Pooley

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

Welcome! I'm coming over to Iceland in a couple of weeks and was only looking at Arctic Adventures the other day -strange! Nice instagram page Mike

As a Sony user and Sony lover - in your shoes I'd house the R7! It's a great camera, the 60mm I used to have back in my Canon days was a great lens, and my old canon 100L was superb as well. I now use a WWL-1B and that is superb and versatile - the only reason to stick with the Tokina (budget notwithstanding) is if you really need the full fisheye field of view. I've shot big animals with the WWL-1B and not been disappointed at all. I even did 2 trips to Tiger beach in the same year, once with the Nikon 8-15 with a D500 (yes I've tried too many systems) then with the A1 and WWL and I preferred the latter (although the D500 was also excellent) but if you're into reef scenes then you might want the fisheye. If its fish I'd prefer the WWL. Mike

I got a couple of family members to chip in to get this for a Christmas present - and downloaded it early obviously. Picked a shot where I got pretty much everything wrong, but as an example and my first go with the software I am pretty impressed No other editing done so not supposed to be the final product, but a fantastic starting point in my opinion. I'm pretty proficient with photoshop, but doubt I could have done this so well manually - at least not within 30 minutes! Mike

I think you've got the right idea of the best areas already. From my experience with the manatees around crystal river, its best to do your research well in advance with which operator you go with. Most of them just want to out you near to them for a nice snorkelling experience which is great without a camera, but often in the worst viz for photos. Try and insist on trying to find the in clear water, even if it means they are not at their most active. I asked for a photo specific trip but still ended up in dim green water There are a couple of reputable outfits around Jupiter and it goes down to personal choice whether you're up for baited dives or not. Last time I went it was with Jim Abernethy bit I'm not sure they do dedicated shark dives any more. I have heard good things about Emerald Charters though. If you go baited its normally a bit of time on the sea bed attracting the sharks then rising to around 10-12 metres and drifting around the bait box where you get the Lemons really close I don't know anything about the springs and there are plenty of centres for blue heron and blackwater, I've been happy with Pura Vida. For the birds, without a doubt the best place is Lake blue Cypress for the Ospreys, but you must time it right with the wind coming in from the east otherwise they'll spend a lot of time facing away from you. East wind on a sunny morning is incredible . You also have Stick Marsh close to the lake for the Roseatte Spoonbills. Another favourite place for me is Cape Coral for the burrowing owls where they live amongst the general population and you just walk around the streets and find the owls looking you of their burrows - and that's totally free! Mike

Mark, Whereabouts are you going in the Red Sea? There are a couple of places where fisheye is useful, but unless big reef scenes are your thing, in my experience the WWL / WACP variants should be the best bet. It can be dependant on the exact itinerary though Mike

I was there in September- flew into Mexico City then on to Cabo. they are definitely still on the lookout, I dropped lucky only because the official I had thought my housing was a drone which she wanted to tax. I said it wasn’t a drone then I developed a ‘language issue’ when trying to explain what it was 🤣 she got bored of my stumbling and sent me through - very lucky. certainly put me off planning another Mexico trip no matter how good the diving is

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 😀