Thanks all for the good advice, I knew it was out there. But I'm
afraid good answers only create more questions.
My skills as a diver are always being developed, but I have been diving
for over 10 years. I dive The Monterey Bay most often and the
California coast north to Eureka the rest of the time. But it is
starting to be just the same old thing. I don't get to do much blue
water diving and Monterey is only two hours away. My Dive Instructor
suggested under water photography as a way to make the same old dive
more challenging with out adding to the physical risk.
I am going to try the N*k*onos III for starters and if it seems to
bring back the thrill of diving the same old spots, I'll probably get a
Ikelite or equal housing for my OM-1n. If that happens I'll be back for
more info.
For now I am curious about how the under water lens design differs,
other than the obvious water tight aspects. I think it was Dr. Gilbert
who mentioned the difference in focal lengths, does this mean a macro
lens designed for under water shots has a different design than a land
design? Are there still advantages to using a macro style lens, or do
you need additional correction?
Thanks again to all with words of wisdom.
--
Mike Butler
Chief Mechanic / Engineer
Team FCAR
http://home.earthlink.net/~teamfcar/
Dublin, California
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|