John E

In Australia the price of the Photography plan (20GB) annual, billed monthly plan is changing from A$14.29/month to A$23.99/month.

I agree with Chris about fisheye lens positioning and port charts. Also, from what I can work out with my system, the Canon 8-15mm with the Sigma MC-11 adaptor and the Kenko 1.4x has a minimum focus distance of about 25mm from the front of the lens. With my 4.5 inch fisheye port and manufacturer recommended extension this puts the minimum focus about level with the glass. With the slightly longer extension that my "chessboard" test suggests, the minimum focus would be inside the port. So the port chart recommended extension is better for CFWA. Since this is an important aspect of this lens I believe manufacturers take this into consideration.

It's fantastic... so many great sequences. Thanks for posting. I also agree with you about colour. Not sure when you were there but the link below is interesting and writes about the coral bleaching in Raja Ampat in December. https://theseapeople.org/2024/12/18/coral-bleaching-raja-ampat/

My understanding is that compromises are involved, and with the Canon 8-15mm the perfect theoretical positioning does not necessarily line up with the best extension, depending on what type of photos you want and what dome you use. For close up wide angle shots, because the maximum effect is possible with a small fisheye dome, taking advantage of the minimum focus distance, and placing the dome closer to the lens, makes a big difference to the effect, creating a larger main subject and a better photo than having a longer extension which theoretically improves image quality but reduces the size of the central subject. For a larger dome, which is not ideal for close-up wide angle anyway, this doesn't apply.

Thanks Chris, it was small.. The bottom jaw does look a little bit long but that must be it.

This small flathead (?) was on shallow reef on the northern GBR. Any help naming it would be appreciated. Picture is with a Sony 90mm macro lens. Thanks.

Hi Adventurer, When you are referring to different wavelengths of light being absorbed at different rates it is obviously with distance travelled through water, nothing significantly to do with time.... as you say "speed of light in water is nearly identical for both wavelengths". So I can't understand how exposure time (shutter speed) could possibly make any difference to the relative proportion of different wavelengths of light reaching the sensor (i.e. colour). I use shutter speed to vary the deepness of background colour from pale blue to dark blue. I use Inon strobes and a Sony camera on auto white balance with white balance adjustment in Ligfhtroom. If I didn't use the warming diffusers it would be the same change in deepness of background colour but with slightly more green aspect.

This is a new BBC article regarding some survivors who were trapped in an air pocket for 35 ... hours. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3z0k72yw3o A Youtuber who reports on white-boat topics did a story about Red Sea dive boats recently ...

I also suggest the first step would be a small strobe like the Inon S-220 or used Inon S2000. Stepping up, a later TG model would have advantages, but best with decent lighting, so no loss in getting the strobe first. If you get more into wide angle , a big improvement on the TG cameras for wide angle also comes from using a wide angle wet lens to get to 130 degree field of view. After that, it is difficult to get a system that is as versatile as the TG for both wide angle and macro on the same dive. The Canon R50 in Nauticam is really interesting and possibly the best aluminium-housed enthusiast system, but you need the Nauticam wet lenses WWL-1B for wide angle and CMC close-up lenses to complete the system as the port is not interchangeable. Even then changing lenses mid-dive is not great in practice, especially swapping out a large and expensive wide angle lenses and carrying it whilst a macro wet lens is on the housing. This system would lbe really underutilised without strobes There is still an advantage to micro four thirds in the small lenses that are lower cost and readily available used, especially the Olympus 60mm macro. Olympus (OM System) OMD EM 10 iv in AOI housing, the OM1 in multiple brands of housing including AOI, or a used OMD EM1 mark ii or iii if you can find one. You could also use an Olympus with wet lenses (to swap mid dive from wide to macro) but also, if you don't mind committing to wide angle or macro beforehand, and since you say you are mainly interested in macro, Olympus with a dedicated macro lens sounds good.

I second what Chris says but I lean towards the AOI wet lens with their quick release bayonet for easy guaranteed compatibility with the port and your zoom lenses. My preference would be the one with the glass front element and collar. Although cheaper, the acrylic fronts are easy to scratch and cannot be polished due to a coating (unlike a normal acrylic dome). The cost of wet lens repair if a scratch does happen involves returning the lens for a new front element.

Maybe there are smaller diameter lenses that would be better for APS-C. One of the things I like about this lens with Isotta Sony A7RV is convenience since I can use the same extension and 8 inch dome port with the 20-70mm and the Canon 8-15mm plus Kenko 1.4 teleconverter. So this covers the field of view something like 35- 95 degrees then 125-170 on full frame without making any changes to the housing. On Isotta A6600 they have the 102mm port which fits the 20-70mm, Canon 8-15mm and 90mm. They don't have a A6700 housing but I hope they make one.

Sound like you have it sorted. Having one handle is a personal preference and what fits the particular housing, especially for a generic housing that may have a handle a little bit too far from the shutter release. Like you are doing ... easiest to just have two to start then see what you like.

Try both arms on one side like the second photo and just have them going over the top of the housing in an arch to keep the Stix floats centred for balance - and then have more range of movement when you take a picture. You may even prefer to only have one handle if you are going as small as possible, eg ditch the right hand one if the handle on the tray doesn't align well with the shutter release on the housing without a shutter release extension.

I know Nauticam sets the bar high but it would be great to have a comparison of sharpness and contrast (on full frame) of macro wet lenses around this strength and include lenses like AOI UCL-09PRO, Saga +15, Weefine+13/Kraken +13, and Inon UCL-67.

