Architeuthis

First, let me thank all of you for the interesting comments...👍 Until now I was using my strobes (Z-330) at color tempearture as they come from the factory (5500 K). Two weeks ago, I pre-ordered two Backscatter HF-1 strobes with different types of diffusers (6500 K, 5500 K and 4500 K) and am glad to read how people use such filters (or some, not at all), to have a first orientation for my own experimentation... (I, personally, am convinced that it is better to adjust the color temperature relation between artificial and ambient light already before the light hits the sensor (this was the reason for per-ordering two HF-1's plus filters). There will be always corrections in post-processing, also using masks, but the smaller such manipulations are, the better the final outcome will be (this is at least my hope))...😊 Wolfgang

How do you get the subject/object focus distance from the EXIF data? I guess you have a special trick or program? => I just had a look at raw files from Sony A7R5 in LRc, obtained with Canon 8-15mm fisheye, Sony 28-60mm and Sony 20-70mm, but "Focus Distance" or "Subject Distance" values are missing in my case... Wolfgang

Big thanks for writing this together Massimo... 👍 As I understand your findings, there is a big difference between WWL1/WACP and a domeport: The domeport produces a small virtual image that is close to the domeport and is photographed by the (rectilinear) WA lens at short object distance. In contrast WWL1/WACP add additional optical elements to the front of a standard lens, the entire assembly (standard lens + WWL1/WACP) being an UW WA lens with fisheye characteristics. This is indicated by the long working distance that you read from the EXIF data (the distance is, of course, incorrect, as the specification in m is for the pure lens without WWL1/WACP and over the water)? Wolfgang

Here I found an interesting summary how to transport Li+, but also other, batteries on flights: https://petapixel.com/flying-with-lithium-batteries-what-you-need-to-know/ Wolfgang

I have questions regarding the selection of the color temperature of a flashlight, especially to people who change the temperature, depending on conditions: My understanding is that for photos that are lit (almost) exclusively by a flash, e.g. macro, color temperature of the flash is unimportant as the temperature of the raw file can be adjusted delibertately in postprocessing, e.g. LRc... The color temperature of a flash becomes important, when ambient light and artificial light from a flash get mixed. e.g. WA. The warmer the color temperature, the less adjustment of the raw file is required in order to get the correct WB for the foreground subject that is lit by the flash. Hence, the background color, e.g. open water, is less influenced by the WB procedure and the blue will be more natural... Here is an example photo that I produced on my last trip to the Carribean, using two Inon Z330s with standard diffusers. The color temperature of these flashes is at 5500K. WB was adjusted to show the correct colors of the reef shark (Carcharhinus perezi) to the left in the foreground: Sony A7R5, Sony 20-70mm @20mm, 1/160s, f/9, ISO 400, 2*Z330: I guess, if I would have used diffusers to warm up the color temperature to 4500K I would have a "better" blue in the background, i.e. less "greenish" cast? How do you adjust the color temperature of your flashes and what temperature is the optimum for what conditions? Thanks, Wolfgang

Indeed a small difference. I doubt that one can see a difference in real world WA photos, certainly not worth going for the larger domeport... And there is some chromatic aberration with the Zen DP230, probably a result of incorrect positioning, as you outline in the EMail you have sent to me (are the images corrected for CA, BTW?)... => Thank you, Massimo, for this very interesting test series (confirms for my usage, that NA140 is way enough for the Canon 8-15mm)... Wolfgang

Left: dome #1, right: dome #2 Top to bottom: center to corner Yes? Clearly the left image at the bottom is sharper. Maybe a small difference in the middle. Same IQ in the top… I would say: left is DP230 and right is Nauticam 140, but the small improvement in IQ in the corner is not really worth the upgrade from 140 to 230 (except for split photos, but this is a different story)… But maybe Massimo is right with his "wrong positioning story" and it is the opposite (left= NA140; right=DP230)? 😋 Wolfgang

Of course larger domes are more comfortable for split photos, especially in tubulent waters. In addition, the virtual image of the UW proportion is further away, the larger the dome, while the over the water proportion is always at the same (far) distance. Therefore a larger dome makes it easier to have both UW and over the water in reasonable focus... My question to Phil is whether he can recognize a difference in IQ in the UW photos between the 140mm and the 230mm domeports... Wolfgang

Do you notice a substantial difference in IQ between the 140mm and the 230mm domes (except better performance of 230mm for split photos)? Wolfgang

No BS, Massimo - that is what I was told officially by Nauticam: they do not give two stars when they IQ is very similar, but the smaller dome gets the star in this case... I suggest you ask your question at Nauticam, they are usually very cooperative. Their answer would be of interest for many here... Wolfgang

I have asked this question some time ago to Nauticam/US. The answer was that the combination with best optical performance is rated with (*), but when they do not notice further obvious improvement with a bigger dome, the smallest dome that brings already best IQ is rated with (*). => This would mean that the 230mm dome does not bring substantial better optical performance over the 140mm dome with the fisheye lens (for split shots it is clearly the better choice)... Wolfgang

This must be the difference in the front cover. In my case WACP-C with Showa (L without warming gloves, XL with Fourth Elements warming gloves underneath) and no problem... Wolfgang

