d2b

For what it's worth, AOI also sells Olympus/Sony TTL compatible triggers. For the sony case it might only be integrated into housings, I'm not sure.

I wouldn't expect so. I've used mine quite a lot in the similar length stock port for PT-EP13. That port is just long enough for the 12-50 or the 60. Of course you get less magnification with the 30 in a longer port.

Probably just a typo, but the 60mm won't fit in FLP04(P) as far as I know. Maybe you meant the extension ring for that case. Another option instead of the 12-50+WWL1 is the 12-45 + DLP03/4 semi-dome. Probably cheaper, and the lens itself has much better image quality (I've shot both). No experience with the WWL-1.

A naive question, but the pictured lens gears look like they are just the gear and would need to have some kind of barrel added to grip the focus / zoom part of most lenses?

My wife has an aging OG paralenz that she likes a lot, especially the depth based white balance / colour correction. Since these cameras are no longer easily repairable or replaceable, I'm curious about replacements. Do any of the newer action cameras have an auto whitebalance system that works comparably well to the the paralenz?

By the way, what do you think about the images from the 9-18, and what port are you using? It seems to have kind of a mixed reputation, but the fact that it works in my existing DLP-04 semi-dome port makes it a relatively cheap experiment. I already have the 12-45 pro which is nice, but not so wide by UW standards.

Do you prefer the MF2's to the AOI Q1s for some (macro?) tasks?

I might be wrong (or just old and confused), but it seems to be about people who started diving after 50, not those still diving but who started earlier.

Mozaik also sells AOI. They may well buy it from Backscatter, since I think Backscatter is the North American distributor, but sometimes the retail prices are a bit better. My experience with them is that the stuff shows up eventually, but it can be surprisingly frustrating trying to get order tracking information out of them. The main attraction for me is that they also ship from Canada, presumably not an issue for people not in Canada.

I'm only shooting stills, and trying to get better at supermacro, so I wanted to reduce the degrees of freedom of the housing, but still keep flexibility to frame tiny critters. Here is my very simple monopod setup (so far untested). I decided to try this as an alternative to the "perch your housing on a muck stick" technique that a few people have shown me can be quite effective. The housing is an AOI UH-OM1-II, so smaller than some in this thread. As mentioned at the start of the thread, there is an extra 1/4" threaded hole in my ULCS tray, so I just put an Ali-express ball head there, and clamped on an arm section of appropriate length. I removed the o-ring from one end to try to always keep one end in the sand. As you can see it does not add much to the profile. Open it can go fairly high. Hypothetically this pose keeps the center of gravity of the rig (which is roughly 500g negative) above the pivot point. We shall see.

Sorry, I mis-typed the part number (which is pretty bad because the plastic package is sitting on my desk). The actual smaller Nauticam spacer ring is 81222. I got it in order to have a compromise between no spacer and the big spacer that comes with the CMC-1. The 81222 is smaller in outside diameter and in the amount it moves the lens back, so maybe worth a look.

Which Nauticam m67 adapter did you try? Looking at the 81228 on my CMC-1, it doesn't look like it extends further than the rim on the CMC-1 itself. Maybe I misunderstand the problem. I ask because I am considering a dual flip adapter for my 120mm front diameter macro port.

Hmm. I tried my best to trigger the apparent malware but didn't succeed. Who knows what the difference is. I was looking at the gallery, and I guess it's natural for people selling fluo gear, but I did think that the the fluo effect was a bit overused. For some of the subjects where I was familiar with them (e.g. mantis shrimp), I think a reasonable standard spectrum strobe setup would be superior. Of course that is utterly subjective, and someone more experienced than me might be bored of the subjects I still find interesting with standard spectrum.

It would be more work, but also more interesting, to put together a size+weight comparison of housing+body+lens+port.

Unless the OM-3 gets significantly cheaper, I can't really see choosing it over the OM-1 for underwater use. Currently the OM-1 II is listed at CAD100 more than the OM-3. It's supposed to be a midrange model between the OM5 and the OM1, but the pricing does not really reflect that yet. Other than retro style and the jpeg control dial (neither of which seem compelling for underwater), I don't see any advantages of the OM-3 over the OM-1. It is a bit smaller, but once you get a housing (particularly a nauticam) you're not going to benefit much from that.