I thought some of you might be interested in seeing my new underwater camera set-up (images below). This is my first foray into underwater DSLR, after shooting a Nikonos V system for the last 20 years.

It is centred around the Olympus E-330 camera with the Olympus 11-22mm lens and a 4Gb CF II card plus a 1Gb xD-H card (about 380 RAW images).

Lighting is provided by two Olympus FL-36 flash units in the Olympus housings plus diffusers.

The two flashes are driven by the Athena Double-Sync unit and are mounted on the Athena arms on the Athena tray.

So far, it has passed the empty housing and loaded housing tests in a swimming pool. I have some nice images of the drainage holes in the bottom of a 3 meter swimming pool. Next weekend, I'll take it down to 28 meters to take some shots on a shipwreck in the Gulf of Thailand.

My preliminary impressions are all good, with one exception: out of the water it is very heavy... Underwater it is bulky but not difficult to handle.

The two things that I am keen to try underwater are the live preview and the TTL control. Of course, I can resort to manual control of the flash but, for the first time, I have a system where the TTL might just work in many conditions. With this system, I can adjust overall exposure on the camera and, with the dials on the back of each flash, separately adjust the EV balance of each flash. With the live preview and the post review, there is a real possibility that the TTL might just be more creatively viable than manual control.

In any case, I'll post an update to this thread next week with some feedback on the first photo session under the sea with this new equipment.

Regards
Peter

Click to view attachment

Click to view attachment

Wow - those housed flashes look huge!

I'm looking forward to your photos.

David

Yes, they are. I was surprised when they arrived how large they are. Seems like Olympus over-engineered the flash housing somewhat. Looks like they would survive a dive to the bottom of the Mariana Trench...

The upside is that I have a lot of flash power (2 x GN 32) and, with the pair of them, a broad coverage, softened by the diffusers. Also, they are fully integrated into the E-330, even switching off and on with the E-330 master switch. As mentioned above I can dial the TTL EV adjustment separately on each flash head. While they are heavy (and top heavy) out of water, underwater, they are just slightly negative buoyant with a tendency to float head-up, taking the pressure off the wrists.

For clearer water, I'll probably leave one of them on the boat.

I'll let you know how it works out under the sea.

Those clever guys at Athena say that they are considering making a lighter housing for the FL-36.

Regards
Peter

So, I just upgraded my rig, going from an Olympus E-300 to an E-330 to primarily gain live preview, both cameras were in Ikelite housings with Ikelite stobes.

I have been shooting the E-300 in this combo for about a year, and have been generally pleased with the results. The E-330 is lower noise and better autofocus, compared to the E-300.

I would also recommend adding a Oly 14-54 zoom lense. This is a great workhorse lens that will cover a wide range of underwater subjects, from moderate wideangle (28mm equiv) to fish photography and close-ups at 108mm equiv. You should absolutely add this lens to your kit.

I have some initial test shots with the E-300, and will be diving the Southern CA channel islands shortly for more.

Rick Colman
Laguna Hills, CA

I actually do own the 14-54mm zoom. It was the first lens I bought with the body. And the same housing port for the 11-22mm zoom fits the 14-54mm zoom, so taking it underwater would incur no additional cost. I had thought that I would mainly use the 11-22 underwater and the 14-54 on land. But, in clear water, the 14-54 might be an option, or for close-up work.

Regards
Peter

Hi!

Although Olympus recommends the 11-22 behind the flat port this is close to a crime! The 11-22 should be placed behind a matching dome. I'm not sure if Athena provides one but I think that lens is worth the effort.
The greatest lens for WA shooting is the 8mm FE. No other WA lens compares to it. Even sharp in the corners (also with the original Olympus dome which isn't wide enough for the 7-14mm for which it was designed).

Helge ;-)=)

On what basis do you say that this is "close to a crime"? I saw the same comment in your E-330 review and wondered what you meant as you did not back it up with any evidence.

Remember that the 11mm is similar to 22mm in a 35mm lens system and the 22mm is similar to 44mm in a 35mm lens system. I did some tests in a swimming pool, using the lines of tiles for a test image. At 11mm, there was some pincushion distortion. At 15mm it had all but disappeared. At 22mm there was none. Unless you are doing underwater architectural images, the 11-22mm lens should be quite usable behind a flat port, especially given that there are not many straight lines underwater.

Personally, I don't like the really wide-angle lens effects. I'll mainly be using the mid-to-longer end of this lens. I know that very wide-angle lenses enables you to get close and eliminate some dirty water problems but the distorted image of a really wide-angle, IMO, do not reflect the reality that we divers see underwater.

Regards
Peter

Hi!

The 11-22mm is a brilliant zoom lens as I learned during topside use. At the WA side it has an angle of view of 89° which no sensible photographer would have housed behind a flat port on a traditional SLR. Te rule of thumb saying to house nothing less than a 28mm SLR lens behind a flat port is still valid. Transferred to the 4/3 system this means that the standard zooms (14-54mm, 14-45mm) may be used behind a flat port with an acceptable trade-off between image quality and cost.

The 11-22mm wide angle is crippeled by the flat port by angle and the image quality in the corners is degraded as well. Even a misplaced (or too small) dome may cause visible degradation of corner sharpness.

I regard the 11-22mm as a high grade lens and I personally wouldn't spend that much money for a WA lens that wouldn't be such a great WA lens (less angle, less sharpness) after housing it behind a flat dome.

It's not so much the distortion than corner sharpness that may pass unniticed until you have some significant image detail right there.

As long as you use the far end of the lens, you're in teh range of the 14-xxmm lenses. These are ok behind the flat port as mentioned above. The only thing I don's understand why you use it anway if you don'T like the WA effect. The 14-54mm would extend the range to a nice portrait tele you would miss otherwise. It's the same port anyway.

I personally use WA because of the WA effect and perspective and therefore in most cases at the very WA end of the scale. As most WA photographers do the same and image artefacts are worse in that case I always assume that setting for evaluation.

One of my current projects involve large domes. There'll be a prototype for optimized half-half shots with a semisphere of 16" in diameter. The other one will be a larger hemispherical (180° FE) dome for normal use. I'll do some comparisons during the development of the domes to illustrate the effect on curvature, diameter and distortions. It'll take some time (and money). I'm doing all these projects in my free time so I can't say by now when there will be presentable results.

Helge ;-)=)

Hi Peter,

I am using the 11 to 22 and 7 to 14 mm in my Olympus Pt-E02 housing with the Olympus dome port and 7 to 14 mm PER-E02 extension ring. The 7 to 14 gear comes with the extension ring and the 11 to 22 gear is the one supplied for the 14 to 54 and 11 to 22 lenses. The 11 to 22 works much better under the dome than behind the flat port, unless you are interested in reducing the angle of view from the lens. The Olympus port is the same multi coated dome glass made by Athena, used by Sea & Sea and others. The 7 to 14 performs well with this dome but would be even better with the much larger dome sizes Helge refers too. The size of the Olympus dome is great for travel and cost wise fits the Olympus plan to keep total cost down.

Helge, is it my understanding that the E-1 project is now dead? It appears that Olympus will introduce at least two new bodies at PMA, an E-1 replacement and some form of the E-400. Do you intend to start over with the E-1 replacement? Also will your angled finder have you returning to an optical system or do you plan to stay with the live view system?

Phil Rudin