This is really interesting - I did not expect that one could use a 10mm rectilinear WA lens behind the small 140mm dome...👍 What regards the image samples: the 10mm Laowa/140mm photo was taken at 1/2 f-stop more closed than the Sony 28-60mm/WACP-C photo. While the corners seem to be a tick better with the 10mm Laowa (one could say corner performance of WACP-C and Laowa behind the 140mm dome is similar?), the writing on the metal ring in the center seems to be a little sharper with the WACP-C (or is this just the different color temperature that pretends better sharpness/microcontrast?)... The Laowa 10mm seems to me a shiny new toy for UW-photographers...😊 (At the beginning of this tread I did not consider this lens to be of any value, but now I am close to order one...) Wolfgang

Hi CHanly83, I use the hardcover all over the time. I have drilled two adjacent holes in the hardcover, to be able to fix a boltsnap on the hardcover via cable binder. As soon as I am in the water, I remove the hardcover from the setup and fix the hardcover via boltsnap on a D-ring on my jacket. Before preparing to leave the water, I put the hardcover back on the setup to protect the expensive lens. No other protector needed... Wolfgang

No, I did not test HSS mode. When I switch WL flash in A7R5 menue "ON", rear curtain is not possible to select any more and one has to set it via PC program...

Just a final update to this issue from my side: I have now received the manual version of the Sony s-Turtle trigger (in exchange for the TTL version). Balazs from Turtle was so kind to provide an extra LED unit, at no charge, as a spare. => I like the Turtle trigger as it is a compact unit (I think to have an extra LED unit, which looks a little fragile, as a spare is a good idea). Also the charging via USB-C is no problem, when once one is accoustumed to it. =>Switching between 1st and 2nd curtain via the camera menue (A7R5) is now possible and can be done during the dive. Switching the flash trigger "OFF" is, unfortunately, still not possible. When I want the flashes off, I have to switch the units off manually by hand. Guess I can live with this... Wolfgang

When we are talking now about the rectilinear WA options, I throw in the Zuiko 8-15mm. Lisi has it and uses it with the Zen DP170 (I also used it some times). It gives brilliant results, it is a highly recommendable UW lens... Wolfgang

No, she does not make videos. I also make very little video only. In my MFT times I was focusing before I started video recording and during the recording by hand or seldom single spot AF actions (because of hunting, that was always a problem during video with EM1II and EM5II, with all the lenses I had). I cannot remember to have ever made video with the Tokina (I used it seldom, because I had the Canon 8-15)... Wolfgang

Adapted Canon 8-15mm is probably perfect, but 8mm fisheye may be too wide... A alternative to WWL-1, that is small and handsome and provides very good IQ is adapted Tokina 10-17mm (Canon EF version) with 1x glassless adapter (can be exchanged against 0.71x speedbooster for wider angle), Zen DP100 (N120 version without built in extension) and 20mm N120 extension (same extension can be used also with 0.71x speedbooster for wider angle, if required). This combo is not as wide compared to Canon 8-15mm, it covers practical the range of WWL-1, but is much smaller than WWL-1 and IQ is, at least, the same... Lisi, my wife, used this combination (with 1x adapter) on almost every dive on our last trip to Providencia. Highlight there are Carribean reefsharks that are non-baited/feeded. They come close sometimes, but not as close as e.g. oceanic whitetip sharks... Wolfgang

Very interesting. Can you see better IQ or other advantages, compared to photos made with other fisheye lenses, e.g. Canon 8-15mm? Thanks, Wolfgang

I cannot compare flare susceptability of WWL-1 or WACP-1 with WACP-C, as I only have limited experience (ca. 25 dives) just with WACP-C/Sony 28-60. The example I have posted above was a seldom event that was seen in three out of approx. 2000 photos. => What I can say is that the WACP-C is not really prone to flare in my hands (I am interested to hear from others how "flare performance" of WACP-C in real life is compared to WWL-1, WWL-C and WACP-1/2, but I think someone should open a separate tread on this, as Ridgebackpilot wants to hear about IQ with WWL-C (I guess on Nikon camera) compared to WWL-1 and WACPs and he did not get much info on this, so far...)... Wolfgang P.S.: I posted the example with flare from WACP-C, just to show that a wet lens is not required to produce similar reflections, but it does not really contribute to the topic...

Hi Hellhole, I have set focus in the focus menue to "AF-C". While I activate AF (usually by the thumb), I can turn the focus on the lens via the focus gear and see by color in the EVF which part of the image is in focus... I can do this additional manual focusing before I activate C-AF, in order to set the focus into the right range and speed the AF up, or I can do the manual part after or while AF for fine adjustments... I do not know whether this functionality exists also on the A7R4, as the A7R5 is my first Sony camera, but maybe a A7R4 owner can tell.. Wolfgang

According to Vincent, the Marelux sales manager, the new flash is already available: "...The apollo III already has started to ship out,the warranty is one year and is burning-out of flash tubes included in warranty...."

I cannot comment on IQ with WWL-C, as I do not have this lens. According to the Nauticam portchard, the WWL-C (which was, AFAIK, developed for compact cameras) the Sony 28-60 is not compatible with WWL-C (24mm plus small lens dimensions are required - just the Sony and Sigma 24mm lenses are listed for Sony FF cameras): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WpealW6Kwx_OURxeLzOp5kqahbwutsol/view Wolfgang

Since the last LRc update, I notice a bug in LRc, develop module: When moving the eyedropper over the photo to select a pixel for Auto WB, the enlarged section for easier selection of the pixel shows always the same pixels, no matter how I move the eyedropper across the photo... => Did someone else also notice this behaviour on his computer (and maybe was able to resolve the problem), or is it peculiar for my configuration? I have Macbook Pro M1, 32 GB RAM, Mac OS 14 (v14.4.1) Thanks, Wolfgang