

.... and fishmongers?

Perhaps the reflector being made of polished stainless steel helps?