Everything posted by vkalia
-
Upgrading my camera - R7 vs A6700: a few specific questions
I have become quite indifferent to brands these days. After ages of shooting Canon, i now have Canon for wildlife, Fuji for street/travel and Olympus underwater. That OCD streak i mentioned is very happy when each set of gear has its own application. At the same time, while i am a massive gear junkie, that doesnt apply to cameras anymore (carbon bicycle goodies, OTOH….). This whole upgrade is being driven by a desire to add high quality video making skills to the gear. Partly because i am interested in learning more about this aspect, and partly to support a new diving-related venture I have ongoing after selling my dive center. Noted about the Canon RF 100 - I didn’t know that was the case. After getting a 50mm with my Canon system, I rarely used my 100mm except on specific macro dives (the 50mm + a wet lens adapter was good enough for most shooting). I expect that to be the case here a well - but when I DO use the 100mm, i will want the most magnification possible. So this is really good to know - thank you! Re your statement that “adapted isnt the same as native” - in what sense is that? Slower AF? Loss of IQ? Anything i need to be concerned about with the 10-17? Right now, it’s a toss-up. I need to get off my ass and go to a store and try out the Sony in-hand as well. I am doing the Raja to Ambon crossing in late October and wouldn’t mind having the new kit by then.
-
Upgrading my camera - R7 vs A6700: a few specific questions
Thanks - this resolves one main question I had. This will be the main lens I use and getting this right is key. I assume the moment i go with an EF lens, I will need a N85-N120mm adapter, right?
-
Upgrading my camera - R7 vs A6700: a few specific questions
Good point! As it turns out, I am not fussed about the arms, etc. Those go in my checkin baggage. I am mainly concerned about my carry-on. Lots of places in Asia are mainly served by budget airlines, and they can be very strict with carry-on weight sometimes. Weirdly, the same arms that i used to use with my Canon DSLC/Aquatica rig work on my Nauticam - an old set of Stix arms and floats back from when they were released. 🙂
-
Upgrading my camera - R7 vs A6700: a few specific questions
Hello all - After 6 years of shooting with an Olympus OMD-EM-ABCDEFwhatever, i am considering upgrading my system. One, to get a few more megapixels for cropping (I shoot primarily 8mm fisheye) and second, to be able to shoot better video (mainly for our business’s promo/social media). I was initially considering the GH7, but am also considering some alternatives. The R7 allows me for a very smooth (and relatively inexpensive) upgrade path - i already have one R7 body i use for wildlife, and i have 50mm and 100mm macro lenses in the EF mount already (and i think i have a non-flooded Tokina 10-17 as well). I have used those lenses for years back when i shot Canon/Aquatica, and am pretty happy with them. The second option is the Sony A6700. The main reason for getting this would be the slightly better eye-tracking for fast moving shots, and also the fact that it uses the N85 port system (although i will need to get a larger N120 port to fit the 10-17). The compact body is a big plus for travel, as well. And my OCD is happier with the idea of a separate camera for underwater and a separate one for land (even if i were to go with the R7, I’d probably buy a second body to dedicate tot he housing - so there isnt really a savings there). I had a few specific questions about these cameras: 1). I am assuming the Tokina 10-17 would work with the A6700 in a Nauticam housing? There is a port chart for the R7 but nothing for this lens with the A6700. 2). Does anyone know if i Nauticam’s port system allows use of EF mount macro lenses with the Sony - specifically a Sigma 50mm macro and the Canon 105mm macro? Their port chart has no mention of this. Not needing to buy more lenses is always nice 3). For those who have used either of these cameras, any usability quirks such as heinously low battery life, AF issues underwater, problems in shooting 4K60 video, etc? I am not going full frame. I dont see the value (i realize others disagree and that’s fine). I plan to shoot off some questions to Nauticam later as well, but figured i might as well try here first, as some of the real-world experience here may help me narrow my choices. TIA!
