Architeuthis

The poor guy seems not to have much reason to smile: serious injury of the jaws. Was this caused by a fishing hook? Wolfgang

Usage of RAM and SSD certainly depends on person. I have MacBook Pro M1 with 32 GB and 2TB SSD. When I work in LR to edit photos, while having other programs in the background, often 20 - 30 GB RAM are occupied. Also 1TB is, more or less occupied on SSD with programs and projects that are not yet finished (the finished projects I transfer to NAS (2*16 TB) and keep only selected slideshows, that I want to have ready on my laptop... => When buying now, 32 GB would be the minimum (not considering video editing), maybe I would take 64 GB to be future proof (the new AI tools in LR need a lot of space). 2 TB SSD seems appropriate to me... Wolfgang

Good that you mention it - it is a male. The females have another pattern in their face, they are speckled...

I have found here a site that has over the water test images of a test chart from the different lenses in discussion, made with similar sensor (from A7R3 to A1) on display: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1525&Camera=1175&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1646&CameraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0 When viewing these images, I would say that the over water performance of the Sony 20-70mm is very similar to the Sony 28-60mm (maybe a tick better at f4 in the center), Sony 24-70mm GM II is a tick better (both at 28mm and 60m and at f/4 (f5.6) and f8, both center and periphery), Sony 16-35mm GM II is slightly better at 28mm (both f4 and f8) and Tamron 17-28mm is almost the same IQ (28mm both f/4 and f/8). The lenses above seem to have pretty similar performance at the focal lengths and apertures viewed. Only the Sony 28-70mm is outstanding (only 50mm or 70mm are available for this lens, but results are similar), as IQ is clearly and much worse compared to the 28-60mm. Here a table of the result of my subjective judgements (but have a view on your own): => These results suggest to me that IQ in the center will be pretty similar between Sony 20-70mm and Tamron 17-28mm behind domeports and Sony 28-60mm behind WWL/WACP (provided the Nauticam optics maintains the IQ). => It also explains why most prefer the 28-60mm over the 28-70mm, that is recommended by Nauticam as "best" solution... Wolfgang

Here another fishportrait from a sand bass (Parapercis hexopthalma). Red Sea, Mangrove Bay, June 2023, A7R5, SOny 90mm macro, f/8, 1/200s, ISO100, 2*Z330: Happy New Year and many excellent dives!!! Wolfgang

This graph shows the (rough) coverage of angles of view of WWL1/WACP with Sony 28-60mm compared to the rectilinear lenses discussed, based on Chris's suggestion to take the horizontal angle of view as a criterion (The WACP/28-60mm combination covers an angle of view comparable to a 13-33mm rectilinear lens)... => It seems the WWL1/WACP would be a good substitute for the Tamron 17-28mm, but Sony 20-70mm is something special. => I did not find a careful review of the Sony 28-60mm lens yet, where the actual resolution has been measured. I guess it would be not quite as good as the Tamron 17-28mm and Sony 20-70mm (over the water). I wonder whether there could be a difference spotted in real life when comparing UW photos (most reviewers say that IQ of WWL1/WACP with 28-60mm is excellent)? Wolfgang

This tread is very interesting for me too. I have A7R5 and Tamron 17-28mm and Sony 20-70mm behind Zen DP170, but no WACP/WWL (I have Canon 8-15mm behind Nauticam 140mm for circular/180° fisheye). I am fully satisfied with IQ of the rectilinear lenses, but think about WACP-C or, as an alternative, another, bigger, domeport (my dive buddy is using most of the time the Zen DP170, so I need something in addition). If Sony 28-60mm behind WACP/WWL has less general IQ than the lenses above, I am not interested in WACPs (corners sharp at aperture wide open is fine, but if the 28-60mm is less sharp in the image center regardless of aperture... ☹️)... => Can someone please compare the AOVs between rectilinear 17-28mm and/or 20-70mm with WACP/WWL (I know these AOVs are not directly comparable between rectilinar and fisheye, what the WACP/WWL are in fact, but just from personal feeling: What rectilinear AOVs are comparable to WACP/WWL)? Wolfgang

Here two fish portraits from 2023 from tiny fish: Red Sea, Mangrove Bay, September 2023, Townsend's sabertooth (Plagiotremus townsendi). A7R5, Sony 90mm macro & SMC1, 1/200s, f/14, ISO200, 2*Z330. Red Sea, Gubal Island, June 2023, Bluebelly Blenny (Alloblennius pictus). A7R5, Sony 90mm macro & SMC1, 1/200s, f/16, ISO100, 2*Z330. Wolfgang

