MatthewSullivan

sorry, i didnt format my reply well! everything after 'phenomenal little setup' was to Dave

Agree with Dave with regards to WWLC/24-50. phenomenal little setup. @Dave_Hicks WACP is an improvement vs wwlc but whether that improvement is worth the size vs cost...YMMV. Since you have WWL, the WACP-C wont (imo) be worthwhile. If you were going to do one, the WACP1 would be the more worthwhile upgrade

The MFO-3 and MFO-3II are optically identical. The glass supplier changed so the nomenclature changed to differentiate for any repair/glass replacement purposes in the future. The dimensions are a few MM different but that is it

I've never used the MWL but from what i gather, the image quality left a lot to be desired, especially in the corners. I'll reiterate though, not havig shot it, i cannot comment first hand. I don't believe alex has shot it either. I shot the kraken for a few years and while it isn't flawless optically, i found i acceptable for most applications I used it for. i do not have access to any of my hard drives with images from it currently but ill circle back to this and post some once I do. It still does need to be stopped down to f11 or so (imo) before it gets good enough on the edges but for things like sharks or whatever else in open water id shoot it at f8 no problem

The Maxis have been thoroughly enjoying thus far for both macro and wide angle. The Pro maxes have an edge in light quality, especially without diffusers, but i have zero complaints about maxi quality of light and the power and speed are hugely enjoyable

13mm RS on sony mirrorless is (imho) by far the sharpest lens underwater. the resolution it resolves is spectacular and it surpasses thr 8-15 from canon or nikon in all the categories mentioned

https://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special-features/article/review-om-system-olympus-om-d-e-m10-mark-iv-backscatter-octo-housing/ should help address at least some of the questions :)

Hi All. Hoping somebody still has an Isotta or Nauticam D700 housing laying around they're willing to part with! Feel free to email me matthew@9milesnorth.com Thank you. Matthew

having talked to seacam at DEMA, i think a few things weren't made clear in their preview. The lens is not a water contact optic like the WACP. It is water corrector port. According to seacam it is designed to allow a land lens to perform exactly the same underwater as it does on land, so the image quality seems largely dependent on the optic you put behind the port. Not all lenses are created equal so I imagine it will take some experimentation before the ideal lenses to use are determined

https://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special-features/article/review-aoi-underwater-ultra-inteli-uis-p1-strobe/ linked it above but here it is again

I haven't used the OM1 II but the original OM1 has some of the best tracking of any camera i've used. It is remarkably sticky

https://www.divephotoguide.com/underwater-photography-special-features/article/review-aoi-underwater-ultra-inteli-uis-p1-strobe/ Here is a more extensive written review by Andrew of this strobe

i would imagine its to guard against flare since the SMC/CMC lenses are very prone to it

it is interesting how relatively frequently it seems that strobe floods occur when they have remained sealed for X amount of time after diving, and then diving again. The only strobes I've ever flooded happened this way and I recall several other accounts both here and on we**ixel that were in the same vein

Alex and I discuss it here. And I have a DPG review on it coming out next week