Architeuthis

Regarding the Tokina 10-17mm, I think this is perfect for APS-C. The question is whether a 100mm domeport is sufficient or whether to take a 140mm domeport (which is also not monstrous)... No question, WWL/WACP have their own place. I use WACP-C on Sony FF and can say that one can go far below f/11 and still have good IQ. Overall IQ with WACP-C/Sony 28-60mm is o.k., but not outstanding... On the WA side, however, when I use WACP-C, I often have the urge to zoom out more than 130° and to take a 180° fisheye lens instead (but can not zoom in further with the FF system). So at the end, I take both WACP-C and (8-)15mm fisheye with me and use them alternately at different dives... On the long side WWL/WACP is amazing, as one can make photos of quite small subjects, even nudies. After longer diving holidays, when I can make multiple dives with different lenses, I find out that the keepers are the ones made with a true macro lens, they are just better. So at the end I keep only WACP-C photos of smaller subjects for documentation, which I was not able to photograph with the macro rig... In case a comparable zoom fisheye lens (e.g. 15-35mm, f/4) with high optical quality would exist for FF, I would not hesitate to exchange the big, heavy and expensive WACP-C against the fisheye lens with a 140mm domeport. As said above, I easily could waive the ability to shoot small subjects with the WA setup (I am also not a big fan of rectilinear WA lenses for UW use). Of course, this may be a very personal opinion... I believe the Canon R7 camera is quite the optimum for UW use of APS-C, since you can use the huge repertoire of Canon EF lenses, in case comparable RF lenses do not yet exist, especially macro. Macro lenses are the weak point of Sony cameras, both APS-C and FF... Wolfgang

I was using the screen for the first two years of UW-photopgraphy with EM5II and was happy. Then I switched to EM1II with 45° viewfinder and it was a revelation. Now A7R5 with 45° viewfinder and I had to use the screen again for the last two diving holidays (end of 2024), since the viewfinder was broken and at Nauticam for repair (water inbrake, repair still under warranty) - I was surprised that it is possibe to make UW photos without viewfinder, but no comparison (especially close to the surface where due to high ambient light, I was not able to see much on the screen)... As the others write, nothing exists for FF that is comparable to Canon 8-15mm on MFT or Tokina 10-17mm on APS-C. I am not sure that the heavy and expensive Nauticam FCP is a real substitute (maybe for the Tokina): I know of people who take both FCP and WACP with them (maybe because FCP is said to be good only at f/13 and more?)... => the A7R5 is a phantastic camera (DR, Megapixels (and optical sharpness) for cropping, AF), but a high optical quality zoom fisheye, e.g. 15-35mm f/4, is really missing... Wolfgang

Not really. I made some icons for applying basic actions as lens profiles plus initial settings in LR and PS (e.g. clarity, starting conditions for WB etc..), but these contain just text as "Sony 90mm", "Canon 8-15mm" etc...

I have now upgraded to software version 6.0.3.21385 (Mac OS is 15.1.1). The Loupedeck CT console is now again reponsive and changes its look when switching from one program to another ("dynamic mode" in the Loupedeck software needs to be swithced "ON")... The problem with the monochromatic icons in LRc still persists...

I guess that the white rings are remains of a fight with an octopus...

Since about one year the owner is Logitech, well known for producing mice and consoles of all kind, só maybe not brand-new... (https://loupedeck.com/de/blog/logitech-acquires-loupedeck/). Logitech also has their own console for LR and PS, called Logitech MX console... I suspect the disaster with the icons and now the lacking support has to do with this takeover ... Wolfgang P.S.: Despite I am retired and a man of independent means, right now I do not have time to process photos and deal with the loupedeck problems (but just returned from beautiful diving holidays in Tansania), as I am busy with Xmas preparations (especially preparing cookies for grandchildren, grandnephews, children and nephews(nice) 😋). After the holdidays I will have time again for working on photos and will try to solve the problem (=downgrading to earlier firmware?)...

