Chris Ross

OM Systems has announced the OM-1 MkII. It's a evolution rather than revolution it seems and the main upgrade is more RAM to enhance computational photography. They talk about improved AF, C-AF plus tracking, human detection mode and improved subject tracking plus upgraded image stabilisation. It is now branded OM-System rather than Olympus. For UW photgraphy one new item which might be worth trying out is the built-in graduated ND filter function which might help out with split shots - how well it does depends on how they implement the setup I would guess and how quickly it can take the required frames, flash recycle times could be an issue. It also is said to use the same body withonly a change to to mode dial giving it a rubberised coating which may bode well for using the same housing? I'm wondering if part of the motivation releasing a new model 2 years out might have been the need to stop using Olympus branding? An initial review is up online here: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/om-system-om-1-mark-ii-initial-review Also for UW shooters there is a new 9-18mm lens as well, could be a compact rectilinear option, don't see any details on what has changed in it though. The old one wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Guys, it is not the vacuum - pulling more vacuum and diving deeper are exactly the same thing, all that matters is the differential pressure. Slightly less air in the housing doesn't mean a thing. Do you want to do 100 dives without using vacuum to attempt to eliminate it as an issue - that's what would be required. There's no mechanism that vacuum impacts apart from buttons and diving deeper has the same impact. You are assuming that because the shutter works it can't be a button problem _ I would suggest that you should never assume. If you you are going to solve a problem like this you need to systematic about trying to repeat the problem. I would suggest going through and trying each button in turn to see if it stops the flash firing. If the button stops the shutter releasing it's not the problem logically as the shutter works when this issue appears. Once you've done that it is ruled out or you have a potential cause. I agree the contacts look good, but the experience is they are unreliable and I can see why this might be the case. Just to confirm that you routinely test fire before every dive to confirm that the flash fires. You say you do this at home - do you do on the boat? I would suggest developing a routine to test fire strobes before you jump and before you submerge. You said that the board of the UWT trigger was replaced, did you also replace the hotshoe cable with it? Another thing to check - can you twist the hotshoe connector in the hotshoe. I have little mini flashes for my olympus cameras and one of them allowed the connector to twist in the shoe, so it would lose contact sometimes. I marked that one and don't use it in the housing any more. That should of course stop it working till re-inserted but worth checking. I didn't realise Sony used a system like that for hotshoe communication to me that would go on the "Con" list for using in an UW housing. Seems like a problem waiting to happen.

The RAW file is the same it's just closer to ideal if you get it right in camera as the IP program will generally use those settings as a preset to show a starting point. Flash though is different to ambient light and far as I am aware the default for the camera is to assume flash light is 5500K which generally works reasonably well as long as flash light dominates. It is generally better to do your processing in 16 bit as well as it is less likely to pixelate if the adjustments are more extreme. Where manual WB makes a difference is in video it's kind of like getting it very close in camera as each frame is not like a raw frame for many cameras, it's more like a JPEG and the latitude for adjustment is limited compared to what you are used to in raw shooting.

Ideally check the dimension of the 110 port from someone that owns one first it should be about 119-120 from inside of glass to end of lugs.

You might be able to use a 50mm extension with what you have now for 80mm macro, as I understand it the lengths are additive, so 30+32+50 = 112mm. For example the inside of the glass on my N85 macro port 45 is pretty close to 45mm from the flange as measured with a ruler. Luckily with the olympus the 30mm Pany and the Oly 12-40 are both very quick to focus - compared to the 60mm macro I use the most. These days the 12-40 is as close as I get to multi purpose, I'm either macro diving or I'm not.

Yes the impact of the diopters are different when you are not focusing down at 1:1, possibly some focus breathing going on and the diopter works better with longer focal length. But it still won't provide more magnification than with the lens alone. I'm not clear though you said you had vignetting using the CMCs with your current port, are you not getting vignetting on land with your current setup or are you using a different combination here? I have actually played around with the Panasonic 30mm macro on my Olympus setup when I wanted slightly wider view for weedies etc around home, but ended up drifting back to the 12-40 olympus lens, which can achieve 0.3x, as I could achieve 95% of the same results plus had better wide views . The small stuff was just too small for the 30mm for my usage and always somewhere were you couldn't get in close enough with various sponges etc in the way, or the subject was mobile and would leave. I rarely use it these days.

