humu9679

I would go with standard matte prints matted and framed with non-glare glass frames. If you have money to spare, dual mats are the look I’d go for, and my preference would be for uniform sizes, like 11x14 or 16x20. If the space warrants a different look, consider frameless prints. Start with a calibrated monitor, and print yourself or send your files to a commercial lab / photo printing service. Send files for test printing rather than ordering at one time, as you may not like the results.

I agree with @John Liddiard Add strobes to your TG system, and you’ll see a big difference in your images. You can also shoot video. It’s a very popular system for a reason, and best for fish portraits and macro. You can also add a wet wide angle lens, even the Nauticam WWL-1. You might start with an “air” lens to reclaim the ability to shoot 25mm (which is narrowed underwater without it, and almost equivalent to your Sigma 16mm, mentioned above). This will also allow you to retain the excellent close focusing capabilities of the native camera. Ultimately the decision will be yours, and many of us clearly have our own opinions about what works. Also, several of us have ventured down various photographic rabbit holes and lived to tell the tale - with much smaller bank accounts - which informs our opinions.

Hello Tailwind_marseille. My opinion: primes are fine, but you might reconsider the Sigma 16mm for APS-c. It’s a great topside lens, but you’ll find the angle of view underwater less than ideal for most subjects. Zooms really do add flexibility and using the 16-35mm means that you’re heading down the full-frame rabbit hole which means bigger lenses and more expensive housings. Consider using a kit lens, which tend to be smaller, and add wet wide angle and close-up lenses. This will cover most everything underwater - maybe not as well as dedicated lenses and ports - but it will create a portable kit and you can use it for years. If you find you like fish portraits and nudibranchs, then a dedicated macro is the way to go. Good luck! Craig

That kit is not for the faint of heart!

@bghazzal You can definitely get pretty good deals on the 90 macro. I was all set to pull the trigger on the 100 macro but life interfered. Have you used the dual flip? I think they're ungainly. We keep trying to streamline things but our gear isn't cooperating.

Ben - I’m guessing it will all work out. The alarms are nice if they’re not a bother, but I’ve never had a problem with any Nauticam housings if you take care putting all the bits together. A7s III? I like it.

Aloha and welcome @3scubakids3 !

@danka94 lovely images! I quite liked the whole video.

@Dave_Hicks Thanks for that. Nice frames Dave!

Aloha and welcome @Sabine Templeton !

Aloha and welcome @Chris Martinat !

@kalani Can't go wrong with the Canon R7, but consider the R50, too. It’s compact, relatively inexpensive, and Nauticam’s housing is much cheaper than full frame. As for the A6500, I agree with other posters here that the A6400 is a better camera. If you’re shooting stills primarily, you won’t miss the IBIS. If you shoot video you might want better stabilization than what Sony offers. The R7 has better video specs: e.g., 4k 60p versus 4k 24/30p in the A6400. Any A6xxx camera before the A6600 also has that tiny W series battery, much improved with the A6600 and A6700.

The orange and yellow t-shirts run a bit small. It’s either that or my man boobs are bigger than I thought.

I second @Dave_Hicks . Flexible, relatively inexpensive, and last for years.

I actually quite liked the 12-50mm, though it had its detractors. Nauticam came up with a solution for its “macro,” and I thought the lens was pretty good for fish portraits and the like. I never used it with the WWL-1 though, and I always wished it were wider. I had an EM1 mark II. As for macro, the 60mm should be a consideration, too. It worked well in that funky 12-50 Nauticam port just fine. Two lenses, one port - always a good thing. With a WWL wet lens, you would have wide, medium distance and macro covered. Best, Craig