Davide DB

And don't miss the mini-doc on Laurent Ballesta's expedition down into the article https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240507-the-deep-ocean-photographer-that-captured-a-living-fossil In 2010, Laurent Ballesta photographed a living coelacanth alongside diver, Cédric Gentil (Credit: Laurent Ballesta/Andromede Oceanologie) Laurent Ballesta photographs his dive team while on their expedition deep in the Mediterranean Sea (Credit: Laurent Ballesta/Andromede Oceanologie)

Hi Zvonimiri, I dont' know its FOV but it's a popular choice and maybe someone will chime in. in the meantime you can check these two threads (if you didn't already):

The 20mm has the same MOD: 43cm / 1’4″ I have ready available a 230mm dome and i have to focus an object at about 5m / 16'

After the countless and extremely technical discussions about the compatibility of the most exotic lens-port combinations, I would also have a question and my own strange combination. I am too illiterate to try to make any calculations and assumptions on my own so I am asking you techies. (As I ask the question imagine my face like that of the famous math meme...) I would like to ask you in general what considerations should be made in putting an anamorphic lens behind a dome but let's take a specific lens: Laowa Nanomorph 20mm T2.2. https://laowacine.com/product/nanomorph-20mm-t2-2-mft/ I found this table: It has a MOD of 430 mm (not promising for focusing the virtual image generated by the dome). What is the minimum porthole size of this lens? How do I calculate the position this lens should have inside the dome? The data indicate an FOV of only 65° compared to how wide the view seems in the footage. Thank you for your help.

Let us know your impression on desktop use 🙂

Link added. Thanks

And by the way, I hope you never see this in your displays or viewfinders 😑

I 100% agree on camera and lens but for the housing, after a thorough rinsing with water and isopropyl alcohol my electronic circuits were perfect.

Don't worry, try with your 120 first!

And while you're at it, draw a N85 cap for me too 😜

Jim I totally agree with you. Let me preface this by saying that I have been a Lumix user since the GF1 and I have had all the GH series camera bodies going into the water from the GH2 on. I have had the beautiful GX85 and also the G85. I now have a GH5 that I use for outdoor shooting and a GH5MKII for underwater shooting. I embraced the M43 system because the small size of the whole thing is functional for the kind of diving I do. I could have chosen Olympus but doing only video the Panasonic choice was obvious. I have occasionally used the old Sony A7S and the legendary Canon 5DMKII. I regret not having personally tried the latest Canon cinema cameras. I still remain of the opinion that for video the Lumix in general are always the most complete and user friendly cameras (in this market segment). The individual features may not be the best (AF ouch, ouch, ouch) but it is hard to find in a hobbyist level machine all the video-oriented features that Panasonic camera have. Now Sony and Canon have also adapted but looking back at the menus of the very old GH2, they were science fiction for the other brands in 2010. Despite this (I have come out 😇) I try to be objective and not be a Fan Boy. Even toward diving I have a very pragmatic approach: they are tools that allow me to achieve my goals and not the other way around. It is also true that by embracing one system then one becomes a victim of "lock-in" and it is difficult (except at great cost) to change systems or brands. I am convinced that crop sensors are more functional for underwater video. Full frame photography has overflowed into cinematography with the emergence of hybrid mirrorless cameras. A “photographic” camera that also does video but film history was made by S16 and S35 cameras and not FF. The diatribes between crop and FF formats that also plague this forum are all distorted by the fact that we are talking about photography and today everyone assumes that the same object you take pictures with, also does video. After this loooong introduction I will add some of my own considerations: Completely agree. More like they should have continued to develop two lines in parallel. A “micro” line with the original purpose of the M43 system in mind and then a line with more aggressive features where unfortunately size matters. Why wasn't this done? Probably because there wasn't enough money, market and companies make big mistakes as well Reading the forums, most M43 people are calling for just that: a compact rangefinder with PDAF that embodies the M43 spirit. I remember well that when the M43 system was trying to establish itself among professionals, the most frequent criticism was that the camera bodies were too small and uncomfortable to hold for hours during professional sessions. I would also add that you can't judge a book by its cover. So “big” is automatically PRO. Specifically for Panasonic there is also an important technical detail: the Lumix despite always having codecs and video processing at the highest level, they never overheated. Never, ever under any conditions. To this day all other brands are plagued by the problem of overheating. Incredible that the GH4 while filming in 4K had the exact same body as the GH3 filming in 1080p. Increasing performance, Panasonic was the first to introduce a mirrorless camera with a sealed internal fan (S1H). And indeed the S series is huge even for an FF. Long story short: If you want extreme video features, you probably have minimum dimensions to meet. Rumors say that we could have something similar to Fuji X100VI that is the camera of the year. I, too, think that a camera with these features would be an instant hit. The problem is that designing a camera from scratch is a long process, and perhaps a new current camera that is not an evolution of an existing one was designed at least three years ago. I am making this up, if anyone knows more about the time to market of these items please join in the discussion. In recent years the compact camera market has been zeroed out by smartphones, but now there is a trend toward compact rangefinder-style cameras that can be carried around with ease. Also a return to “vintage” and toward low resolution, perhaps fueled by influencers on social media. I was reading that old Fuji compact film cameras are going fast in Tokyo. The few stores that develop film say customers don't want prints but they ask for digital scans and are throwing away the negatives. They are attracted to the vintage, imperfect look of these little cameras. The return of Polaroids in other forms. We live in strange times.