Theoretically, but practically the setpoint is equivalent to about 2m depth and the efficiency of the hand pumps is pretty low so I don't think you can get too much lower is pressure.

Yes, but there is inward pressure on all of the buttons underwater and if one of the clearances is a bit tight it might be enough to activate a button. The fact it worked again in the housing before re-opening it tends to indicate a problem caused by external pressure and you said you had replaced the trigger once, which tends to indicate a problem somewhere other than the trigger. It also possible that the camera is not sitting on the camera plate right and you may sometimes have the camera sitting a little further back. You could try to test it by setting the camera up in the housing and taking shots with each of the buttons on back of the camera pressed in turn and checking to see if the trigger fires each time. This might identify a button to check further. The fact it happens so occasionally is of course going to make finding the cause difficult.

I dived out at Catalina island on a boat organised by Bluewater photo a few years back. As I was flying in, I asked about tanks and weights and it seemed like it was a difficult problem to hire them and they ended up organising one of their staff loan me a tank and weights. That may be because I was dealing with Bluewater rather than a dive shop? The boat I was on did tank fills (incl nitrox) on the boat. The boats seem to go out of San Pedro near Long Beach. The boats are separate operations to the dive shops. I expect if you emailed one of the dive shops in this area they could help you out with what you need to hire and booking onto a boat. On the boat I was on I needed cash to pay for Nitrox (and tips for the crew). If I recall correctly the boat trip included air fills and breakfast/lunch. This shop is closeby to the San Pedro harbour and has trips out to Catalina on its schedule: https://pacificwilderness.com/?page_id=521 I've not used them but they are close to where the boats leave from. I went in August and was lucky to have really nice conditions water varied from 20°C at some sites to 16°C at another.

So when it quits is it out the whole dive? Or does it come back again? Does surfacing fix it, or do you have to open the case? I'm guessing on each occasion it failed that you tested it on the surface first and it stopped when you submerged? My initial thought is perhaps the housing is marginally pressing a button which prevents the flash firing. I would think that it has nothing to do with water - just the pressure. Either that or it is random and you use it underwater much more often than on dry land?

Unfortunately the short working distance means that a wet lens won't help you out. Closeup diopters work by allowing you to focus closer than the lens already focuses so you are losing working distance. You can calculate working distance at min focus from the specifications and the bare lens has about 12mm or working distance at 1:1 - when you add in a port 1:1 is about touching the port glass. Best you can do is get a close fitting port for the lens.

You probably won't find anything at the price of the FM7 in Singapore. It's quite an expensive place. I travel there quite a bit for work but the hotels I use would probably be a bit too pricey for what you want. Likewise food can be expensive, but the hawker centres and food courts can provide great food at reasonable prices even in the tourist areas. You can be in downtown SIngapore in your hotel within a little over an hour from landing and a taxi to Orchard road is around $S30 or so and getting around when you are there via MRT is quite easy. Just be aware there are some taxis that don't take credit cards - the guy at the taxi queue will ask you. You probably don't want to take the MRT from the airport if you have a lot of luggage, they can get quite crowded.

Good to have you here Pavel. welcome onboard.

Welcome aboard Chris, good to have you here.

welcome aboard!

A little bit apples and oranges comparing the 15-30 (f4.5-6.3 IS STM) to other options you mention. It's in the port chart as an option for an APS-C sensor where it gives the full expected range between 18 and 30mm focal length. It's not on the port chart for full frame, but guess that it would work on Full frame but between 28 and 30mm only.