-
Working the subject: focusing on the artistic aspect of underwater photography
Thanks for that thoughtful response, @Luko. A few comments of my own in no special order: - Re the use of the term “artistic” - you are correct, it does come across as fairly pretentious. I was using it as a shorthand to denote an image where the appeal is not documentary in nature (as in, “here is a fish” or “here is a fish doing something interesting”) but where the composition, lighting, etc come together to create an image whose impact is greater than just the literal recording of the subject. Pretentious or not, elevating something relatively mundane into something that has an emotional impact on the viewer is art, atleast to me (although this defending this definition is not a hill i will die on 🙂) - Absolutely agreed re geometry and composition. Too many wildlife photographers - myself included - get so excited by what they are shooting that they forget the “photography” part of “wildlife photography”: ie, the images still need to be designed/composed, and there is often a ‘decisive moment’ that needs to be captured. Speaking for myself, when it comes to megafauna or really cool stuff, i get so excited by what i am seeing that my attention to those details diminishes. OTOH, on days when there isnt a lot of action happening, that’s when I am able to slow down and look closely at interesting photo ops - Speaking of “looking” and “art”, even as a staunch wildlife/nature person, I have to say that the creative requirements of street photography is the highest. Taking the most banal of subjects (people going about their daily life) and making into a compelling visual image requires immense skill. And i absolutely agree with you about looking at the work of accomplished photographers is a great way to develop the art of seeing. - There’s always been a bit of debate about quality vs quantity when shooting. I agree with you - ideally, one should be able to get everything right in terms of composition and then take the shot. Repeated shooting is a bit of a crutch. Certainly, “spray and pray” is not an effective way to take good photos. But there is merit to an approach that is in the middle - think about your composition, take a shoot, review and see what can be made better, and repeat. Over time, as the lessons from these review/repeat sessions sink in, the number of poor shots one takes reduces. There are a lot of shots i dont even bother taking anymore nowadays, because i know the results will be mediocre or worse. Cheers!
-
Working the subject: focusing on the artistic aspect of underwater photography
Ha, funnily enough, i am also just starting to try out videography. Just with a GoPro and video lights mounted on top of my housing, but it’s been an interesting - and fun - experience. One thing i have noticed is that i find it very hard to do both. When i try to get both photos and videos on the same dive, I end up with mediocre shots on both sides (well, for the latter, it is graded on a curve: my videography isnt any great shakes anyway, so it would be mediocre regardless).
-
Working the subject: focusing on the artistic aspect of underwater photography
PS - in the interest of sharing our images and creative vision, perhaps we can have regular theme-based topics and people can share their photos related to that theme?
-
Working the subject: focusing on the artistic aspect of underwater photography
Thank you all for the overwhelming response. I wasn’t exaggerating when i said that i dont have much in the way of natural creative talent and it is all learned. The biggest watershed moment for me was indeed understanding the difference between “making” an image vs taking one, as @humu9679 said. “Making” implies you can work at it, instead of just seeing something magical. And yes, digital certainly has helped there. For all that people used to make fun of chimping, it was a great way to review shots, get instant feedback and improve. Atleast for me. And not having to worry about being limited to 24 photos a dive certainly is a big plus! 🙂 One thing that has helped me a lot if actually getting into street photography - it’s shaken me a little out of my usual way of looking at a scene by forcing me to look for details and find something interesting in the mundane. I am not particularly good at it, but find the process refreshing. Would love to hear from others about how they approach their picture taking as well - including your article on neutral space, @TimG. Cheers!
-
Divers in the image: Underwater Modelling
Nice! I have a system of signals with my wife already, but some of the tips here are very handy. Thank you.
-
Working the subject: focusing on the artistic aspect of underwater photography
Yeah, it’s a challenge for sure. Most of the time, even with my wife hanging around and modeling for me, i dont get as much time on a subject as i would prefer. Occasionally, if the subject does warrant it, i will find a way to make the time - either go back to the dive site and/or tell the dive guide that i am going to be planted just here and will see them later.
