Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why do you not use dSLR?


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

Poll: Why do you not shoot dSLR (26 member(s) have cast votes)

What is it that stops you making the move

  1. too big (10 votes [38.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.46%

  2. too dear (14 votes [53.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 53.85%

  3. no live preview (1 votes [3.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.85%

  4. Other reason....please add a response (1 votes [3.85%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.85%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Scubysnaps

Scubysnaps

    Great White

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1081 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Central
  • Interests:Diving, photography, Audi TTRS

    www.scubysnaps.com

Posted 01 October 2009 - 10:13 PM

Hi,
I'm just curious what peoples' reasons are for not shooting underwater with dSLR...for me its a mix of the money, size to travel with, and no live view...please make your vote!
Cheers
Woody :D

Edited by Scubysnaps, 01 October 2009 - 10:16 PM.

Cheers
Paul

*Nikon D90 with Tokina 10-17 & Nikon 60mm, 105mm, Sigma 17-70, Kenko1.4 * 2 x Z240 & 2 x 12 litres...global! *

www.scubysnaps.com >)))>

#2 Nakedwithoutcamera

Nakedwithoutcamera

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 395 posts

Posted 02 October 2009 - 05:37 AM

I voted too dear, plus I am so mechanically inept I'd need someone to walk me through ever single step.
Ellen B.

#3 ce4jesus

ce4jesus

    Giant Squid

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1639 posts
  • Location:Aurora Colorado
  • Interests:Anything Ocean (How'd I end up in Colorado?)<br /><br />A Christian Marine Conservationist?

Posted 02 October 2009 - 07:52 AM

Not me personally but I know people who have health issues lugging a larger rig around underwater.
Gary
Olympus E-520, TLC arms, Inon Z-240s, 50mm, 14-42mm woody's diopter

#4 FreediveWI

FreediveWI

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 36 posts
  • Location:Madison, Wisconsin
  • Interests:freediving, trimix, photography, wrecks, kayaking, running, skiing, underwater hockey, scuba instructor, ect.

Posted 03 October 2009 - 04:31 AM

Too expensive, and they change the cameras so fast that once you do make the investment it's obsolete in a year.

#5 Cerianthus

Cerianthus

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 825 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hasselt, Overijssel, Netherlands

Posted 03 October 2009 - 05:55 AM

well, cant really fill in the poll : but have to react on the last remark : just because there is a camera that has more pixels, better resolution, etc etc does not mean the camera suddenly stops working after a year...

Gerard

My photo's on flickr
Crop the world ! (Using Canon 70D, 60mm, 100mm, 10-17mm FE, Ikelite)


#6 CompuDude

CompuDude

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 03 October 2009 - 06:03 PM

Assuming "too dear" is an expression for "too much money", then yeah, that.

I want one badly even though the monstrous size, lack of video capability (in most, yes, there are are few new ones that somewhat correct that), and lack of the ability to switch between WA and Macro on one dive all give me pause. But the cost of entry is still far too high. Perhaps if the housings were more reasonably priced... and each type of shooting didn't require a new lens purchase (and new port/dome, in some cases)... and few offer the ability to shoot optically-triggered strobes, necessitating further upgrades still... Oh, and let's not forget excess baggage fees on nearly every trip!

And yet I still want one. :(

So do I plop down $1k for a new Canon S90+Ike housing (assuming they make one), or $1.5k for a G11+ike housing (assuming they make one), or $6k+ for a D300 (or even D90), housing, and two strobes? Oh, and continue to make mortgage payments! These are questions to wrestle with...

Edited by CompuDude, 03 October 2009 - 06:05 PM.


#7 Scubysnaps

Scubysnaps

    Great White

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1081 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Central
  • Interests:Diving, photography, Audi TTRS

    www.scubysnaps.com

Posted 04 October 2009 - 02:02 AM

Assuming "too dear" is an expression for "too much money", then yeah, that.

I want one badly even though the monstrous size, lack of video capability (in most, yes, there are are few new ones that somewhat correct that), and lack of the ability to switch between WA and Macro on one dive all give me pause. But the cost of entry is still far too high. Perhaps if the housings were more reasonably priced... and each type of shooting didn't require a new lens purchase (and new port/dome, in some cases)... and few offer the ability to shoot optically-triggered strobes, necessitating further upgrades still... Oh, and let's not forget excess baggage fees on nearly every trip!

And yet I still want one. :)

So do I plop down $1k for a new Canon S90+Ike housing (assuming they make one), or $1.5k for a G11+ike housing (assuming they make one), or $6k+ for a D300 (or even D90), housing, and two strobes? Oh, and continue to make mortgage payments! These are questions to wrestle with...


you took the words right outta my mouth!


