RomiK

9 hours ago, ChipBPhoto said:

Hi @Floris Bennema,  

 

Really good question.  Great news that you haven’t had an issue.  The WWL is a terrific design.  And yes, it is mounted with the bayonet mount.  The only thing to watch is because there is a thin layer of water between the flat port and WWL, it is possible to either get tiny air bubbles or even a pice of sand when entering.  The camera’s autofocus can lock on to it, rather than the subject.  In my experience it is rare, but it has happened.  That’s why it’s strongly recommended to burp the lens once you’re stable in the water.  
 

This is normally not at all an issue.  The only snag is if that rare occurrence happens when you most need it *not* to happen.  That’s why some prefer a dry port to eliminate the possibility.

 

With that said, the WWL is a terrific option and one I enjoy using, especially for lightweight travel. 

 

@Floris Bennema - and here is a good example of what @ChipBPhoto mentioned. This happens in my experience with WWL1 rarely so far but it could and does happen.

11 hours ago, Floris Bennema said:

I don't understand these complaints on WWL-1 bubbles. I use the lens for over 5 years and only experienced bubbles before the bayonet mount came out. Rolling from a boat I keep my camera in front of me so the water flows in rather smoothly and never take the lens off. Or jump, camera up in the air. No issue for me. Do  those who have isuues use the bayonet mount?

.

that's like impossible... for bubbles not to form no matter bayonet or not (I do have bayonet)... the bubbles will show as round spots under certain light conditions - lighter background. Attached pictures are from that one dive I didn't do it (file names show date and time of exposure). The next dive they were gone. And no it's not a dirty sensor 🙂 

Now I do believe that since the bubbles need some affinity to stick that by using some kind of nano coating or shampoo treatment the bubbles sticking could be minimized but I did not do any tests for that. But unless one enters the water really slow the bubbles will form, that's like given. Also in a spray bubbles from divers below... not often but it could

On 10/18/2024 at 8:21 PM, humu9679 said:

Another thing, the process of creating a still image or a video seems quite different to me. "Seeing" a still image or moving images requires different neurons, and to be able to do both, at least for me, is very difficult. Sometimes a still can be taken from video, but too often it makes a meh still image. On the other hand, being able to to envision a still image is probably a good thing for video - good composition, lighting, plus movement.

 

This should be framed and put on the wall of every hybrid shooter. Myself I try to do both photo and video on a single dive and more and more I am finding myself with the idea of dedicated photo and video dives as my hybrid dives produce great pictures, great videos but rarely both... lighting, workflow, mindset, lens choice... all in play

Stick to the dome stick to the dome stick to the dome... corners are unimportant - bubbles are... Just came back from Galapagos banging my head for bringing WWL and not the dome... so much action happening during first seconds of the drop and I can imagine a lot of Orca and whales actions are going to happen from zodiac at snorkel... I found WWL-1 to be important for captures such as fish bowl, wrecks, corrals perhaps but for anything frame centric - not really.

Having said that this whale shark photo is at 28mm - widest - WWL view - and its eyes are - ehm - less sharp than I`d wish but it was cloudy at Darwin combined with 20m depth - not much room for better than F5.6... but I still have had more or less controlled condition if you could call paddling with your foot like mad fearing for life to keep up with the shark 🙈 and I am sensing the Orcas and whales encounters will be more dynamic. 

So I'd bring the dome and also 20-70 F4 for days you want to do close ups.

IF they could squeeze in a realtime AF tracking in video WITH visible tracking point now THAT would be a game changer... other than that we can only ask Santa to bring additional fish animal AF 😂... For photo they COULD bring AF bracketing (for macrophotography). Other than that I am happy with what it has. The HDR video I am able to get out of this gen through custom WB - SLog3 - HLG interpretation on Shinobi with waveform controlled overexposure - PQ no LUT conversion and HLG export in FCPX ... it's pretty awesome.

What do you do when after 6 months your dentist clears you for diving? Book a Galapagos trip with 2 weeks departure time 🤣. 

But OK 🙂 - for fast and flexible (or furious 🙂 there is great saving on Galapagos live aboard Oct 17-24 https://www.zubludiving.com/liveaboard/ecuador/calipso?from=2024-10-01 

And so my wife and I are going. While my better half will have iPhone16Pro in Divevolk housing and one weefine smart 10k video light I am scratching my head what to bring and still travel light.

For sure I am bringing Sony A1 body, Shinobi monitor and Retra strobes.

But then

- video lights? I am thinking useless for big stuff and sharks don't like them anyway

- 16-35 and/or 20-70 in 180mm glass dome? Are splits really important and nice over there?