-
Working the subject: focusing on the artistic aspect of underwater photography
While I am mostly a wildlife/nature photographer, one of the most interesting books on photography that I have read in a very long time is "Magnum Contacts Sheets" - link below (and no, I don't get a commission if you buy it 🙂) https://www.amazon.com/Magnum-Contact-Sheets-Kristen-Lubben/dp/0500292914 This book shows the contact sheets of the photos taken by various Magnum photographers in trying to get their shot. It provides an absolutely fascinating insight into the mindset and creative process followed by some of the best photographers in the world. One of the biggest take-aways for me was the degree to which these photographers "work" the subject, in terms of exhausting various angles, perspectives and compositions. It took a lot of waiting to get the fusiliers aligned just right While this may not be news to some of the old hands here at Wet/Waterpixels, this is something I have rarely seen divers do in the real world, especially those new to underwater photography. Regardless of whether they are carrying a Go Pro, a TGx or a housed system, most photographers I see will swim up to a subject, spend a few seconds composing the image and adjusting their lights, take the shot and then swim off to the next subject. While this may be good for getting clean documentary shots of the subject, the results are generally lacking a little in artistic value. Yes, I did say "artistic value". As the art of underwater photography evolves, well-exposed, sharp photographs of various marine life (documentation) have become pretty much common-place. So how does a photographer evolve his/her images to make them stand out? The next step up from simple documentation is showing behaviour/action - and while this requires the photographer to be alert and technically proficient, there isn't necessarily a lot of creative input here either: the subject does the heavy lifting in terms of making the image. There wasn't much creative input into this image other than the choice of angles - replace the tiger shark with a less interesting fish and this photo would not be very interesting The highest level of photography (IMO) involves creating images where it is the design and composition that makes the image stand out - not merely "look, here is a cool subject". In wildlife, for example, it is much harder to take a great image of an antelope than a lion - similarly, it is much harder to take a "wow" shot of a coral head or some reef fish underwater than a whale shark or manta. You have to spend time thinking about what to include and exclude in the image, how to compose the frame, how to light it, etc. etc. When it comes to artistic design, your first shot is unlikely to be your best shot - atleast not consistently or unless your name starts with "Henri" and ends with "Cartier-Bresson". It takes time to work through the various compositional aspects in order to find the best image - ie, you need to work the subject. If you do, you can be rewarded with images that go well beyond the obvious. I'd like to illustrate what I mean with an example of how I went about taking one of the shots I really like. To set expectations, I have the natural creative talent of a brick and have to take a very methodical approach to taking images. So this process may seem a little plodding to the creative geniuses out there. For the rest of us, perhaps it may be helpful. This was a coral head I came across on a dive during a trip to Raja Ampat: I found the glass fish sheltering under the coral to be quite interesting and got into position, angled my strobes, set the exposure and fired off a shot, resulting in this: Ok, it's a shot showing the coral and the fish. But there really isn't much else to redeem it. It's lacking colour and pop, and there really is no unifying theme to the image other than "here's a bunch of stuff". And most that stuff is adding nothing to the image (and would not, regardless of how great the corner sharpness was 😜). So I decided to get a little closer and see what I got. It took around 10-15 shots from various angles before I found something that looked promising: Ok, now the image has a little more pop and there are no extraneous elements. But it still seems a little haphazard. Hmm, maybe having the glass fish appear more synchronised would help? This led to a few more shots (well, 60+, actually) trying to get the pesky fish to be aligned the way I wanted. Some of them: There were quite a few other variants of the above, with the fish facing one way or another. All were pretty nice but from a design element, there was something lacking - these images were still not giving me a sense or scale of being on an amazing reef in Raja Ampat. While nicer than the earlier images, these were still simple "look, here's some fish" images. So I decided to go a little wider to see if that would help capture the essence of the underwater world a little better. Ok, now this felt better. The blue water on the other side of the coral balanced the glassfish a little more, and gave a greater sense of the reef, and I was quite pleased with the image. But then I started thinking about how all the visual elements were only on one side of the coral