Andrey Narchuk

This is the first really working plugin for eliminating backlight. It collects most of the suspended matter both in water and on objects. It works with photos of different sizes and suspended matter of different sizes. And it practically does not spoil the image itself.

Plus to the set of O-rings: 1) optical cable 2) batteries for TTL converter 3) Polymorphic plastic The rest is fixed with "electrical tape" for long expeditions for a group we usually take a soldering iron and additional light (torches and strobes)

I've been using Chinese 10k lumen lights for a couple of years. At that time, I bought them for $20-25. And for that money, they're not bad. Two flashlights almost completely illuminate the frame on the fisheye. The charge is enough for a dive if you shine it all the time. And if you set it to 1/2 - 1/4, then for a couple of dives. (The batteries are also Chinese) Of the minuses - the buttons are very weak, after 25m they usually jam. And they can jam in any position. And after purchase, some of the o-rings may need to be replaced. Including those that are not visible when replacing batteries (from the back cover).

For me, a portfolio is a selection of photographs that reveal you as a photographer to the fullest. Individual, iconic shots. Shots that show your unique style (subjects, type of shooting, color, etc.). As a result, you should get 20-30 photos for the entire time. But the question of choosing a photograph is much deeper. Selecting photographs for an article, book, competition, social media. networks are very different. I have had cases when I had to take technically unsuccessful shots and use them (even sell them). We work a lot with nature reserves. And when I show photographs to scientists, they periodically find objects of interest to them not at all where we think.

Really interesting topic. This largely depends on the shooting location and your own preferences. But there are no universal answers here. As already written, the main problem where flash power may not be enough is shallow water and backlight. The easiest way to see your own filming history. What tone of water do you like in the photo (how hard do you like to clamp the aperture). What flash power settings have you used in the past? (how often did you lack power). I love light photos. Fortunately, modern cameras provide a large range and preserve much more detail in the highlights. I like an open aperture (4, 5.6 maximum 8 and then flashes like Inon S-2000 work great even at half power). In less transparent water the situation is even simpler. And if I need to illuminate a large object at a distance of several meters, then it’s easier to use an additional sensor-triggered flash (the same Inon 2000), which fits perfectly into the BSD pocket.

I divide photo processing into two types: 1) Simple processing. The goal is to show the real situation. Includes color correction, suspension, etc. Takes from 1 to 10 minutes if the water was very muddy. 2) Art processing. In this case, I can process the photo for a very long time, selecting different transformation methods. It can take several days until I find the desired final image that is suitable for this particular photo. The result may be very different from the original.

This is a very difficult topic. The issues of feeding animals in nature photography have been discussed for decades. Due to the fact that there are significantly fewer underwater photographers, it started here later. At the same time, the very fact of protecting marine life is even more pressing. People far from the sea do not pay attention to what is happening under water. And now the question is not even that feeding in certain places changes the behavior of animals. The problem is that soon there may be no more of these animals left (and no fish either). Therefore, attracting attention (including through underwater photography) is now critically important. An example from personal experience: Philippines. When you dive in some places you are told that the use of gloves is not allowed as it can damage the corals. In my experience, one fishing boat that forgot to remove its anchor destroyed more coral than all the underwater photographers combined (for all time). Examples from history: On the one hand, tourism in the Red Sea causes a lot of damage to the reefs. On the other hand, in the south where there is no tourism, fishing with dynamite has destroyed almost everything. The Queen's Gardens remained almost shark-free until the advent of tourism. And there are many such examples. Of course, a strict violation of ethical standards during underwater photography is not acceptable. But things like feeding... especially if it goes hand in hand with learning and advocacy like in Fiji. This is the best option we have.

Last year I continued my attempts to collect underwater panoramas with marine animals. Steller sea lions from Moneron Island were happy to pose. The main problem is that they move very quickly. You have to do dozens and hundreds of takes so that you can stitch together several frames later. But the panorama better shows what is happening in the water. A large number of sea lions that surround you on all sides.

Hi! A'm glad to listen you again!)

I used the Sigma MС-11 with two Canon fisheye lenses 15mm and 8-15. Sony worked without problems in single photo mode. During continuous shooting, the focus was on the first frame in the series, but for fisheye this is usually not a problem. But there were indeed problems with the video. In fact, you first had to choose what to focus on, and then shoot the entire sequence with that focus. I used a 230mm sphere as a port. But I was lucky to buy it secondhand less then $800... p/s And I used an old 1.4 teleconverter (not Canon) with fisheye and everything worked fine. But I didn't really like the final picture. Perhaps I didn't select the extension ring correctly.

In my experience, fisheye 8-15 on Sony is not an ideal solution. Pay attention to the available ports for the N100 mount. The N100-120 adapter is not always convenient, as it provides additional distance. For example, because of it, I was not able to fully use several very short lenses (for example Tamron 20mm). Therefore, if you like to use fisheye in a small dome, then it is better to look towards other manufacturers. p/s The final difference in size between the Sony kit and the Nikon kit is not very big. Although Nautikam on Olympus with a small dome port looks very compact.

I used a homemade ND filter when I tried shooting fish portraits at a wide aperture (2.8 or even 1.8) for an art effect. In this case, the strobes also overexposed the object even at minimum power. An additional translucent spacer (any piece of white plastic) allows you to normalize the exposure. In this case, I see no reason to close the aperture to 10. When shooting in such conditions, I calmly opened the aperture to the maximum (2.8 old fisheye or 4 new fisheye). And the edges of the frame remain sharp when using a large sphere.

I've always had a very limited budget. And I either won cameras in competitions, or the manufacturer provided them to me (either for free or with significant discounts). When it came time to change my old Canon, I tried to negotiate with Canon. But it didn’t work out. At the same time, Sony was committed to cooperation. And in addition, I won a Sony camera with one lens. I wanted to smoothly switch to Sony optics. Temporarily using your old lenses through an adapter. The plan was quite workable, the costs were only for the box itself. But as I used it, I began to doubt it. For 3 years, Sony has not released a fisheye. The macro wasn't as good as I wanted. I started making a lot of videos. And I also didn’t really like the video on Sony (7R3). Therefore, when I had the opportunity to sell Sony, I did it. And with the money I received I bought a Canon R5 and box for it.

I agree that native lenses should work significantly better than "foreign" through an adapter. But this was not noticeable on older cameras. And it's clear that Sony has done a lot of work in terms of autofocus in the latest model. My situation was not a standard one. I won a Sony as a prize in a competition. And I planned to gradually switch to it. But in the end he returned back to Canon.

I can’t say about the latest Sony A7 RV model. But I used Sony 7R3 for 3 years in the Nauticam. And I wouldn't call it a good experience. I didn't understand policy of Nauticam with N100 mount. You are forced to use adapters for the N120 in many cases. I didn't like the speed of the 90mm macro. I compared it with a 100mm macro from Canon (via a Sigma adapter) and Canon on Sony worked faster in many cases. And the main problem for me is the lack of a fisheye lens on Sony (in most cases I prefer it to a wide-angle lens). The adapter allows you to use Canon fisheye. But it's not always perfect. And there are focusing issues in the video mode I used. I often shoot in difficult conditions and the problems become very noticeable. As a result, last year I sold Sony and bought a Canon R5.