Pooley

Not necessarily Mark, it's a great site. When I return next year I'l;; be with a non-photographer friend, so will do more dives around the liberty, coral garden, drop off etc and less at places like Seraya, Baturinngit and Germobong. It'll still be great fun with lots pod photos opportunities, just not quite as intense. Time to go back for you I reckon! Mike

In a nutshell, the Nauticam water optics stretch your lens wider than it would normally go, so you're looking at around 130 degrees diagonally. There is still some distortion but less than a fisheye distorts but more than say the 12-24 behind a dome. Image quality is superb. I don't know much about Sipidan but with Socorro you'll be aiming for big animals up close, and I've seen lots of reports that the WACP range work well. Personally I have the WWL-1b on a Sony A1 with the Sony 28-60mm. lens and the best comparison for what you're going for is when. I went to Tiger Beach and it was brilliant for 12 foot Tiger Sharks right up against you. Maybe if you do an image search on Alex Mustards site you'll be able to get an idea with what the water optics can do. In his image search box, type 28.0 and it'll take you to lots of shots with the water optics. Just be careful that some of his very latest shots may be with the FCP rather than a WACP. The fisheye option is great, but you're going to lose the zooming ability unless you start putting a teleconverter behind it. For macros, I have the 90mm and I think its excellent.

From my own experience, the 2 most important aspects are a strong and accurate targeting beam and the ability to control with size of the light beam. I've seen lots of people trying to use home made and sub standard snoots and equally seen their frustration afterwards. this really is one of those times where if you buy cheap you buy twice. Like Tim, I have the retra strobes and LSD and think its a great bit of kit. However, I'm not sure if the focussing light on the YS-D1 will be strong enough for your aiming. If you can afford the backscatter combo then it looks promising. After that its all about how you get the strobe in position. Easiest way is have a willing buddy to hand hold the strobe. After that I think the Wolf method of setting up is good - https://www.uwphotographyguide.com/snoot-mounting-macro Here's a link to some of mine a few weeks ago with the retra LSD - https://www.mikepoolewildlife.co.uk/bali24 A few were lit more traditionally but you can see the snooted ones and see how sometimes the beam needs to be narrower / wider Mike

Mrs P has just crashed her car twice in a month. If anything she needs to earn brownie points from me 😀

Make sure Mrs P doesn't get to hear about this - I got a reserve spot on Alex's boat this autumn and she's not impressed that they can't fit her on! A good itinerary that one, should be a great trip for someone

Cheers for the reply - but you did have me a little confused with the bigger stuff! Mike

A nice variety of shots. Whereabouts did you dive? I've done 2 trips to Tualmben the last 2 years, and will return 2025/26 so am happy with that area. I snorkelled Menjangen this year and will dive there next year, but I'm guessing you were further south - Nusa Penida maybe? Please can you let me know who you dived with (if you were happy with them!) so I can start looking around for the future cheers Mike

Are you currently on full frame or crop? If you're on APS-C with a 60mm then the full frame equivalent for canon would be one of their 100mm macros. If you're currently putting the Nikon 60mm on a full frame, then the only one I can think of is the Sigma 70mm macro but I've never seen any report of it being used underwater

I wasn't going to reply but as it seems to be getting personal... 1. I couldn't care less about easy likes. Never have, never will. 2. I have pointed out benefits in areas you don't like to shoot - but you are so arrogant you don't want to hear it. 3. Where am I saying its the artistic merit that counts? Or are you just talking yet more rubbish? 4. I see the photos you publish, and to be fair, they don't inspire me. De-saturated sharks that have clearly been over processed do not give me any viewing pleasure and look false You really are the most arrogant, unpleasant argumentative bore I have ever had to deal with on wetpixel / waterpixels. I've no doubt your ego will make you reply to this- crack on, I'm out trying to deal with you

Last bit of advice - You clearly want to establish yourself as a knowledgeable person with respect to underwater photography. You are trying on a regular basis to use science to back up your theories. Show us beautiful photos instead. You really, really, need to look and think about how you came across on the internet if you want an audience to respect your thoughts. Just once in a while, try listening to and understanding other peoples opinions and experiences - chances are you will learn something yourself. Look at both sides of a debate without being confrontational, you're sounding like a football fan who cannot see past his own team. The title here is Full Frame bubble Burst. It hasn't, and it likely never will. Maybe you don't feel the need to use it, and that's great- people get fantastic shots with compact cameras - but to not consider a huge portion of the genre and still try and defend your point really doesn't do you any favours. On that point, I think I'm done with this thread, Mike

Massimo, Once again you're trying to use selective points to justify your sensationalism. I use the A1 with WWL-1, EMWL and SMC. AF is better than the D500 for all 3 scenarios, albeit the closest run in for the wide angle. It doesn't matter how much resolution you have if your shot is not in focus. Ansel Adams was spot on in regards of that point. Just to dismiss FF and to keep trying to argue the point to support the thread title is plain silly and when the overall situation is taken into consideration - wildly inaccurate

Super macro isn't niche, and certainly not 5 grand. EMWL, undoubtedly so, Like I said above, you're trying to be sensationalist but unfortunately only talking about a select area of the genre doesn't cut it in the real world. Its not a sign of weakness to acknowledge other peoples opinions and realise there may be more to the discussion than the initial headline

What about all the significant improvements with regards to super macro and using the EMWL? AF is far superior,I used to need to lock focus and rock the camera with my SMC-1 on the D500, where I get a superb hit rate just simply using AF now on the A1. Likewise there are very well noted AF issues with the EMWL that are not present on the A1. It seems more than a little hasty to try and go for a sensational headline when you're not considering both sides of the argument for a huge portion of underwater shooting

If you're happy then great. There is an undeniable cost issue that is a personal matter as to whether its worth it for the individual. However, there are enough real world reviews with open water examples by top underwater shooters around to visibly display that there is significant improvements with the latest kit. I really don't think the likes of Alex Mustard would choose to use sub-standard kit. I don't expect for one moment you to alter your opinion on this - I think there are enough posts here to know you will argue your point to the death - but the fact of the matter is full frame mirrorless is better than previous kit, be it D500, D850 or earlier mirrorless incarnations. The only deciding factor really for amateurs in the finances

I have an A1 and think its fantastic - as do a lot of other people. Doing super macro is far easier than with my old D500 with the noticeable improvements in the AF capabilities The files are easier to work with. There are numerous reported issues using the EMWL on DSLRs with regards to the focussing - not on the A1. Size wise there is very little in it. Yes, there is a real gap for a true reasonably priced fisheye, but I can adapt my old dogma 15mm if I want, and the WWL-1 covers the rest of the area I need. If I had more money I could go with further water contact optics. The D500 was great, and I wouldn't cry if I had to go back to it again, but the A1 is just superior in the field. Can't argue with the finances side of things either. Now, if you think photography is studying test graphs, examining the extreme corners of frames ad infinitum and shooting pool walls, then good for you, but I'm a big fan of seeing real world results, and maybe just ask yourself why the majority of top level pro's who do this thing to put food in the table use full frame.