whereas the blue water was completely lacking in any point of interest. Some more shooting and gesturing to my dive guide resulted in this: Bonus points to the coral grouper for a serendipitous appearance This (to my eyes, at least) felt like the best photo of the bunch - a good 100+ exposures after the initial image. I could have stopped after the first few images, I could have stopped after 20-30 images but by spending 30+ minutes in this one location, I found a photo that truly appealed to me. Is it perfect? Of course not. There is perspective distortion with the diver that could have been mitigated by having the diver move away from the edges. I'd have also have liked him to be holding a torch. That's a testimony to the fact that despite the time I spent, I could have always worked the subject more. So what's the takeaway here? Pretty simple: too many divers spend their entire dive swimming around, taking a couple of photos here and a couple of photos there. That's perfectly fine when you are starting out and is a good way to hone your technical skills and build a good foundation of documentary images and also action photos. But as your skills evolve, a good way to improve the quality of your images is by becoming more selective. Try to get a few really great shots as opposed to a large number of average ones. And in order to achieve this, shoot fewer subjects - but the subjects that you do shoot, shoot them really well. By that, I don't mean just blindly fire away and hope for the best. Instead, take a deliberate approach to positioning yourself, your perspective and exposure/lighting. Think about different ways you can compose the image. Then review the results, decide what could improve and repeat. Starting thinking like a photographer who happens to be on scuba - as opposed to a scuba diver who has a camera. Sure, this isn't always easy to do: unless you have your own private guide or are diving with a group of photographers, you rarely have the ability to spend as much time as you prefer on a subject. But if your goal is take the best possible images, you will have to find a workaround to that. Most dive centres are generally very receptive to (and slightly dread!) underwater photographers, and are willing to work with them in terms of guides, groups, etc. Make that extra effort and you will find the quality of your images improves significantly. Footnote: the series of images above is not a statement about how awesome the final image is. I like it a lot (and I shoot to please myself), but I have photographer friends who aren't that impressed by it (which is perfectly fine). The goal is to illustrate the approach to working a scene, and hopefully, this sequence illustrates it well. Sometimes, no matter how much you try, the animals don't cooperate. I spent a lot of time working through various compositions till I found one that appealed to me - all it needed was an appropriate subject swimming through at the right location. Despite waiting for almost 30 minutes, I didnt have any luck better than this.
-
The 14mm image thread
Thanks for those images, @DreiFish. I am glad to see that you can get a relatively large FOV with that focal length. Maybe it is just a matter of perception after coming from the FE, but composing with the 7-14 always felt compressed - looking at your photos, that’s clearly just a matter of getting used to a different focal length. As for corner sharpness - never saw an image which made me think “this would look better if corner sharpness was better”, so that’s a non-issue for me. And your wreck photos only reinforced that - excellent images, all, and never once did my eye stray to the corners to check. 🙂 PS: Love the shot of the people jumping off the boat, especially the goldie leaping out. My golden retriever loves water and will wade into seas, ponds, puddles, etc. but she refuses to jump into water.
-
Bangka/Lembeh 2024
Fantastic images - especially enjoyed reading about the creative process behind making those shots!
-
CFWA with the MWL
Nice! The snooted arrow crab definitely looks great - my favorite is the school under the jetty though. Absolutely *love* that image.
-
The 14mm image thread
I mostly shoot wide angle with a fisheye (Tokina 10-17 for over a decade, and Olympus 8mm for the past 6 years). The Tokina replaced a Sigma 10-20 and i havent looked back since. So from a creativity point of view, “seeing” with a fisheye lens is natural for me and I really like the results I get with it. I recently got a Panasonic 7-14mm lens from a fellow member for an upcoming trip to Egypt for photographing sharks - I made the purchase knowing this was not going to be a lens i would use that much, and that there would be learning curve with getting used to the reduced FOV, but I am kinda surprised by how steep that curve is! I took it out for a test spin recently, to a site I know really well, and didn’t get even a single keeper. That FOV simply isnt “natural” for me. Can i request people to post some of their shots here? Preferably reef shots - big fish shots are somewhat obvious. I know there is a wealth of images online, but it would be helpful to have a bunch in a single place and would help me “see” better how other are composing with this lens. TIA!