- or 28-60 and WWL1-B and then kick my head when I start shooting after drop forgetting to clear bubbles? 😂

- is macro really an afterthought in there or are some dives macro friendly?

- if macro is yes what about EMWL130 in that environment?

I remember Socorro and Cocos were all about the big stuff. Macro and video lights were utterly useless. Is Galapagos itinerary the same? Thanks anyone for chiming in!

6 hours ago, Lasongo said:

Also, I don't mean to be rude, but online petitions are unlikely to get any change.  A better option is to write a physical letter to your local Mexican consulate or embassy.  I've sent letters to the Mexican Ambassador to the US and the Mexican Consulate General in Houston.  Here is the mailing address for the Mexican Ambassador to the US:

Ambassador Esteban Moctezuma
Embassy of Mexico
1911 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington D.C., 20006
 

 

 

Great idea. I will entertain embassy in Prague with the help of my friend who runs larger diving travel Operations (he also owns safari boat in Egypt 🙈). Let’s put some pressure on 🤟 

I have created a petition for this. Please join if you support this: https://chng.it/kkpq5MnYSX

37 minutes ago, Johno1530 said:

The Carnet for Mexico only lasts for 6 months not a year, I believe. I have never needed or heart of one until recently on Waterpixels. 

What I meant was that you could use it for a year on a worldwide travel should you choose to travel to other questionable exotic destinations (e.g. recent development in Indonesia - which I think was relaxed a bit)

https://www.londonchamber.co.uk/international-trade/trade-documentation/ata-carnet/ata-carnet-faqs/#:~:text=An ATA Carnet can be,the validity of the document.

37 minutes ago, Johno1530 said:

 

Once I have done Socorro (If I actually decide to go) I will NOT go back to Mexico until they change this rule, but it would appear that the government are happy about tourists not going on diving holidays, which will eventually hit the tour operators and liveaboard operators. 

For sure. The ball is at tour operators hand now as only they could put pressure on somebody inside mexgov to issue clarification on camera accessories. That would put this issue to bed. 

Wow, things move fast in the internet age... this is disgusting development and certainly is putting Mexico cenotes and Socorro off my list until I am ready to add $400 and a hassle and time to my trip... 

I went quickly through ATA Carnet options and although possible it simply puts fun out of a trip. 

Mexico says: https://anam.gob.mx/exportacion-e-importacion-temporal-de-mercancias-mediante-cuadernos-ata-ing/

 basic fees: https://www.atacarnet.com/processing-fees

... and something special for Mexico as always: https://www.atacarnet.com/advisory/Mexico-Special-Considerations

In theory ATA Carnet would solve out world travel for a year for one fee  but in practice dealing with customs on arrival AND departure and various special considerations ... 🤮

21 hours ago, stillviking said:

Hello,

 

Just buying a Macbookpro M3 Pro, I see it has:

• Brightness (nits): 555.8 / 1,551 (HDR)|
• Color Reproduction (DCI-P3): 81.1%
• Accuracy (Delta-E): 0.11

With so low Delta-E, I will still need to calibrate it?

It depends what would you want to calibrate it for. On my MBP M2 (same screen) without any calibration I am getting WYSIWYG on my Canon Pro1000 printer. However - on different LCD screens I see different pictures. And it happened when I was in Canon's showroom to test their ProGraph4200 printer their calibrated monitor attached to it showed horrible picture that I brought only for that printer to print it out exactly as it looked on my MBP... So I would approach the issue of the calibration in relation to the output device you would like to see your MBP processed images on... 🤷‍♂️

21 hours ago, stillviking said:

 

What happens with time is that Delta-E starts increasing, or I'm wrong?

 

Is MacbookPro screen good for photo editing?

 

Cheers!

It's excellent.

On 7/21/2024 at 1:28 PM, Davide DB said:

Hi Roman I am sorry that you had this experience with camera & scooter but its use it's completely different from what you describe.

What you wrote happens for the reasons I wrote above. I assume that before carrying a camera on it, one is completely confident using the scooter. Although at first glance it may seem simple, its safe use is not trivial even in recreational diving. There are even courses to learn how to use it safely.
In addition, there are different types of scooters, and as for camera mounts, there ar different models with different characteristics.

 

 

No Gopros there. On the first photo I'm using a GH4 in Nauticam Housing, 6" dome and Keldan Luna 8 lights. On the second photo, a beloved Nauticam GH2 with two custom lights bigger than HF-1 strobes. Now I have a monitor too.