You should be able to avoid this tax when travelling domestically assuming the airport is setup with a domestic arrivals channel where you don't fill out a customs form and don't pass through customs. It's not clear from the airport terminal maps how this works for domestic arrivals as it mentions some international flights arrive at SJD terminal 1 and the map shows customs areas. It seems to me to be a somewhat legitimate tax, but the rules to apply it are being bent, for example classifying a housing as a camera. The arrival card mentions you can bring in two cameras. Then there is also stuff about higher value items on the arrivals card. In theory most countries could apply this to incoming tourists as the vast majority are arriving with goods such as laptops, devices etc that would exceed the duty free import allowance, but they also depart the country with those goods. It is most likely a local official making a name for himself or funding an early retirement scheme. Certainly if you are coming back to your home country with brand new equipment to your home country you would be charged local taxes and duties. If you do get charged taxes on your housing in Mexico you should request that they provide a receipt and include serial numbers as it can only be legitimately be charged once. The other option which might be worthwhile if travelling with particularly valuable equipment is a carnet.

The first question is how well do your ports fit your macro lens? Does the lens come up to within a few mm of the port glass or sit further back? Then how close it is the accessory lens to the port glass? Testing the lenses by screwing them in a good suggestion and this will test if the flip adapter is an issue or not. But you also need to check if the distance inside the port is OK. The other consideration is does the adapter hold the lens parallel to the port? The saga adapters only have a hinge, while the Nauticam adapter has a locking clip to hold the parts together. I seem to recall this being an issue with flip adapters not folding completely flat in the past. The Kraken is a big lump and I suspect you need quiet a sturdy adapter to hold it properly.

The problem is the strobes over powering ambient light and if you put a filter on the lens it reduces both ambient and flash light and you need to boost ISO for ambient and you end up back where you started. Macro is entirely different as you are generally using flash as main light. According to the specs the Z330 ND is 4 stops - so hopefully that is enough for the task.

Welcome onboard Stuart, good to see you here

I found this link for the Godox you mention, seems like the coverage is not great: https://strobist.blogspot.com/2019/04/godox-ad200-amazing-flash-if-you-tweak.html Fixed using the bare bulb reflector system, but housing that would end up being a huge lump. It's been discussed on WP about dome covers probably not actually improving lighting cover. You want to see what sort of coverage it produced in testing. Getting a 100 deg beam would a reasonable target. Possibly it won't be Retra in its light quality??

A handheld rocket blower also works quite well for blowing off excess water: https://www.camerapro.com.au/4980-giottos-large-rocket-air-blower.html

Subal make flash housings for Nikon and Canon. http://www.subal.com/c5c17/Light_Flash/Flash_Housings.aspx I think one of the issues with land flashes is that while they come labelled with impressive guide numbers like 58 or 60 this is fully zoomed in. My Canon 580EXII has a headline guide number of 58 but at 14mm lens coverage the guide number if 15. Zooming into 24mm coverage it is 24 GN which is about the guide number of a Z-240 but with less angular coverage (84° vs 100° without diffuser for INON Z-240). Of course all of this assumes supplied GN are somewhat accurate.

I have used the combination on land - I don't have the port for it to try UW. AF is slightly slower but works fine mostly and image quality seems fine. I shoot at f11 usually. I probably have some reasonable on land samples I could share. I think I recall 1 or 2 WP people mentioning they shoot with it UW, perhaps they will chime in. Here is a sample with the 2.0x: https://www.facebook.com/groups/wetpixeluw/posts/10158868336166017 Some people using the lens on this WP post: https://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?/topic/70464-om-system-90mm-macro-announced/page/4/

This has been discussed before. The Nauticams are great to use but very complex inside so you would need to be very sure of yourself and meticulous. Other housings are much simpler with an array of straight buttons with minimal offsets so it is easier to disassemble and put back together. You need to source a service kit for all of the o-rings and may need to replace corroded shafts and other parts. You should use new springs and e-clips as well. I have seen a number of reports that Nauticam service is expensive but your housing comes back looking like new. As others have said does it need service? My EM-1 MkII housing is still working fine and is 7 years and near 300 dives old. I soak mine and exercise the buttons after every session and dry throughly - I don't let water evaporate on the surface - this avoids water marks. Soaking an exercising buttons is needed to flush salt water out - it won't leave of it's own accord. If salt water is left it will eventually evaporate and become very concentrated and corrosive.