-
Backscatter In-Water Strobe Beam Testing
Fair point, and my apologies if i came across as being dismissive. That was not my intent. I do find the content very educational as well (although it does boost my GAS significantly and make me feel that without that one additional bit of kit, i wont be able to take a photo worth a damn! 🙂) PS: thanks for the kind words about the image
-
Backscatter In-Water Strobe Beam Testing
This ^^^ I’ve been using Inon strobes since 2005 - except for a brief (and regrettable dalliance with Sea&Sea in 2019 that i would much rather forget), and recently switched to Supe D-Pros. After a point, I think all strobes have sufficient power - even the Inons were bright enough to let me get good starbursts, etc in shots like this: I did recently switch to Supe D-Pros because their battery life is fantastic (being able to go a couple of days of shooting without needing to recharge is aces in my book), their significantly wider beam coverage and the fast re-charge. I dont think i have ever gone above 60-70% on power there (and rarely have i used 100% even on the Inons), TBH, so i am not sure what more power would get me - it certainly wouldn’t let me shoot stuff further away. I have been following this thread with interest (because i like learning about the technicalities of gear) but am also a little perplexed about things that don’t really matter much in the real world (eg, minor differences in center vs peripheral brightness). It’s certainly useful to know these things and i appreciate the rigor that is going into the analysis - but does this really help with decision making on a buy/no-buy decision?
- Fusilier in whip coral
-
Help! Water in housing!
I can’t speak for your housing but i have gotten a few drops into mine by not being carefully about ensuring that the housing was fully dry before i opened it. From what you describe, that is *likely* the case here, but you may want to test by submerging the housing (sans camera) in a rinse tank for a while to be safe. As for how to dry it: If you are in Egypt now, leave it out in the open in the shade. Should dry pretty fast. Or see if the center has a powered blower that you can use to blast the moisture off too. Depending on where the moisture is, you can also open and close the housing in a way that water doesnt go in (I have done it a couple of times when i needed to change a battery and didnt have the ability to dry the housing entirely. It helps to have a buddy assist with this). Good luck!
-
Batfish in space
-
Panasonic Lumix GH7
My theory is that a more expensive camera feels disgusted when placed in a cheap housing - and so to ensure smooth functioning, housing manufacturers price their housings proportionally to the camera that goes in them. That’s the only reason i can think for such a big gap between various housings which require (more or less) the same amount of work to make. 🙂
-
Catastrophic housing flood this week.
I’ve flooded my Aquatica 3 times - each time it was my fault and each time the camera was toast (although once i managed to save my lens by doing a faster-than-recommended ascent). The last time, i had a lovely manta sighting 15 min into the dive with a flooded camera. Stupid manta. Who wanted to photograph it anyway?
-
Big Animal Expedition in La Paz - Sea of Cortez Multi-day trip: Baja Shark Experience
Ugh. That really does suck. That’s $500-1000 in “fees” right there. Thanks for the clarification, folks. Is making me re-think the trip and whether to pivot to Cocos instead.
-
Advice on upgrade path: TG-6 to RX100VII, OM-1, a6700 ???
This would be my preferred option. That’s an excellent FE lens, and the whole system is a lot easier to pack and carry for travel (I put the entire setup in a medium sized Lowepro camera shoulder bag) - that ease of travelling is why i went with MFT over APS-C. And shooting with a fisheye is… *chef’s kiss*. My Tokina 10-17 replaced my Sigma 10-20 about 15 years ago and i have never looked back. With my MFT system, i only picked up a rectilinear wide angle for one specific trip: After that, i will go back to my fisheye. Yes, they are a little more finicky to use - but the shots that you get with them are absolutely fantastic. HOWEVER - as mentioned earlier, this is for diving. For snorkeling, I’d go with something smaller/lower drag - I’d hate to drag a full housed system with 2 strobes around on the surface. But the question you want to ask yourself is - do you see yourself just staying with snorkeling? Because if you get hooked to u/w photos, scuba is the next logical step and then your camera decision would be different. Re price - as a fellow wildlife photographer myself, i can only say that i have never regretted buying what i needed (with some headroom to spare), as opposed to making compromises in the gear to save some money.
-
Big Animal Expedition in La Paz - Sea of Cortez Multi-day trip: Baja Shark Experience
What’s this about? I am planning a group trip to Socorros in June, and read something similar on the Nautilus website too, about photographers being harassed for their gear at customs on the way in. Edit - I googled this. Am surprised this exists in this day and age. And it is vexing, especially if they are starting to do this in Mexico airport as well, which is where we will be flying in. Is this mainly for folks with big-ass housings, multiple cameras and huge dome ports? Or are even folks with a single camera/housing in a backpack getting busted? I carry my entire rig in a medium sized Lowepro backpack.