Me and my friends use the camera (GH5, A7SIII, A6700, A7RIV) with scooter, lights and strobes nearly in all our dives. In the early 2000 we were using huge Amphibico Housings for shoulder mounter Sony camera on Gavin scooters.

I drive the scooter with one finger and he goes just straight. When I leave the hand, it stays just in front of me.

 

From the trash bin (wrong settings) last Sunday, my buddy filming @80m/262ft. 

 

 

 

 

 

For a limitless experience just use a detachable camera mount. The Suex camera mount permit to remove and reattach the camera underwater with a single lever push pull.

 

This short documentary was 100% shot on scooter mounted cameras.

We had no creative constraints in making it.

 

 

I guess it is all about priorities and why would you want to use scooter with camera mounted for video at all. When I tried it my vision was a moving shot, a bypass shot at various angles up to perpendicularly. For these should they last for more than a split second and if you want to have control over framing you really need to control the camera by hand. Otherwise it's a random success nailing the frame and be stable or you just take what you get.

Savalia video - talking about shot technique and result - right around 2:20 mark (for example) shows visible wobble caused by the camera placement and the way it was operated. Ok ish for documentary but not a beauty shot. And it's not the only occasion.  So for the documentary anything will go. But for good and beauty shots - not really. Having the camera far away on the tip of the scoot only exacerbates the issue.

I've tried the (mini)scooter/SonyA1/Retraflashes once and my take from it was:

- need to go really slow otherwise things shake up. UW rig Hydrodynamics not friendly to speed 🙂

- need to operate scooter by left hand and hold the rig using right hand to stabilize the buoyancy issues and control the shot. 

- I used 360deg rotating tripod bases I could do variable angle shots

I'd say the camera placement on the picture above is good for GoPro and small lights for documentary (such as my friends working on 80m U72 submarine wreck down in Croatia last month) and is not good for any creative work

Since I fly to dive I abandoned the idea of taking DPV with me as I have too many things to transport already 🤷‍♂️

I don't quite understand what's the fuzz about this. Granted we arrived to Mexico through Cancun in December 2022 but still the rules haven't change did they? As per regs you can bring 2 cameras, three cellphones, laptop and accessories... 

• Two photographic or video recording cameras; photographic material; three portable cell phone or other wireless networks equipment; a global positioning equipment (gps); an electronic agenda; a portable computer equipment of the so-called laptop, notebook, omnibook or similar; a portable copier or printer; a burner and a portable projector, with its accessories.

https://www.gob.mx/shcp/articulos/lo-que-debes-saber-al-pasar-por-una-aduana-mexicana?idiom=es

or 

https://www.gob.mx/epn/es/articulos/que-mercancia-puedes-ingresar-a-mexico

That customs want to impose their own rules... well that's a play of habit of southernly mentality but as long as one know it's rights and rules one has ammunition towards such creative individuals... Perhaps print the regs in Spanish and have it ready to smack these on their head?

2 hours ago, Oskar - Retra UWT said:

Creating a unique version for 2nd and 3rd generation Retra Flashes would have had only a minor impact on the total length, so we opted for a product compatible with all Retra Flash strobes (except the first generation, which does not support over-the-air firmware updates).

 

The Power Vault increases buoyancy by 100g compared to the 8xAA Booster configuration, maintaining an equal balance of the strobe underwater.

I meant this (picture)... -100g total is good but the distribution is of an essence too. The picture have strobe with empty main body compartment and full booster to mimic Powervault weight distribution. The powervault sticks out even more and physics arm power law applies correspondingly. Not a big deal and definitely not as big as some video lights but still something to keep in mind when arms fully stretched out.

For my gen of strobes (depending on cells dimensions flexibility which you might not have) I would be happy to have slightly less capacity in exchange for compact dimensions. But maybe there is no flexibility on lion cells size so that might not be possible IDK 🤷‍♂️... it's always like what we want vs. what we can get 😑 I am certain retra gen5 will have this inside 🤙

There is a lot of emphasis put on price point which in grand scheme of things .... won't make much difference... The real importance I think is the pack reliability, usability, how fast it charges and so on... Personally I think they should have made two versions for latest and previous gens so they would use that empty space inside the strobes and stick out less. They mill them out of aluminium one by one anyway. This design with this center of gravity will make the strobes quite "ass heavy", in some situations it's gonna tilt the nose up. But at the end it's the company calling the shots and only market will prove them right or wrong, eh? 

