You know, I have no idea what the difference is.

I too have tiny Asian arms so I share your pain! Well, I did up until I got the new tuzne cleaner! I wish I had one 5 years ago. Would have saved my tank 5 years worth of scratches from the magfloat/shark (DAMN YOU MAGFLOAT/SHARK!). I thought I was pretty careful whenever near the sand but no matter how careful I am, sand surely got under the magnet of those types of cleaners. That or possibly calcareous tube worms.

Still, I hate to bring bad news but even with the new cleaning scraper it's STILL a chore LOL.

Thank you my Asian friend. :lol:

I will go purchase one of these soon. Cleaning with the shark is getting real tired real quick.

Can't sand still get between this n glass n scratch Ur tank? If it's not possible at all I will deff get 1 as well. I stopped using mag float in fear of scratching my new tank but having an in wall now it's hard using the Kent scraper cleaning from the top due to reflection n I keep have to go to the front to check for missing spots.

actually, I did notice that if you are REALLY aggressive with it that you can manage to wedge sand between the glass and that plastic blue bit that holds the metal scraping blade in place. Still, it's not easy to do. Certainly not as easy to wedge sand in there as with a magfloat/shark. Think about a Kent scraper that you run along the inside of your tank. That's what this thing is like. Mostly just a thin blade on the inside.

Even witha Kent scraper I'm scared to clean the near sand bed part. I always just push it down n lift scraper off instead of scraping up. Mybe I'm too cautious?

You can never be too cautious :-) I jam this thing right into my sandbed now though.
Could never do that with the magfloat/shark before!

Oh man I think I rly need this lol. How thick us ur glass I see ur using the strong version. Mine half inch. Wonder if I can get away with the reg long version.

Everyone needs one of these! My glass is 1/2".

This thread is pointless without pictures.
 

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psbeglfqth.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pslq1q2njv.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psixiyfhei.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psypl7ufxj.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psi6xdlv6p.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psx776dw4s.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psmwxtaur8.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psby1f5luf.jpg

Looking good Kiener!

Care Magnet nano
(0220.010)
Glass thickness from 6mm (1/4") to max. 10mm (3/8").

Care Magnet long
(0220.015)
Glass thickness from 10mm (3/8") to max. 15mm (1/2").

Care Magnet strong
(0220.020)
Glass thickness from 15mm (1/2") to max. 20mm (3/4").

Cool, thanks! I wonder why it's called "long" considering the scraper is the same size length wise :-)

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psy6jxt0ts.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps6gmcgljz.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psfsnszrfi.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps14q7fb48.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psq1ky3spx.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps58uobj8n.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psvtowrubj.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps4ty0yrpd.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psfbeopzla.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pspvd16iet.jpg

Ooooo, love that last coral

I think they are referring to it being longer than the Nano
Kinda like your T-Rex arms compared to my arms :mrgreen:

Nano is Width 45mm (1.77 in.), length 78mm (3 in.).
Long is Width 86mm (3.4 in.), length 140mm (5.5 in.).
Strong is Width 86mm (3.4 in.), length 140mm (5.5 in.).

I love the last coral as well. What is it?

That last one is a Red Plant.

*I can neither confirm nor deny that it is or is not ORA.

That baby is sweet :)

I read that at proper depth and light green will come out on red planet just havent seen it. Very nice.

absolutly amazing photos.. how and what camera set up do you use?

This debate is still on going???

Totally agree... Keep those amazing shots coming!

OH EM G-O-S-H !! I wrote that comment just for you ! :lol: I miss those debates. Good times!

Thanks! Canon 6D with 24-105mm lens or Canon 40D with 28-75mm lens depending on my mood.

Sweet photos

Big price difference between these two - for the average reef photographer, do you prefer one over the other? I'm looking at upgrading from my old G9. Or do you think it's more about the lens than the body?

You're right, there is a pretty big difference in price between the two. To be honest, it's not the camera that makes the picture (even though technically speaking the camera body does make the picture :lol:). I'm sure you and many people have heard this many times before, but what makes a bigger difference in photo taking is the quality of the lens. That's where you want to spend your money.

I actually have no preference between the two camera bodies (for reef photography). In fact, a few years ago I had an even older, cheaper, smaller Canon Rebel (entry level Digital SLR) that I used to take photos with. If I still had it today I would use that camera with one of my prized lenses and still produce the same images.

