want new kit ...film/no flash/good optics

[blacknet]

Hello,

First off let’s get a few things straight. I agreed with your section on the optics part. The MMPA violation is a real thing, also using strobes on marine mammals is just plain wrong.

www.dict.org States this:

Photography \Pho*tog"ra*phy\, n. [Photo- + -graphy: cf. F.
photographie.]
1. The science which relates to the action of light on
sensitive bodies in the production of pictures, the
fixation of images, and the like.

I.e. painting with light. Don’t add words to my post. I stated this

Photography is the essence of painting with light!

And I stick to my statement. There's the definition according to the dictionary.

Yes you can do zone work underwater! It is a real thing. Just like almost all underwater photographers lack the essence that makes people like Ansel Adams great. Sure there are some great u/w photo people.

I often question the sanity of where this thread is going as it's seriously skewed from its original path.

Ed

 

[TedJ]

Bob,
Here's a link to one you might want to check out.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2931594402&category=3343

 

[blacknet]

Hello,

That item will definately work. The biggest advantage of using a pro camera in a pro housing is the size of the viewfinder. Aquatica makes pro housings for that series.

B&H is a good source to check as well.

Ed

 

[NotoriousBOB]

Hey the Aquatica 3 looks like the bizniz. I already have the F3 a MD4 motordrive and a 21mm lens so it could be the way to go....................I think i'll keep my eyes peeled for a second hand one.

thanks

 

[kasey]

I wouldn't study David Dubilet and Jim Church in learning how to photograph the moon, nor Ansel Adams in learning to photograph underwater! Painting with light is totally different in different media - shooting in murky green water introduces an element of physics that no land photographer ever has to deal with. While natural light photography can be very interesting, flash photography is the staple of underwater photography for good reason. Most marine mammal photos are taken in very shallow water, and often the animals are too big to light with a strobe - that is why natural light dominates this single aspect of underwater photography, and arguably so.
Finally, I wish these forums could be more objective. Ed - read again your original definition of photography. Unless it has been changed since you typed it, it says - the study of light.

 

[Marvintpa]

If you are looking to do available light have you considered a Nikonos V with 15mm lens? This is widely believed to be the sharpest lens in the world for underwater photography, and it can help make some exceptional photos wihtout much of the bulk and complexity of a housing, and has a bulb mode. It's size makes it easy to use with a tripod if you're looking at really long exposures.

 

[NotoriousBOB]

Thanks Marvintpa, I had a chance to try out a Nikonos V today on land and agree it's a beutifully simple/small peice of kit. My only problem with it is the lack of long shutter speeds or a way of locking down the shutter release on 'bulb' setting. Gonna try it in the water at the wkend so i'll post some results maybe

kasey, the reference to Ansel Adams 'the negative' is about his excelent explanations of the physics and chemistry of film exposure/control/development.
The fact that he is a landscape photographer is neither here nor there.
Using his systems it is possible to take controll of the meters sugested exposure and visualise how different 'creative' exposures would work.......by the way there is also a chapter on how to shoot the moon

 

[blacknet]

kasey,

My original unedited post stated

Photography is the essence of painting with light!

I think that what I did originally post was taken out of context. I should have kept my opinion on strobes to myself and never remarked on that.

Why would you not study David Dubilet's work? He's a great person to know and he's made some great comments on my work. He has some outstanding photo's and has experimented with many different things.

Ed

 

[SubMariner]

Photography is the study of light, that's the base definition. It matters not where you are, what you are doing or anything else. The base definition does not change, it's what you do with it that changes.

So.. "out of context"? I think not.

~SubMariner~

 

[vicky]

UW photography- like any other type of photography- is "painting with light. But underwater, after several meters, the only light available for painting is lacking some colors of its original colorful spectrum. You can paint as much as you want with blues...Or, you can paint with an almost full spectrum- using a strobe.
For these very same reasons, using a strobe for distances farther than 2-2.5 meters is almost useless- most "warm" colors will be absorbed anyway.. That's the reason many underwater mammal photos are taken without a strobe- if you want to cover the whole body of a whale that is about 10meters away, no strobe in the world will render you any colors. Also I don't remember these animals being so colorful from the beginning

But corals and reef-fish without a strobe? Bahhh... Only if you are diving at 0-3 meters deep AND it's a sunny day AND the sun is in a good angle AND the surface is clear (no wind- no waves) AND water is cristalline clear- then you can get some colors without a strobe.
IMHO without a strobe you can take photos of wrecks, light & shadow effects, including silhouettes. Perhaps also B&W can be nice sometimes without a strobe.

And a last word- why are you lamenting ("I think that what I did originally post was taken out of context. I should have kept my opinion on strobes to myself and never remarked on that.
")??
So, many of us disagree with you, it doesn't mean we don't appreciate your opinion or that we would like you not to tell us what you think. Ain't this a "discussion forum"? Isn't this the place to say what you think and see what others think of what you say? You'll find people disagreeing on anything on almost every thread in this forum or any other, for this matter. Most of the time the equation is "2 persons= 3 opinions"... (originally it's 2 doctors=3 opinions, but who cares... )