I am (was🤣) happy with 8xAA supercharger on my Retra Pro Xs. I carried extra 8xAA and 2x 4-bay chargers. And 4 ports power brick. It is (used to be 🤣) part of battery hygiene to have 8AA batteries in a charger and every other dive or third dive to change one strobe's pack and never had problem with power in 4 dives per day scenario.

Now thinking I could save travel weight and space on two chargers and 16xAA and charge only overnight is quite appealing. Yes it's 🤑🤑🤑 especially since I already have superchargers but still it's only money for added convenience and then there is that YOLO syndrome 🤣.

I've touched on that earlier in this thread - FCP is not a fish eye lens. It's a fish eye distortion element put in front of a rectilinear lens. So the DOF is going to be lower than the pure fisheye. So as such it will offer blend of subject pulling like fish eye lens coupled with subject isolation of rectilinear solution. So I'd say it's just a tool for some - subject oriented - type of imagery which like @Alex_Mustard prefers (who I guess was somewhat involved in its development) but it's not a tool for other type of imagery. Off course one can only debate it's usefulness  and versatility for private arsenal of tools given its cost and mass concerns but for rental circuits - should there be some 🙂 - might be great... And it seems to be excellent tool for it's purpose nevertheless 👏

On 6/10/2024 at 2:41 PM, TimG said:

 

Excellent question! I don't know about the Canon, but the Nikon TCs have a lens element that extends too far beyond the body of the TC for the Tokina to connect. I imagine the Canon might be the same.

Yes, it's the same. The TC optical element protrudes out so it won't fit in.

My thinking is that with tele (macro) lenses the focus plane is much less curvy than with wide angle lenses. And so the effect of closing down the aperture with macro lens will be much less pronounced than that with wide angle.

In another angle the focus plane filling the sensor will be shape of globe with wide angle while just a sliver of it with macro. And therefore the effect of aperture relative to relative size of DOF will be limited.

@Alex_Mustard thanks for pointing at your FCP images 🙏 Would you be able to post test shots showing distortions at various zoom levels? I am sure there must be some 🙂. I am impressed with sharpness @Sergio images shown at full res at the focal level and I am not too concerned about overall DOF. So I may succumb to YOLO syndrome 😂. Although I wonder whether the whole new system of Canon  R7 coupled with 8-15 wouldn’t provide similar results at about the same price to me 😂 (already have 8-15)

10 hours ago, DreiFish said:

Thank you Sergio -- this is helpful. In the full size images, it does appear that the first one the focus is somewhere on the diver or the gorgonians in the background not lit by the flash. It's really hard to say much about the sharpness from this image because the subject in focus is both unlit and far in the background, so normal water diffraction robs some of the expected sharpness.

 

Second image, (parts of) the foreground coral are reasonably sharp. But definitely depth of field is limited, as even the front part of that coral (in front of the point of focus) is blurry. So maybe field of acceptable focus is ~10-20cm in depth?

 

EXIF data shows this shot as F13, 1/100s at 29.5mm focal length. So this is basically at the widest end of the zoom range. If depth of field is so limited at such a wide field of view.. then yes, the FCP acts very differently than a traditional fisheye lens. It has a much narrower zone of acceptable focus. It's going to be basically impossible to keep an entire scene (foreground and background) in focus. 

So I am (just thinking out loud, not that I would have anything to back it up with) that unlike  fisheye lens that is built to project reality on the sensor in a certain way which by nature brings large DOF the FCP compresses the virtual image in a fisheye like manner but this image is further interpreted by rectilinear lens (and not very good at that - kit lens) with its own corrections and then projected onto the sensor which may result in shallower DOF?

first image is from Oly EM1II with 8mm fisheye I was testing for friend of mine and the other three are WWL-1B at widest all with lower aperture values. The Oly was right at the anemone.

4 hours ago, fruehaufsteher2 said:

Thank you, very helpful!

As sharp as I expected for mine.

So it seems at lower aperture numbers FCP offers some kind of separation - first image the diver in the background not sharp, the gorgonias in the middle tack sharp and the foreground blurry... But where it's sharp it's tack sharp! 👍 Very dangerous situtation here! 🤑🤑🤣

9 minutes ago, Andrej Oblak said:

 

 

I used AOI UWL-09 which was pretty heavy. Dropping it was my biggest fear, closely followed by accidentally cross threading it when reattaching it back to the port. Thankfully neither of these happened, but I must admit that my life is easier now when I don't have to do that anymore 🙂 In my opinion a bayonet mount is a must if you use wet lenses.

 

… and luckily WWL-1B is a bayonet only so now there is no excuse … 😂