If someone asked me for my recommendation I would say get the whatever camera body you want. For general photography (including reef photo taking, etc), they are all virtually the same. A $300 DSLR vs a $3000 SLR. Then get a really good lens. My 24-104 mm and 28-75 mm lenses are both very good lenses. If I put either of those lenses on a $300 entry level DSL or a $3000 high end DSLR they can/will take the exact same picture.

Sorry but I must disagree on this point. Let's say you put your 24-105, an L (professional grade) lens onto a Rebel (few hundred bucks), compared to a current gen full frame camera like a 5DMkIII ($3000), there will be a marked difference in the image produced, whether it's a picture of a person's face, landscape, or a fish and coral.

The differences in image quality such as resolution, dynamic range, noise reduction, etc. can be easily distinguished by any person. Not that I don't agree with your point in investing in lenses, that's definitely the right way to go, but with today's technology you cannot discount the camera body's importance as well.

I speak of these things with experience as I've gone through many camera bodies and lenses in the past 5 years. Currently due to work I just use a 5D2 and 1D3, with the 24-105 and 70-200 f/2.8 IS mkII. I don't have much of a preference for these lenses, they do weddings well, but if I had money to burn I'd buy all my prime lenses back. Prime >>>>>> zoom lens. :wink:

Yes, you're right in that there are major difference among the camera bodies. There is absolutely a reason why a camera is $3000 vs $300. What I was trying to do was simplify the discussion and put it in the contexts of taking reef pictures. You don't need 1D to take reef tank pictures that are identical to what I photographed. You can achieve the same results with a Rebel. I know because I have.

For example, taking a picture of a particular coral (say my Frogspawn or that Red Planet that everyone liked) at F4, IS0200 and 160 shutter speed will look virtually the same on any DSLR today.

I didn't intend to discount the camera bodies entirely. I am aware of the differences because I have owned quite a few myself being a former portrait and wedding photographer. It's just that I get asked ALL the time, "what camera are you using?" or "what camera should I get?" and I try to answer that question in a more relateable manner without going into the nuances of photography like dynamic range, noise reduction, etc :-)

Well that settles it then. It doesn't matter what camera you get. So then what lens should we get.....? :lol:

The one that takes awesome pictures. Serious, didn't you read ANYTHING that I wrote?

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psigmdikqo.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps4y5cujom.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps341nfkat.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pswdh3t4hk.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psechrke6j.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pszpvl8ndu.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pssnmh9qiu.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psxfcctpbn.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psfbw4jwkz.jpg

LOL this ^

If one is really hardcore about reef pictures, probably the Canon 100mm f/2.8 L macro lens would do wonders.

For wider shots like FTS, something like a 24mm/35mm prime lens would be great.

Currently if I were on the market for a camera body, Canon 6D would probably be my choice. Full frame >>> crop. Or a used 5D2 is still a great camera.

Last couple years I've really enjoyed using the Fuji X100s as a non-work camera. Beautiful image quality and affordable price, with a small body/footprint that you just can't get with a DSLR.

Yes, I do love the 100mm macro lens as well! Awesome lens that I used to use a lot to take reef photos.

A lot of photography is dependant on your particular needs. Everyone has different needs. I owned a Canon 5D Mark II for a couple of years while I used it as my primary camera. With it I owned and used the very nice but expensive 24-70mm L F2.8 and Canon 70-200mm F2.8 IS L lens. Although that particular kit took AWESOME photos I did not enjoy using it. I am an asian with small t-rex arms so for me lugging around that kit was HEAVY. I rarely ever took it out during family outings, instead favouring my smaller 40D with a lighter 17-50mm Tamron lens. When the new 6D came out I immediately sold my arguably better 5D Mark II in favour of the 6D simply for the fact that it was easier to use. Getting a 6D over the 5D mark II wasn't an upgrade. Most people would probably consider it a downgrade. Still, I often favoured my 40D. In addition I have since sold both my 24-70 F2.8L and 70-200mm F2.8L IS lens and got the F4 version of it instead. Again, another downgrade but I use it more now because it is much lighter and easier for me to carry around to say, the zoo with my wife and kids.

