Chris Ross

😂, looking around a bit some sites suggested it might get onto websites through ads- anyway just be careful, I would guess the site is fine as long as you don't follow the instructions.

It comes up after you click around a few different links, not straight away, I just tried again and it seems to come up when I click on the generic excitation filters box. this is what I get:

had a look at the website and there is a suspicious verify you are human page that comes up asking to open a run dialog box and paste in a command the site placed into the clipboard. seems like this is malware of some sort. Needless to say I didn't run the command as asked.

Are you asking how much lift you could design into a float designed for a Macro port 65? If you assume an ID of 75mm and 20mm wide annulus so an OD of 115mm, the port is about 75mm long this gives a displacement of 450 cm3, so the buoyancy would be in the order of 450 minus the weight of the float collar in grams. the straight wall part of the port is only 60mm long and if the float is this long it would displace 360 cm3 so in this case the buoyancy would be 360- float collar weight in grams. A 20mm wide annulus might be a bit much though, with my housing it would extend beyond the housing base so the housing would rest on the float collar rather than the base of the housing.

Saw a pre-order ad today price was $AUD 5900 it's $US3900 at BHPhoto.

Thanks, my OM-1 weighed in at 610 gr with battery and two cards, so seems my scale is close to right and agrees with data. It does prove one thing though that a m43 system is significantly lighter than even Sony full frame - the OM-1 system is only 60% of the weight of the Sony. So the camera size and weight doesn't have as much influence as you might think, the weight of lenses and accessories does add up.

It's 114mm dia x 300mm long so it would possibly need the Nauticam N200 system and the min focus distance is 600mm so probably won't play well with domes. Designed for super 35 but built in convertor for full frame, price - $35,000.

Are these Nauticam housings? I just stuck my Nauticam OM-1 housing on the scale with 60mm macro port and 45° viewfinder installed and it's weight was 2.9 kg. No camera inside. Similarly my OM-1 bare camera with battery is 610 gr on my scale. Are those weights for bare camera or do they include lenses etc?

On your first slug, I think it's not a nudi, I can see no gills, perhaps a Sarcoglossa sp. (sap sucking slugs) possibly a Thuridilla sp. which seems to include a lot of colourful species?

It's not so much the cameras but the lenses - compare an Olympus 60mm macro with a Canon RF100mm macro. 185 grams vs 730 grams, 82 x 56mm vs 149 x 82mm and less than half the price. Or the Olympus 12-40 f2.8 vs the Canon 24-70 f2.8 - 382 grams vs 900 grams and the Olympus is 40% of the price. The olympus lenses also generally focus closer with more magnification (apart from macro lenses) and will work in smaller domes. On the macro front both are 1:1, however with the 2x crop factor a 1:1 lens fills the frame with a subject half the size on Olympus, so less need for diopters.

Have to say I agree.

OM systems has been pretty good at issuing firmware updates for their cameras, bringing new features to the body. A lot of new features rely on more powerful processors and are only available on the latest models. They are also bring features from top line models down to models like the OM-3 fairly quickly.

welcome aboard, good to have another Sydney diver join up!

The biggest issue for Fuji is the limited lens lineup I think with only a handful suitable to use underwater. I really hope m43 keeps going, the small lenses are great, relatively inexpensive and very easy to travel with and it seems to be the camera of choice for macro shooting on land, I follow quite a few people using them macro shooting of bugs etc.

There's also posts on the forum about using the Sony 2x with the 8-15 along with the metabones adapter on the forum. This gives full diagonal fisheye through to about the equivalent of a 14mm lens, very flexible arrangement. I have one adapted to an OM-1 and it provides great flexibility and the optics are excellent. With this setup you have camera - Sony 2x - Metabones - lens. Do you print your own gears or do you get someone to print them for you? One of our forum members, @Gudge has printed zoom gears for me, he's based in Perth if you need someone to print them. He may have a design already.

Nuidbranch names do change quite often and also it is best to use the scientific name when searching as the common name can be shared by a number of species. Google search the scientific name to see if what comes up matches your pic.

not certain about it and the OM-3 certainly seems to tout the subject recognition.

I have good experience with the OM-1, it locks on pretty well, the only thing I notice is that it sometimes won't focus on a close subject as it can see the background through it, but dealing with that becomes instinctive. I can't compare to the OM-5II/3 as I haven't used them but they are said to share the OM-1 AF.

No unfortunately don't have one.

nice shots, my MFO arrives soon, agree the shore dive exits can get a little rough at times. Didn't know you were in town, are you visiting or based here?

There was a thread on here specifically recommending against stacking the MFO-1 and any of the Nauticam close up lenses as they both have the air-water interfaces and would double correct. The Fantasea lens won't have that correction, though it is quite a low power lens compared to the CMC-1 and 2 lenses. If the MFO-1 has a front thread you could try stacking and see if you like the results seeing as you already have the lens. You could even try it in a tub shooting a flat target to see what the quality was like.

There are lots of position on the dial on your UWT trigger as there are lots of ways to do TTL and each camera manufacturer has it's own way of doing it and requires a different trigger board and each strobe manufacturer has adopted different timing etc for their TTL as there are a number of ways to do this and each style of TTL has its own position on the dial.. Pavel had a post on this a while back. This is just on getting TTL to work before worrying about implementing HSS. This is made more difficult as in general it is done of fibre optics and with the possible exception of Olympus RC1 there is no dedicated handshake like you would get with a Nikon camera communicating to a Nikon strobe. Add to this, the TTL protocols are reverse engineered to work over fibre optics. Your specific question I think is best answered by Pavel, I would send him a PM. On your question, a black band means it is not syncing properly, there could be any number of reasons for this. If you look at the instructions for the latest current UWT trigger here: Google Docs#11071-HSS-SONY-A7-June2024.pdf you will see that Marelux has a separate dial position including HSS, so it appears it uses different protocols. I would suggest that given you can use up to 1/400 it would seem, that this is better than your camera's 1/160 and just work within that limitation. Controlling output in HSS can be done by changing shutter speed, aperture and ISO. so to get your exposure right you can juggle all three of these. As you increase shutter speed the exposure from HSS will reduce as it acts like a continuous light source. Probably the best way to proceed is to start with your current settings and adjust the shutter speed up and ISO up to keep the background exposure constant and do some test shots.

Davide has given you some good basic pointers to get started, while I'm no video shooter, I've picked up a few things, playing with a little footage. Firstly the amount of adjustment you can make tends to be more limited than what you might be used to on stills, depending on what codec you used. Second getting close on white balance out of camera is going to make your life easier, smaller shifts are easier to deal with and you are less likely to get "lost" along the way and end up with a messy looking clip.

Yeah I saw that, a nice solution, I'm thinking for people who aren't as comfortable spot welding battery packs together and if they have the space installing the same batteries in a holder that would be a good solution as you probably don't need any balancing for the batteries as you can pull them out and charge them in a dedicated 18350 charger, so you don't have to be concerned about getting them all fully charged.

Congratulations Ross, a great image.