I wrote already in the paralell tread on Scubaboard: Purple blob is not a big issue. Sometimes when making photos against the light flare/blobs, sometimes colored purple, appear. Similar to any other WA lens in my opinion (but speciality is that the flare/blobs are purple - seldom seen with other lenses). "Reviewers" say it occurs more often on Oly bodies compared to Pana - maybe, but I am not sure.. I was using the Pana 7-14mm with EM5II and EM1II behind Zen DP170 and it was not a relevation. I found (micro)contrast quite low and used it seldom. Zuiko 9-18mm, we also had it, is even worse... My wife is using now EM1II/DP170 with Zuiko 8-25mm (7-14mm and 8-19mm are sold now). This combo has brilliant IQ and I can highly recommend. Also the zoom range is very usable... She also has Tokina 10-17mm behind Zen DP100 with both 1x and 0.71x adapter (what I would prefer, also a brilliant IQ and extremely usable focal length range), but she is using the 8-15mm more often... Wolfgang

Yes - the second image looks very close to the one on the webpage... Was vibrance/saturation adjusted to the same levels in all the three uploaded pictures? What was the difference in the two uploaded pictures to give more vibrance/saturation in the second? Wolfgang

Beautiful photos at display here! I just cannot decide wich one I like most, I was so excited with my new camera in 2023 (A7R5). I have to cheat and put in three photos (all made on the Red Sea workshop with Alex in June/July 2023): SS Thistlegorm: practically no current and very good vis allowed to take a panorama from the stern. Canon 8-15mm fisheye @15mm, 1/160s, f/11, ISO 1000, no strobe: And here Lisi in the SS Dunraven, coming towards me and separate the enormous school of glassfishes inside. I love the circular fisheye look and this was such a good occasion. Canon 8-15mm fisheye @8mm, 1/5s, f/13, ISO 500, 2*Z330 strobes: A macro, taken at Gubal island. The big eyes of the squirrelfish make it look like a character from a Japanese cartoon. Sony 90mm macro, 1/200s, f/16, ISO 100, 2*Z330 strobe: And here an extra cheater: MY Ghazala Explorer at sunset near Ras Muhammed. Canon 8-15mm fisheye @8mm, 1/125s, f/22, ISO 800, 2*Z330 strobes: All the best in 2024 too you All and great success to Waterpixel! Wolfgang

This is very right. In addition, one can use the Tokina 10-17mm on MFT with the 0.71x speedbooster (this is the way intended by Nauticam) to get 7-12mm - a similar range compared to Canon 8-15mm or the FCP on FF. By using the Tokina on MFT with both glassless 1x and 0.71x adapters one can cover the range of FCP (0.71x) and WACP (1x) with just one lens and two adapters - at very good IQ... Wolfgang

I am a little late to the party, but here my 2 cents: I have experience with MFT and FF, but not APS-C. MTF is the system with the best lens repertoire, both for WA and macro. At least compared to FF, but I guess the situation with APS-C is similar. If I would go for a system with sensor smaller than FF, I would go MFT... The negative side with MFT is, that the bit depth of the raw files is just 12 bit (not a problem of A/D converter, the small sensor just does not give a signal/noise ratio that makes 14 bit meaningful). This means that you have to be more careful with settings when making the photo, as there is less leeway for postprocessing (e.g. in LR). Some, very borderline, conditions just will not give good results... When you go MFT: Regarding WA, we (my wife and me) have and I recommend strongly the Tokina 10-17mm with both Metabones 1x and 0.71x converters, 34.7mm N85/N120 adapter, 20mm extension and Zen DP100. With this very compact (and not overly expensive) combination you have the equivalent AOVs as one would have on FF with the new FCP plus a WACP/WWL, what seem to be the most versatile ranges for many UW photographers. IQ is very good, much better than any rectilinear WA lens behind a dome... For macro it is advisable that you select a camera body that has phase detection based AF, as this is working much better for macro. There are the 30mm (Zuiko&Pana), 45mm (Pana) and 60mm (Zuiko) macro lenses. My favorite is the 60mm. Later, the 90mm (Zuiko) macro lens is a tool for dedicated macro fans, that no other camera system has... Regarding your budget, I would go for a second hand, high quality, aluminium housing (e.g. Nauticam, these are also available in higher numbers second hand). I believe that the difference between Oly OM-1 and EM1II (or the almost identical III) is very small for your needs, and for the EM1II you may find a real bargain (Chris could make a comparison from his own experience, as he has both cameras). For the OM-1, almost for sure, you will have to buy new. The big advantage with housings, as Nauticam, is, that you build up a system and later, after a couple of years, when the camera is really outdated, you only buy a new camera plus bare housing and continue to use all the rest. I am not sure whether the "bargain" plastic housings are even able to support all the wonderful lenses of a complete system and whether they keep to their own standards over time (Olympus plastic housings, the precessor of AOI, have e.g. three different standards of housings, not compatible with each other)... You also do not need to buy the entire system at once and try to squeeze in everything for 5k $, possibly at the cost of a high quality and future proof solution (and then, after one or two years, invest another 5k $ into a completely new and also not future proof system). It would be enough to start with WA and then widen the repertoire to macro. Later to other specialities (standard range etc..)... Good luck, Wolfgang

