sony rx100 m2 first set up

[KeithG]

save the money for later (or send it to me).

take a minimal system underwater, learn what it will and won't do and decide what you like to do. then learn all you can about what you need to do what you like. then invest heavily in buying gear that you know will do the job.

example: i learned i like close up macro, so for me a wide angle lens was a waste of money. i originally bought one. used it a few times and eventually gave it away to a DM.

 

[fish80]

save the money for later (or send it to me).

hahahaha! Ok will do. (the first one) ....

I am sold. Camera + Meikon housing it is. Which red filter do you recommend using for the rx100? I have been reading various threads and I am not sure. With the gopro I loved the URPRO / SRP filter. Any reason I should go differently with the rx100? Are there even better filters than that?

Thanks!

 

[stuartv]

Yes, the Meikon housing will take 67mm threaded add-ons - like a wet Wide Angle lens.

I'd suggest trying the red filter that comes with the housing before spending money on a different one.

I wouldn't buy a Sola light for two reasons: They're too expensive for what you get, and, two, you can't swap the battery for a fresh one. If you want a video light, check out the Archon D36VR on eBay.

 

[stuartv]

Ok sounds good man. Also I have already a cheaper video light from bigblue which I can use for subjects I can get closer too like a eel or something like that... but that was my idea with the sola, use it only for those type of pictures. Shall I invest that money in wide angle lenses then, or without a strobe it makes no sense?

I'm a pretty new u/w photographer, myself. But, my understanding is that a wide angle lens without a strobe does not make much sense.

A WA lens just makes things look further away. If you are using a strobe, so you want to get close enough for the strobe to really illuminate the subject, then you need a WA lens to keep the subject from being too big to fit in the frame. With just ambient light, you don't have so much need to get so close. So, not so much need for a WA.

 

[mattia_v]

Closer is always better for clarity. Particularly underwater. Water also causes your angle to narrow due to diffraction, so if you want a nice wide shot of the reef you will probably need a wet lens. The issue with strobes an WA is that you need a lot of power to cover the subject; bigger is better, 2 much better than 1.

Macro with flash is relatively easy from a lighting perspective - 1 strobe and some experimentation will get you a long way to where you need to be.

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

A WA lens just makes things look further away. If you are using a strobe, so you want to get close enough for the strobe to really illuminate the subject, then you need a WA lens to keep the subject from being too big to fit in the frame. With just ambient light, you don't have so much need to get so close. So, not so much need for a WA.

While underwater, the farther the subject, the more water will between the camera and the subject. The color of the water will be what has not been absorbed by the water itself. Thus if at 80ft, the column of water above has absorbed most of the sunlight's red and green spectrum, thus leaving the water pretty blue.

That said, if you are using ambient light to shoot, if you use a regular lens, your subject might have to be 10 ft away. A 5ft block of blue water in between you and the subject will make the subject pretty blue. If you have a wide angle wet lens with dome port, you might only have to have the subject 2 ft away, thus your subject's image as to travel much less thru this blue water.

This doesn't take into account to the subject being lit by only blue light. Which means with the default white balance, both images will be pretty blue in color. But you can manual white balance a subject 2 ft away than one 10 ft away because it still has more of the remnant non-blue light for the camera to boost in order to manual white balance with.

Saying that, it should mean you should not need to use a red filter, but instead perform manual white balance frequently, depending on your depth and subject distance. I have a rx100 and its manual WB is terrible. I have been performing manual WB successfully on my ancient Oly C5050Z, and to come to a camera that couldn't do what my dino-cam can do is disappointing. But I just had my manual WB pretty much set to the max setting and have that as my goto stored WB in one of my custom setting so I could jump back and forth between strobe and non-strobe mode.

 

[DazedAndConfuzed]

Dude... you are making me want to just stick to my gopro and forget about a better camera.. :-D

but look at these tg4 review pictures:

Olympus Tough TG-4 Review

they are shot with just a sola 2000. If the tg4 can do this, also the sony rx100 should be this good no? Am I missing something? Thanks!

The goliath grouper shot seem be taken from under a ledge, thus all the light is from the sola, and that's with a fisheye converter, thus the when the grouper is properly lit, it is inches away from the lens. As for most of the other pictures, they seem to have been color corrected, since the color from the video of the same camera is vastly different.

 

[ggibson]

Hey, if you're considering the Meikon housing, I'd do a little research to see if the controls fit your needs. From what I know, that housing cannot adjust the rear control ring. There seems to be a knob to adjust the front ring, but DPReview's review said it slipped often in use. My RX100 II front ring is quite stiff so I can easily imagine that to be the case. The Meikon is a cheaply built housing that will probably not hold up well or handle all that well. My sense is that this housing is OK for snorkeling or beach use, but if you really want to go diving you should spend the extra money on a better housing. If you're considering strobes and all that, you'll be better off in the long run.

Sony just announced a housing that supposedly fits all RX100 bodies (MPK-URX100A) for $330. That seems a much better option to me.

 

[stuartv]

Hey, if you're considering the Meikon housing, I'd do a little research to see if the controls fit your needs. From what I know, that housing cannot adjust the rear control ring. There seems to be a knob to adjust the front ring, but DPReview's review said it slipped often in use. My RX100 II front ring is quite stiff so I can easily imagine that to be the case. The Meikon is a cheaply built housing that will probably not hold up well or handle all that well. My sense is that this housing is OK for snorkeling or beach use, but if you really want to go diving you should spend the extra money on a better housing. If you're considering strobes and all that, you'll be better off in the long run.

Sony just announced a housing that supposedly fits all RX100 bodies (MPK-URX100A) for $330. That seems a much better option to me.

I have the Meikon housing for my E-M10. I have taken it on 4 wreck dives off NC, so far (plus some quarry dives). I have no issues so far with quality or handling. I have it on a tray with 2 Z240 strobes. The housing itself has a good lip on the front and thumb notch on the back that makes it easy for me to handle one-handed. All the buttons work and smoothly so at all depths I've taken it to, so far (113', so far, for 2 dives on the Aeolus).

Obviously, I cannot speak to the specific issue about the Sony control ring.

But, I do agree that if the Sony housing is not much more, and as long as it's rated for at least 130'/40m depth, it would probably be a good choice. I do note, though, that it's interesting that you're implying it's one housing for all 4 (at least) RX100 models. I think every other housing manufacturer has a different model for each version of the RX100, as the (Mk I thru Mk IV) are all slightly different.

 

[ggibson]

I've heard some positive stories about various Meikon housings when I was doing my own research for the RX100 II, but I still think it's a case of getting what you pay for there. For the RX100 II version, the housing is the older clear plastic build which seems more cheaply made than the more recent black polycarbonate models (like the one for the EM10). Some people reported the controls being difficult to press or access on the RX100 housings, and only being able to use one control ring (which slips often) can be a big problem. I personally would be worried about the control o-rings failing over time. I could also not find any information about the compatibility with different wide wet lenses (even with an M67 thread). Finally, the RX100 II housing also only has a single 1/4" thread on the bottom which is not as reliable for pairing with a tray. With all of these compromises and questions and since OP is already considering a strobe and/or video light, it seems worth it to bite the bullet on a more expensive housing.

On the Sony housing, I too was surprised that it is supposed to support all RX100 models. I know there was a small size increase from version I to II to accommodate the tilt screen, and then again on the III where the lens barrel is a bit longer and the body slightly thicker (to fit the EVF maybe?). I think the III-V versions are all the same dimensions--at least the III and IV housings are usually the same. If it works for the II, it seems like a promising option at the price.