hedonist222

I've had my mf-1 for about two years with at least 200 dives - never had an issue. A few friends have also put hundreds on their mf-1s I don't intend to come of as contrarian but I was not even aware the mf-1 had issues and I frequent the usual underwater photography forums .

Between dives, I try to keep it as wet as possible. In a rinse tank if shore diving, or in the shade on the boat under a damp towel. At the resort I use air to blow water. If the dive center does not have a blower, I have a small portable one.

How is it a game changer? And why is it a game changer with her but not you. Thanks.

What a great post. The latter indeed!

That's a sensible approach. I guess my question is, and you provided a suggestion, what is the widest angle I can use with a flat port before I reach limitations that will impact the image.

Hello everyone, I have a Sony A7RV and Nauticam housing. I currently have a 90mm macro lens and Nauticam's corresponding port. What non-dome port options do I have for attaching a wide or slightly wider angle lens? I'm considering a second port, so long as its not a dome because I am trying to keep budget on the lower side as I primarily take macro but would like a reasonable option for non-macro. Thank you

A friend of mine with a Sony A7r3 and a Seafrog housing moved to the Easy Dive housing. He's an avid photographer like us - annual trips with no less than 500 photos. He's said there are so many shortcomings with the ED. Many unmapped buttons. Fewer accessories. And the biggest irk is having to exit out of a menu to review a photo. This entails several "back button pushes" to exit the menu system you are in, then enter another system that lets you review photos. Then exit this system and return to the shooting menu system. Then to add salt to the wound, it takes a few seconds when switching between menus. Everyone knows a few seconds underwater not only feels like an eternity, but costs you shots you could have taken. So much wasted time. There are a few other things that I cannot remember now. But I determined that this is more of a commercial camera than a personal one. Think Deep Dive Dubai or aquariums - where they can spend X amount on a housing then only need to pay a bit to upgrade software. A lot of cost savings but not something for an avid photographer. He is now vehemently looking to move to a Nauticam or Marelux. I'm just pointing out that non-mechanical housings have limits.

How did you get in contact with NusaTrip?

Nauticam SMC-1 for sale. $350 shipped via FedEx.

Hello. I have one. Are you still looking?

Same here. Won't be delivering before 15 November. Was hoping to use one on an upcoming trip.

Thanks for sharing this. Just f/16? Pairing this lens with a diopter means even more forgone DoF. I recall resolution being pretty good up to f/22 on my Canon EF 100 f/2 L.

Yep. Definitely not US dollars. Copied from a Facebook page in a far eastern language (could be Hong Kong or Taiwan dollars).

Although I remain confused at the first point above. Most macro lenses working distance (i.e. the minimum focusing distance to record a 1:1) is always less than 1 meter anyways.

The MFO-1's main function is to cancel the focus distance limitation. Maybe early days and hence the cryptic marketing blurb, but it looks like they've managed to reduce (doubt they can eliminate) the minimum focusing distance. Info from the internet: #81501 MFO-1 (yellow circle) The main features are: 1. The focusing distance can be within 1 meter, eliminating the focusing distance limit of macro lenses (SMC is within 10cm). 2. Improve the overall picture quality. 3. The distance, range and size of photographed objects have increased a lot of possibilities. It is expected to ship at the end of November, priced at $12,000 #nauticam #smc3 #mfo1

I was also going to suggest the Nauticam vacuum button cap. It should really have been tethered to the body. I know its not aesthetically pleasing and Nauticam does groove on function as well as aesthetics.

Those are some nice photographs, Simon.

Thanks humus. Likewise!

Good to have you on here, Edward.

Wow. Now that sounds very interesting. I regard the SMC-1 as very sharp. In fact, on some of my photographs, it's provided a sharper output than the lens itself (with using the diopter). I'm very excited and looking forward. Thanks for this snippet of info, Edward.

Thank you for this helpful input, Wolfgang. You are most correct in that, aside from degradation, there are other more commanding variables. Such as DoF as above. I actually did test the lens from f22 to f16 but I am opting not to rely on it (test results) because my subject was not stationary. It was fast moving a nudibranchi and therefore my area of focus shifted between shots. I will repeat this with a polyp or similar soon.

I recall quality from the Canon 100 f/2.8L began degrading at f/24. I have not yet tested the Sony 90mm yet. Has anyone established this yet?

Thanks @atus! and most definitely likewise!

I found a few photos of me actually raising the camera so it doesn't bang around the dive site. It gets cumbersome after a while. And another of typical day of foraging. 😄

Just yesterday I was doing a shore dive at a sandy bottom site with no coral. The only life there was shrubs, grass, and seaweed. To actually be able to find anything meant getting as close as possible to the finger-high sea grass. With my rig dangling with the length of my lanyards meant I had to hold the camera away from my torso and outwards to my side. This is a photo I found on the internet that depicts what I'm talking about: My system would be dragging through the sand even at the distance from the sea bed in the below photo. Being able to raise it even 10 cm means I can get closer. Incidentally, yesterday's site resembled this one.