Hi Tim, I have installed version 6.0.2.21225. The result is that it stopped now working on my PC (Macbook Pro M1, newest OS; it does not switch to the LRc look when I start LRc)... 😋 I wrote already several times to the customers support, first complints about the icons and lately about non-working, but no response about the non-working issue... The new owner distributes its own hardware and I fear they have little interest in supporting the old one (i.e. Loupedeck CT)...🤮 Wolfgang

Bluewater Photography Guide says that SMC-1 and MFO-1 can be used in serial combination: https://www.uwphotographyguide.com/Nauticam-announces-the-Nauticam-Mid-range-Focus-Optimizer1-(MFO-1) This, however, seems to be a misinformation as Alex clearly states here that SMC-1(3) and MFO-1 should be used alternatively and not together (he says that serial combination will lead to double correction of flat port abberation and hence a loss in IQ): => The only problem with Sony 90mm plus SMC-1 that I was able to recognize so far is slight vignetting in the corners when I use SMC-1 at the longest object distances and smallest magnifications that SMC-1 allows. These are, however, object distances and magnifications that I better cover with the pure macro lens w/o any diopter attached... => I also wonder what the benefits of using MFO-1 on Sony 90mm with flatport are: does sharpness improve just in the periphery or is it increased also in the center (when it is the center, it may be worth going for it (but I did not recognize any sharpness problems in the center yet))? Wolfgang

Thanks...👍 I have never seen them with my own eyes (only tropical relatives that exist more shallow). Friends using rebreathers told me that they see them frequently in Croatria, even at places close to were we often use to dive (it would require, however, practical U-profile dives to 56m using compressed air and I am not ready for this)...

It would be very helpful if Nauticam can provide sample images like e.g. with and w/o MFO-1 that clearly show the benefit of using MFO-1. And does it improve IQ also when a macro lens through domeport is compared to macrolens&MFO-1 through flatport (especially interesting for shorter focal lenses, where the flatport makes most detoriation of IQ)? It seems to me that the MFO-1 is better mounted permanently to the flatport when making macro. But then, what when another diopter will be used that increases the magnification substantially above 1x (like SMC-1 that is essential for macro on FF)? Is SMC-1 used in addition to MFO-1 via e.g. a flip holder (as many use the SMC-1 now)? Or is MFO-1 removed and SMC-1 mounted instead (either via (unhandy) double flip holder or by dismantling MFO-1 and storing in a pocket)?

I still do not really understand the advantage of using this new diopter (when looking at the Nauticam portchard for the Sony 90mm macro, I see that max. magnification and working distance are pretty similar with or without MFO-1)... You say that sharpness of the image and other qualities are improved. Can you please explain this in more detail (As far as my understanding is, any additional glass added to a lens (e.g. TC or diopter) leave IQ, at the best, untouched. How is it possible that sharpness improves?)... Thanks, Wolfgang

Wow, Retra reacted really fast to the Backscatter HF-1. If I would not have bought recently two HF-1s (at present, I like them a lot, since they do a great job) and serious reviews would show that the Retra Maxi performed as good as the specs suggests, I might have considered them instead... Anyhow it is good that affordable and powerful strobes become now available, after Inon stopped production of the Z330... I fear Retra may come out with a smart model with circular tubes and integrated Li+ batteries (instead of 8 NiMh batteries, 4 being in the supercharger extension) - this may be the point where I cannot hold myself back and will order some... Wolfgang

This is indeed a stone-coral, one of the few ones in the Mediterranean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cladocora_caespitosa With "corals" I mean the class of Anthozoa ("Blumentiere" in German). These animals are really beautiful in the Adria. Also Gorgonia belong to this group. This September we were able to see/photograp even a precious coral (Corallium rubrum) in the Kornati national park at quite shallow depth of approx. 33m (they are almost extinct at recreational divers depths)... Is the new owner the son of Jani (his name was Tommi)? Jani was the previous operator, he also made the guide aboard the old Vranjak. Or is it the son of the previous captain (I cannot remember his name just now)?

Thank you for this interesting report, Klaus...👍 In the old days (before 2000) I have been twice for a week on the old Vranjak and it was fantastic and outstanding. Later there appeared a new boat, the Vranjak II (maybe this is th erecent Vranjak) and now it seems even the operator has changed. We certainly will book a trip in the near future (as far as I know one should reserve a place optimally 2 years in advance, I guess the scedule for 2025 is pretty full 😊). We go to the Adriatic at least twice a year (for us it is aprox. 4h driving by car). Especially the corals (e.g. in Vis and Kornati islands) easily compete with any other destination. The Anthias colonies at red Gorgonia fields (alomost) beat the Red Sea, but one must go at least 30m, better pretty deeper, to see the beauty. Macro motifs, like nudies, are beautiful and abundand. As Klaus writes, it may not be a favorite destination for people coming from far away, but for people living close... => Also complete charter is available, if made well in advance, maybe one of us should organize a special UW-photographer safari (best time is second week in September - first week in October, then 7mm semidry is sufficient)? Wolfgang

