Pooley

If you fancy using the 16-35mm that you already own, then the last thing you need to be concerned about in this particular scenario is soft corners - you'll be shooting open sea blue backgrounds with no corner detail. I have a WWL-1b and last year did a dolphin snorkelling trip - in and out of small boats quickly, no time to burp and never had a problem I'd certainly have the opposite opinion to Chris though, I can't see a 2x converter behind a zoom lens and a port matching the IQ of a wet lens Mike

I did similar to you a few months ago. I had an older MacBook Air, which was used for travel, downloading onto an external SSD and maybe half edit some shots for fun whilst away, but serious processing done at home I went for a MacBook Pro this time due to the extra port meaning I can charge, download and use the external SSD all at the same time I went for 512 and have downloaded PS, LR and photo mechanic which takes up about 110GB of hard drive on the MacBook, so could probably have gone for the 256 and got away with it. Just a few figures for you to think over Mike

Hi Fred, I have one I no longer use. Near mint condition, great port but I moved to Sony mirrorless. I lost the neoprene cover but it will come with the rear cover and the o-ring and a nauticam pouch. I'll pack the lens to avoid any scratches in shipping. New in the Uk is £960 (1111.76 euros), how about 500 euros plus postage? Let me know if you're interested and I'll take some photos I used it with my Nikon 8-15, it was great. If you agree that price I'll throw in an 8-15 Nauticam zoom gear worth 243 euro for free as well. Alex at uwvisions.com sell the port cover for £36 (41.60 euros) if you want one Mike

I agree totally that prices everywhere are getting out of hand - but we must always remind ourselves that we no longer pay for film either

Thanks for the comments gents

Thanks both. I'm glad you both like that one because its probably my favourite, but I think sometimes people can be biased for other reasons, such as this one was really technically difficult due to the size, and using the SMC with a moving subject rather than sometimes being a bit more objective about our shots Mike

I'm lucky to have a Sony A1 and have no plans to change it, but if I did then for underwater only work, I would now seriously consider M43. I got my A1 for topside wildlife work as, at the time, it was far superior to anything else out there in regards of AF and the 'zebras' feature. However, once underwater, these become a lot less important. The only significant difference I have found between the Sony and my previous, excellent, Nikon D500 is for super macro once the SMC-1 is attached as with the Nikon I found the focussing struggled and I often had to 'rock' the housing back and forth, whereas with the Sony it works much better. The other big advantage I find is being able to view an image in the viewfinder when shooting macro as it limits movement especially important on muck dives, and nowadays as long as you get a recent camera I don't think you'll fins using an electric viewfinder too difficult. I certainly don't. There is the odd issue with sunbelts and wide angle but generally I prefer it If I were to sell all my topside gear I'd be tempted to go M43 due to the weight as all my underwater photography is travel based. I believe M43 to be good enough IQ wise if shot well Mike

Thankyou Sony A1 and 90mm in a nauticam housing Nauticam SMC-1 Two retra strobes, no snoots on these as I wanted a bit more background interest Mike

Had a little success with the Frogfish this year, all comments and critique welcomed Mike

Thanks Rich, it is appreciated Mike

If you're doing a wreck based itinerary I'm guessing its one of the more northern routes? If so I wouldn't expect much in the way of shark action Hope its a good trip Mike

Hi, I suppose the main question between the 14-30 and the fisheye is will the fisheye distortion bother you for the wrecks? Obviously, the fisheye will get you closer so potentially better IQ with the less water to shoot through but if you really don't want that bendy look then you're going to have to go with the 14-30 I know we have this constant battle with weight allowances on airlines but the weight of a small wide angle lens should be manageable regardless, I often put things like that in my pockets until I'm through security, so if you're taking the big dome I'd also take both lenses The Red Sea does have macro stuff, but not to the same level as macro oriented areas - there are some nudibranch, gobies, blennies etc but I find that unless you're at a specific site with specific targets then its more of a 'fishy' place so depending on your style, the 60mm might get more use than the 100mm I'm not sure I'd bother taking the 24-70, it would easily be my last lens out of that lineup to take Mike