Currently I am in the market for a new camera and am actually looking for an even smaller and lighter body while not sacrificing some of my favoured workflow features on my existing camera bodies.

As for Full Frame vs Crop, again, this is highly dependant on your particular needs. For me, even though my 6D is full frame, after it has left Lightroom I crop it down to a 10 megapixel image anyway because quite frankly, I find them (10 mega pixels) good enough for 99.9% of my needs. It's good enough for the web and good enough to print photos with. I have only ever once generated a full frame (24 mega pixel) image out of my 6D and that was for a client who wanted to make a poster once. 24 megapixel images are massive and while I understand the need for them and the benefits of them, I don't think everyone needs 24 mega pixels. They take up a lot of space and take a long time to process. All of my clients received 10 megapixel files for their use and they were more than happy with them. Don't get me wrong. I'm not disagreeing with you. In many respects full frame is better than cropped. It's just that I don't think everyone *needs* it :-)

At the end of the day, I could and did afford some high end equipment but learned that I didn't necessarily need them. My needs were different. A 5D mark II with a 24-70 F2.8L lens (while totally AWESOME), did me no good if it frequently sat on my desk while I took pictures of my kids at the park with my iPhone. I guess that was part of my point earlier about when people ask me for my recommendation or what camera I use. When I tell them I use my 6D or 40D they go researching and discover that those can be fairly expensive cameras so many people think that's what they need (those expensive cameras) to achieve similar results to what I've posted in my thread. Well, that's not correct. They don't need to buy an expensive full frame 6D or even a 40/50/60D to achieve similar results. If they want to photograph fast paced sporting events or model shows or make billboards, then yes, they will probably need to buy those more expensive cameras, but those have not typically been the people asking me for my recommendations :-)

Well put. The reason I favour full frame over cropped is two-fold: shallower depth of field and better ISO performance. For me, that's worth the price difference.

With the emergence of the Fuji X100T, the X100S can be had for a relatively low price on the used market. The Fuji gave me what I wanted: a compact, discrete camera that rivals, if not betters DSLR image quality. I took the Fuji on our honeymoon last year and I did not feel crippled in any way, and took some fantastic photos while not being encumbered by a heavy DSLR.

Macro-wise, it is acceptable. The shutter lag of course is the one disadvantage but it really isn't that bad once you get used to it.

Another good camera I have had experience with is the Olympus OM. More flexibility than the Fuji but a bit more bulky and I daresay the Fuji has better IQ.

Another thing people often miss is the importance of a good tripod. Instead of spending all the budget on body/lenses/etc., a nice tripod can do so much more for photography. Definitely a worthwhile investment and the technology never goes out of place, unlike cameras and to a lesser extent, lenses.

Interesting discussion, I took notes :D

Kein, in that last set of pics you posted, are all those shot Raw then tweeked?

Yes. Actually *all* of my photos are shot in RAW. I prefer to control the output of my photos so I use Adobe Lightroom to generate JPG, PNG, or TIFF files (depending on my needs). I definitely do tweak the photos prior to outputting them. I have a macro/preset in Lightroom for various applications (Portraits, Landscape, Reef, etc). For photos in my tank my macro/preset typically does the following:

1. Reduce black level (reduces shadows due to harsh halides)
2. Adjust white balance to 15K to balance out the Halides and T5 lights. The camera often has a tough time with white balance when photographing reef tanks.
3. Crop/resize image from 20.2 Mega pixels down to 10 Megapixels (yes, I literally THROW AWAY half the pixels that my camera used to generate the image :lol:).
4. Output file to JPG.

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psl3c0lbl0.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psiyipoh6z.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pspzngx5tp.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psjy1ftcep.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psizi6chla.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psshgtuw9g.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psdot1qfrn.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psf6stoyyz.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psr3zn1on7.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psqsesjn4e.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psl6bl0ccp.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psx5xfeumk.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...ps6dkmoc40.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pszvlgyhe6.jpg

awesome

Thanks :-)

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psq5229spa.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...pslhishqdw.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psdxpwgh32.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psosoctpkc.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psrmlhf2ej.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psunn6rbox.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psqmea3siv.jpg

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/...psozgdocof.jpg

Now that you are staff, are you still eligible for TOTM!!?...