The heavier weight, or better the negative buoyancy, was only a problem on the first dive: I had the floats mounted the same way as I had for the relatively neutral Z330, i.e. most floats on the inner arm, to have buoyancy close to the center of gravity. The result was a rig with strong torque, because of the backwards positioned HF-1s that pulled the rig down. Now I put the floats more on the outer arm and I do not recognize any more that they are heavier than the Z330s... Regarding the Li+ batteries, It is much better to travel with 8 batteries, sufficient for two HF-1 and one MF-2, compared to the 16 NiMh batteries plus two 21700, previously for two Z330s plus HF-2. Li+ is certainly the future. I find the negative and anxious feelings of some people too innovation skeptical and also a little bit ambiguous. There are so many Li+ batteries on board of aeroplanes (and also diving vessels) already now, because of handys and computers. The minority of Li+ batteries is from divers, is it video lights or diving torches, where Li+ batteries are already the standard. Now come some additional Li+ batteries from UW flashes - so what? Regarding airline restrictions, the 21700 need to be carried as carry-on luggage, not as check-in luggage, up to 20 are allowed. The restrictions start at 100 Wh capacity (2 allowed) and at > 160 Wh the real problems start, see e.g. here: https://www.iata.org/contentassets/6fea26dd84d24b26a7a1fd5788561d6e/passenger-lithium-battery.pdf => In summary, no regrets so far (Tomorrow, November 13rd, I will take off for the next dive trip 😋(Tansania, Mafia island))... The HF-1s are a substantial upgrade compared to the Z330s, regarding color temperature and power. Light distribution is very good according to my experiences, but see Alex Mustards review on HF-1 (He writes the HF-1 belongs to the best UW flashes available and he likes them a lot, but the Retras provide more even and softer light distribution and hence, are even better)... Wolfgang

I have Macbook M1 Pro, approx. four years old. Still very good for photo (LRc & Photoshop) and video editing (DaVinci freeware version). When the notebook was new, all LRc editing was fast as a flash, but in the meantime the AI based filters came out. These consume much more processor time. As I use the computer, the AI filters are the most demanding tasks. Processing a single photo (e.g. NR via AI) lasts up to a minute (estimated, A7R5). I guess with the new M4 Pro this may be half or even less of the time (I did not see benchmarks for these AI applications for comparison, but maybe someone has already tested.)... New applications demand more power. 32 MB RAM are still sufficient and 2TB SSD is o.k. (I have programs and not yet finished projects on the SSD and this is approx. 1TB (only 1TB would be limiting for me). I have the 14" version, as I find this much more convenient for traveling. At home, I connect the notebook to a calibrated 27" monitor... Wolfgang

I cannot tell about the Retras, but I can compare Z330 against HF-1... Already after one two week diving holiday, I can say that with HF-1 (with 4500K flat diffusers) the color of the sea needs little correction in most cases (WA with 180° fisheye and WACP-C with 130° and less; combination of both flash and natural light). With Z330, I had to adjust this color much more, not seldom using masks in LR. Also the susceptibility to backscatter seems to be less with HF-1 (I guess the flat diffusers have a narrower beam angle compared to the Z330 with the built in dome diffusers, but cannot say exactly, it is just a subjective impression)... I did not recognize a difference in evenness or softness of the light distribution. Not seldom I get a darker area in the middle (no matter wich flashes), but the reason is that I did not position the strobes correctly (usually I use "9-3", "10-2" up to "semi-rabbit ear (also something like 3-9, but on elongated arms", depending on motif (depending on how far I want to reach the flashlight and also how reflective the bottom is)) - in my case it happens when the strobes are too far out for the distance of the subject... Wolfgang

I am not in the Nikon system, so others have a better overview - but I just see that Nikon came out with a new APS-C model (unfortunately not with a smaller stacked sensor, similar to Z8 and still with 20 Mpixel): https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-z50ii-initial-review#II Depending on how good the AF works UW, it may be a good camera for UW. I am not sure, but I believe that the old Nikon 8-15mm fisheye and the Tokina 10-17mm fisheye (Nikon version) are not usable on the Z mount, but as far as I know, one can use the Canon EF version of Tokina and the Canon 8-15mm via adapters on Z-mount (plus all Z mount lenses and also the old Nikon lenses that work via adapter)... Maybe worth a consideration? Wolfgang

Good to hear from Brandon and you that the WACP-C offers a real advantage over WWL-1...😊 About the Laowa 10mm one must add that this lens offers a very special perspective and this is certainly not for everybodies taste. It distorts heavily at the corners, the opposite way as fisheye lenses do (fisheye and WWL/WACP compress the borders). The Laowa 10mm stretches the borders out extensively - much too much for my taste. I used it together with the 140mm dome on 2 dives, but I think I will not use this lens again UW, unless (maybe) for a very special occasion...