Many years ago I went through this myself. for the housing, if you rinsed everything out and sprayed the vacuum circuit with contact cleaning fluid (isopropyl alcohol) and dried everything again, you can give it a try and turn it on and if it works you don't have to do anything else. Of course, I'm assuming that the flooding is due to your mistake.... for the camera and lens, I would say it is not worth it. Much depends on how the camera was flooded and if the battery left some liquid. When it happened to me, a Panasonic technician gave me precise instructions on how to proceed while specifying that the odds were very low. It sounds like a joke or a recipe for grandma's cake 😄 Soak camera and lens for several hours in distilled water taking care that the camera floods completely. Gently dry as much as possible with compressed air . Leave in a ventilated kitchen oven at about 40 to 50°C overnight. Yes it is possible with the oven at home. Put camera and lens under vacuum with one of those machines and bags and for home vacuum. Send everything to service. Distilled water removes as much salt as possible from circuits. Oven dries and vacuum retards oxidation of electrical circuits. The recipe was perfect but the cake not so much 😑 The lens was junk, and Panasonic offered me a reconditioned lens at a bargain price. The camera body was repairable at an acceptable price but it took three shipments to service before everything worked. In Italy Panasonic and Nikon service is handled by one company and they had offered Panasonic to give me a reconditioned camera body but Panasonic refused and in the end the repairs cost them more than me. Long story short: it's not worth it. You can, however try drying it at home in the oven and try turning it on.

So we are famous in Lembeh 😁

I know people who use it and particularly with an A7RIV. When you change the camera you have to change the electronic circuit that controls the camera at a price usually around 500 euros. IIRC you don't have 100 percent complete camera control but for extra features you have the ability to access the menus in a non-intuitive way. In short you have the advantage of being able to change the camera while keeping the housing but you certainly don't have the immediacy of mechanical controls. A friend of mine had the old version for 15 years changing 3 camera bodies. For the ports I can't tell you the quality of the Easydive ones. The users I know all use old Igloo/Underwave crystal ports that are compatible. But maybe the old Isotta Igloo and Easydive ports had a common system. I am too young. I'll give you other info asap

Hello, everyone, We have received several reports from our members of a probable scam attempt through personal messages from two users: Joeman and Rollyaboat which have been disabled as a preventive measure. The pattern is a classic one: personal message reporting that a wanted item is in the possession of a supposed friend outside the forum. In these and other suspicious cases, please report it through the appropriate function in the message panel via the three dots on the right. This way the moderators are immediately notified of the suspicious post or personal message. Thank you all for the reports.