Great video, thanks.,, and wow, fascinating critters... also nice to see the activity in real speed rather than slow motion, and some great reference shots near the lights to show how busy it is.

Hi Sasha, hope you like your new set-up. I previously had the EPL-10 in the AOI housing. It is a great system. If you expand it the 60mm macro lens is great and used copies easy to find. For the housing the magnifier that shades and enlarges the rear LCD also can be useful. For the wet-lens, I think that one goes to 145 degrees angle of view with a 24mm so you will need to zoom in a bit to avoid vignetting at it's widest, but the AOI UWL400A, also sold as Backscatter, is 120 degree at its widest. I think the Weefine/AOI quality is probably similar. I have had a couple of wet-lens and the ones with the polycarbonate front dome need to be used very carefully. They can focus very close and despite the marketing the dome is not very very scratch resistant, so touching something easily makes a mark. Whereas normal polycarbonate dome ports can be polished, these wet lens without glass front elements have coatings so scratches can't be polished. If you want to get a smaller set up with TTL you could look out for used Inon S2000.

I hope those sales figures don't tell the whole story! I really like Olympus lenses and cameras so hope OM System stays viable. As the other manufacturers are part of large corporations with other sectors to support R+D, OM System seems at a disadvantage when it comes to resources. I wonder how that volume of sales can sustain new product development .

You could try Underwater Photo & Video Equipment - Buy & Sell Facebook Group. Somebody listed a pair for sale in Illinois a couple of days ago.

I agree with the comments above. As someone in reef tourism I'd emphasise that the Olympus TG6 or TG7 have advantages. It can produce good shots on its own with no strobe, tray or wet lens if you need to go as small as possible. It doesn't need anything like as much preparation or care for a dive because it is a waterproof camera in a housing, so you can focus your attention on customers. The TG6 or 7 have really good jpegs when used underwater and if you take photos of customers you can share them straight after a dive eg using Olympus-share onto your phone and airdrop. You can also potentially use the camera as a rental and hire it to customers. The quality for social media or website use is fine. For Canon, the Nauticam R50 looks really interesting but with the wet lenses added I suggest it is too bulky and heavy for a divemaster diving with inexperienced customers (I have a WWL-1B but not handled a WWL-C) . For any compact camera in your situation I would be tempted by a less expensive second-hand camera in an aluminium housing and not be too set on particular model, but get one that has been looked after (even older G16's in a Nauticam housing can be good). Depending on your own needs, a simple less valuable small camera for diving with customers and a larger one like the one you have for diving without customers might be preferable to a half-way solution.

I wonder if anyone knows what is special about the S+S correction lens or is it like other low power achromatic diopters? My limited understanding is that single lens diopters (filters) impact image quality whereas achromatic ones are much better. Both just act to reduce the minimum focus distance, helping the lens focus on the virtual image which is close to the sensor and curved. So if the S+S is not available, or is not a suitable size for a particular lens, another weak achromatic filter would likely do the same thing? There are several high quality low-power achromatic filters including the Canon 500d close-up lens, Nikon 5T diopter, and Sigma close-up lens AML 72-01 (which I have and is 72mm threads) which seem to do the same thing but are in different diameters due to sometimes being intended for specific lenses.

I'm thinking of boat compasses. These are filled with a transparent mineral oil and it is not unusual to get bubbles, especially with age. But a reason oil is used in that case is to dampen the motion of the compass card. I agree it would be odd to have oil in an optical instrument but the only potential reason I can think of would be to help make a complex shape pressure proof. Seems weird to get droplets in something before it goes in the water even if it has been knocked, unless as Dave wrote, some drops of liquid were already inside but not on glass and moved?

I don't know how viewfinders are made but it seems logical that if the "droplets" arrived before submersion they could indicate the viewfinder is oil filled and the droplets are actually bubbles. If it is oil filled maybe the knock has caused a tiny bit to be lost or dislodged so there are now small bubbles on glass. Maybe it is possible to get these to move off the glass possible by something like warming the viewfinder slightly such as putting it in the sun so the oil gets less viscous and the bubbles rise.

I think a few people use this lens as it has a versatile zoom range for mixing wide-angle and close-up on the same dive. I mainly got it for fish and people portraits but it seems a good lens for dives when I don't know what to expect. I have been using it with a close-up achromatic diopter lens. (Sigma AML-72-01) which 72mm diameter, matching the lens filter threads. I think it is 1.75 strength. To be honest I am not sure how important the diopter is, but it certainly seems sharp using it. Maybe someone else has the calculations on what it does to the minimum focus distance. I have a photo of the top of my Sony A75 with the diopter and without which shows the minimum focus distance looks slightly reduced, but not by much. I assume it helps corners at the 20mm end and maybe helps to be able use a larger aperture with an 8 inch dome. I haven't tried it in a smaller dome. Isotta have a zoom gear and port extension for this lens although it is not yet listed on their Sony port chart. The replicated close-up pictures are just crops of the original frame. Of course for wide angle it is not as possible to get as close as an ultrawide lens to the subject but in clear water it is still effective.

Thanks. I have wondered the same thing with this lens. I have the Kenko 1.4x teleconverter, and on my Sony the 4k60 has a 1.2 crop too, so I am guessing the resulting field of view is pretty good. I also wonder if using the additional advanced stabilisation means the 4k60 is not necessary for smoothing footage? And wow the reefs filmed look so sad. Can you say how patchy this was - just some areas of reef with extra local warming due to water flow or was it very widespread?

Fantastic .. and the music choice works so well.