I have here the (slightly) scratched glass from the Nauticam 140 N120 domeport. I had it replaced by a new one and will dispose the old hemisphere soon. MAYBE one can try to repair it... In case a do-it-yourselfer wants it, she/he can have it for free (shipping needs to be paid)... Wolfgang

Thank you Phil for the important information... The specialized split domes by Matty Smith will certainly work even better for splits. Currently I am using the Nauticam 140 dome (shade removed) with Canon 8-15mm for splits, with a not very high keeper rate for splits, but selected photos are o.k. My aim is to cover, in addition to better splits, the not extremely wide WA range (for the "really" wide WA, I will not give the NA140/8-15mm combination out of my hands, I love it ❤️). I could cover the moderate WA range with the Zen DP170 that we already have, but this dome is too often in use by my wife, we need something additional that can be used in paralell (a second 170/180 dome seems redundant to me). The 250mm dome weights 0.14kg more than the 230 dome, but I would expect much better rectilinear WA properties from the 250mm dome (for splits the 250 also works better)... An alternative to cover the "moderate" WA would be the water contact optics by Nauticam. Already the WACP-C comes into the weight range of the 250mm dome and I would have to make the splits still with the 140 dome...

The 250mm dome is perfect for rectilinear lenses down to 17mm (16mm would very probably also not do harm). Regarding fisheye lenses, I did not notice barrel distortion when using DP170 with MTF sensor, where the situation is similar. Barrel distortion is certainly there, it is predicted by theory, but fortunately it is irrelevant under these circumstances in real life. I guess, but have no idea or proof, whether it would work also for FF. It would be very interesting whether someone has tested this out. Spending 2700 Euro for a (possibly negative) experiment is too much... Wolfgang

I am pondering about acquiring an additional dome for Sony FF. Ideal for my lens repertoire (Tamron 17-28mm, Sony 20-70mm) is a 170/180mm dome and I already own the Zen DP170. I also would like to use the DP170 with Canon 8-15mm fisheye for splits, but the problem is that we are two UW photographers in the family and Lisi quite often uses the Zen DP170, so I seldom use this dome in practice: We need an additional domeport. Buying another DP170 (or Nauticam 180) seems too redundant to me, therefore I think of another domeport... The Nauticam 230mm (almost) fisheye domeport with a radius of 120mm would be a nice addition, but the Nauticam 250mm WA domeport, with a larger radius of 160mm seems better for rectilinear lenses (at least in theory) and certainly works also better for splits (currently I do the splits with Nauticam 140mm fisheye domeport and Canon 8-15mm)... On the smaller MFT sensor (Oly EM5II and EM1II) I have very good experience with using non-fisheye domeports ( the DP170) with fisheye lenses (Zuiko 8mm, Canon 8-15mm and Tokina 10-17mm). IQ is at least as good compared to a dedicated fisheye domeport (Nauticam 140). Not expected by theory, but a fact... => My question is whether someone has experience with using fisheye lenses behind the non-fisheye Nauticam 250mm domeport on a FF camera. How is the IQ is compared to using a dedicated fisheye domeport as e.g. Nauticam (or Zen) 230mm or Nauticam 140mm? Thanks, Wolfgang

P.S.: I read on DPReview that the Metabones MFT/Canon adapters do not fit perfectly on the new OM-1 camera. Some abrasion on the adapters is required befpre they fit. I do not know whether it is true, but one should check this out, when thinking about OM-1...