At the same (wide) aperture, the WWL has better corners. One must add, however, that corners are not really important for most of the photos under these circumstances (big fish/whale in open water)... It is, of course, a matter of personal preference, but I prefer the fisheye-like character of WWL/WACP in most cases: the object in the center gets emphasized and more hefty, while the periphery gets compressed... I will go to Mafia Island/Tansania in two weeks and hopefully we will encounter whale sharks and whales there. Similar situation, but (hopefully) more light. I am sure I will use my WACP-C/Sony 28-60mm for most of the time... I plan to use 1/320s, f/5.6 - f/8 and variable ISO as startup settings (A7R5). Not sure about AF yet, AF of A7R5 is very good, but too many options. I have the camera&housing set so that I can set "AF-Subject Detection" ON/OFF with the record button, C2 to set the "Focus Area" and C3 to toggle "Recognition Target"... Wolfgang

Just an update to the viewfinder issue: I have sent the viewfinder to PanOcean, who forwarded the viewfinder to Nauticam. Information from Nauticam: It is a water inbreak into the nitrogen selaed part of the viewfinder (as Alex presumed) and some parts are corroded. They will exchange the corroded parts under warranty (they say it is labourious, will take approx. 4 hours under Nitrogen atmosphere)...😊 There is also a water stain on the main prisma that is visible when looking through and replacement of the prisma will cost approx. 400 Euros (surprisingly this consequence of the water inbreak is not covered by warranty)...😐 Wolfgang P.S.: it seems that on my next trip that starts on November 13rd, I will still be without the viewfinder...😟

Hi Justin, My approach is not to squeeze out the maximum colors of an existing monitor, but that the colors I see on the monitor during processing in LR and PS should (ideally) be reproduced the same way when the photos are viewed/printed at the end... I view the photos at home on a BenQ 2k beamer and most printing is done for an annual calender that I give to family/friends for Christmas. Seldom some magazine or a big print for the wall. All these end users are able for just for sRGB (as is the internet) and in order to avoid unpleasant surprise, it is better to supply them with calibrated sRGB images... I have a monitor here (BenQ SW270c) that I calibrate from time to time, both in sRGB and aRGB, and I can toggle between sRGB and aRGB (maybe some (remote) day I may be invited to upload an image to a high quality aRGB print medium and then the aRGB option will come into the play...)... Since I switched to edit everything in calibrated sRGB, the final output on the beamer and also on the prints look much more like I see them on my screen... Wolfgang

I think since you already have Nikon Z, it is better to stay with the system you have unless you intend to switch to Sony anyhow... In case you choose Sony and do not want the many Megapixels (I find them very useful), you could wait for A75 that probably will come out soon and certainly will have the latest technology. WA fisheye is a real problem with FF (all brands), there is nothing like Tokina 10-17mm for APS-C. Only FCP-1 or 8-15mm fisheye with TC (1.4x, maybe even 2x (=> see tread on 8-15 fisheye with TC about this issue) cover the entire range, starting from 180°. WWL/WACP options start at 130° and this is not enough (at least for me, personally)... I think that Canon 8-15mm & 2x Sony TC on Sony is o.k., but there may be a difference in IQ between the Nikon and Canon 8-15mm fisheyes, especially when used with TCs (maybe the performance of the Nikon 8-15mm fisheye with TCs is much worse) - this has never been studied in detail... Wolfgang

I recently upgraded the firmware of my Loupedeck CT to 6.0.1.20874. The results is that the LRc icons look terrible: just white on black background, no colors (in the perevious upgrade, where these problems started they looked even worse: white on turquoise). They are very difficult to differentiate during the workflow, what greatly decreases the usability of this hardware extension. Even in the "Color Mixer" submenue of the "Develop" module, all icons are white on black and one has to have close look, which color range is active, before adjustments are done... Did anyone experience a similar problem? Did you downgrade to the last usable version? I have Macbook Pro M1 and Sequoia 15.0.1 (is it the same with windows?) Wolfgang

Regarding the series of sample images that I posted recently, I have opened a poll in DPReview: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4781390 => I greatly appreciate participation of people who take their time (the invitation for a beer is, of course, also valid in the waterpixel forum... 😋). Wolfgang