When you are considering this, also consider the Tokina 10-17mm... With MFT I was mostly using Canon 8-15mm with 1x adapter and NA140 (this gives very similar AOVs as the new Nauticam FCP on FF at excellent IQ). As I continue do use the Canon 8-15mm and NA140 now with FF, Lisi is using the Tokina 10-17mm with Zen DP100 and both 1x and 0.71x adapters. This does not only give AOVs like the new FCP on FF (0.71x), but in addition one has the ability to switch to the 1x adapter and have AOVs very similar to WACP/WWL. This is incredible flexibility in a very small package. In case I would be still with MFT, this would be my only WA equipment, almost no need for anything else. Just for splits a bigger dome would be, of course, much better (it is possible to do splits with the DP100)... => I know, the Tokina 10-17mm is a lousy lens over the water. The UW performance is, however, almost a miracle - I am not able to tell a difference in IQ between photos made with Canon 8-15mm or Tokina 10-17mm (and IQ with the Canon is excellent)... Wolfgang

From where do you have this info? Maybe the demand was not there?? In case this is true this would really be a pity...☹️ I found the Canon 8-15mm (with 1x adapter and NA140 dome) and the Tokina 10-17mm (with both 1x and 0.71x adapter using the Zen DP100) extremely useful and well performing combinations for the MFT system. I really miss these angles of view now with my FF system... I had two and one is sold. The other one is still in use by Lisi who uses now the EM1II... Wolfgang

Here are some adresses located in Europe, where such masks are fabricated. There must be also companies in US, but these I do not know: When I remember correctly, I had my mask produced here (years ago): https://tauchmaske.de/international Here two additional companies with very good reputation among divers (unfortunately the pages are in German only, but I am sure they will be able to correspond in English): https://optik-pingel.de/ https://www.sehmeile.de/ Wolfgang

I use Dust patrol sensor cleaning kits (they have different versions, depending on sensor size), together with a special loupe (e.g.: https://www.amazon.de/JJC-Universal-Lupe-Reinigungs-Vergrößerung-LED-Beleuchtung/dp/B07MSH1WN7/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&crid=22WEO3YGK3NCX&keywords=dust+patrol+sensor+cleaning+louper&qid=1702819366&sprefix=dust+patrol+sensor+cleaning+louper%2Caps%2C164&sr=8-1-spons&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9hdGY&psc=1) and sometimes a sensor cleaning pen ) including a sensor cleaning brush (e.g.: https://www.amazon.de/-/en/DIGI-KIT6D-F/dp/B004ZLJLTQ/ref=sr_1_10?crid=3UVX1GU2KEX7A&keywords=dust+patrol+sensor+cleaning+pen&qid=1702819436&sprefix=dust+patrol+sensor+cleaning+pen%2Caps%2C131&sr=8-10&language=en_GB). They also provide detailed videos about how to do it for different camera types. So far, in practice, it takes more trials as in the videos to get the sensor clean, but in the end it is. When you send the camera in, they will do it the same way and it will take time and $$$... Wolfgang

This lens is available for many weeks and I am curious, whether someone is using/testing this lens for Sony FF cameras. Would be interested to know how this lens performs generally UW and which dome size is required to get decent results... My background is that I have Sony A7R5 and use both Sony 20-70mm and Tamron 17-28mm behind Zen DP170. Both lenses perform very well behind this dome, but the zoom range of the Tamron 17-28mm is limited and 17-50mm would be much better with respect to zoom range... Wolfgang

According to Marelux, color temperature is 6200K without and 5500K with the dome diffuser. See below some basic properties that I have found in the Internet, for comparison: Wolfgang

Hi Landvogt, I burned out four(!) YS-D2 in the last years. For me Sea&Sea strobes are our of discussion, certainly never again. Inon Z330 is the direct competitor of YS-D2/3. Now I have four Z330 and they work, so far, ok (one has a loose contact at the "ON/OFF" switch, but works until now). Z330 are currently not available new, but a succesor product may be on the way... I do not have Retras, but with the circular flash tube (preferred by many), they are in another league. Also top price (I would expect top quality also). Maybe a cheap and much better alternative to YS-D3 may be the SUPE Pro max, that has also circular flash tube, but is priced similar to the YS-D3... Wolfgang