...but its time to ignore them words :(
Cheers
Paul

*Nikon D90 with Tokina 10-17 & Nikon 60mm, 105mm, Sigma 17-70, Kenko1.4 * 2 x Z240 & 2 x 12 litres...global! *

www.scubysnaps.com >)))>

#8 Draq

Draq

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 370 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 October 2009 - 09:30 AM

Too expensive

Too big

No live view

I just can't justify the cost. Not so much the camera or lenses, but the housing and ports. I came really, really close to getting an Olympus due to the reasonably priced housing, but that took me to the other reasons. Also, I do not want to check camera gear and my compact camera with housing, arms and strobes already takes up a lot of room, and combined with reg, computer and few other things is over the allowance of some smaller airlines. A dslr would never make it unless I made the whole family carry bits and pieces. if I had any intention of selling pictures, or could dive where I live and therefore dive more than a few times a year, this MIGHT change a bit.

And, finally, maybe it is just my vision, but I hate the "view" looking through the viewfinder of every dslr I have tried. I "grew up" with SLRs, and really prefer a viewfinder over an lcd on land, but when I put a housing and a mask between my eye and the camera, I just do not enjoy the view. Admittedly, I have never had the opportunity to actually use one while diving, and there are models that are probably better that I haven't tried. Also, I see a lot of people say the viewfinder is better than an lcd and then I see where they plopped down close to a grand for an aftermarket viewfinder attachment.

A "dslr" camera with really good live view and a decent range zoom in a housing and port for around $1,000.00-$1,500.00 would get my attention and probably my money, especially if it were a compact housing, but until then, I have to stay with the point and shoot crowd.

#9 arunk

arunk

    Damselfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 06 October 2009 - 07:29 PM

I am wrestling with precisely the same question right now. I have the G9 with Ike housing and a couple of twin YS110a strobes.

I think I am about to either make your day or plunge you into this maelstorm of contradicting emotions I am going through right now.

Like you, I was put off by the idea of the price of the housings. A Nexus or Subal housing with ports would set you back at least USD 4-5K, let alone the camera and the various lenses.

Then I saw the newish Canon EOS500D and the new Epoque Housing plus the flat port which will take the 100mm macro lens and the kit 18-55 lens which would, including the additional lens, zoom gear, caps etc, cost me about RM 10,000.00 or about USD 2,700.00 all in. It has HD video and a pretty usable live view. I went in and had a look and it was only marginally bigger than my Ike housing. It takes both fibre optic and sync cords and works well with the DSTTL in the YS110as. I have the ULCS arms for my Ike kit and that can be used well enough with the new housing. I have the HPRC Cabin sized Hardcase and if I were to take out the foam and just wrap the stuff with Tshirts etc, it will all fit in. I will invest in a fisheye lens and the dome in a year or so.

I am now seriously considering selling my current set up and moving on up :) .

I am still conflicted though because I dive about three to four times a year only. So I have decided that I am going to leave it to fate. I have set a price and a time frame for my existing set up. If I get the price within the time frame, its is my fate to move on up. God decides...or at least that's what I am telling my wife :( .


Too expensive

Too big

No live view

I just can't justify the cost. Not so much the camera or lenses, but the housing and ports. I came really, really close to getting an Olympus due to the reasonably priced housing, but that took me to the other reasons. Also, I do not want to check camera gear and my compact camera with housing, arms and strobes already takes up a lot of room, and combined with reg, computer and few other things is over the allowance of some smaller airlines. A dslr would never make it unless I made the whole family carry bits and pieces. if I had any intention of selling pictures, or could dive where I live and therefore dive more than a few times a year, this MIGHT change a bit.

And, finally, maybe it is just my vision, but I hate the "view" looking through the viewfinder of every dslr I have tried. I "grew up" with SLRs, and really prefer a viewfinder over an lcd on land, but when I put a housing and a mask between my eye and the camera, I just do not enjoy the view. Admittedly, I have never had the opportunity to actually use one while diving, and there are models that are probably better that I haven't tried. Also, I see a lot of people say the viewfinder is better than an lcd and then I see where they plopped down close to a grand for an aftermarket viewfinder attachment.

A "dslr" camera with really good live view and a decent range zoom in a housing and port for around $1,000.00-$1,500.00 would get my attention and probably my money, especially if it were a compact housing, but until then, I have to stay with the point and shoot crowd.



#10 rtrski

rtrski

    Great White

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1019 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas, USA
  • Interests:Slowly learning digital photography and underwater digital photography. Like drinking from a salt-water firehose... ;-)

Posted 07 October 2009 - 05:57 AM

Well, I did switch...but only to one with live view, and got most of my housing/strobes used, and am sticking with it even though it's getting quite out of date because replacing/upgrading would be too 'dear', and dealing with the dirty looks from the wife regarding the travel bulk/size and how using it shortens my bottom time by 5-15 minutes/dive.... So I'm in the category of did switch, but probably shouldn't have, for almost all your reasons. :(

Edited by rtrski, 07 October 2009 - 05:58 AM.

Current rig: Sony SLT-alpha55 in Ikelite housing, Sigma 105mm f2.8 DC Macro w/ Ike 5505.58 flat port or Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM behind UWCamStuff custom 5" mini-dome. Dual INON z240 Type IVs triggered with DS51 for TTL mimicry, or DS51 alone with home-made ringflash assy for macro.

 

Topside, unhoused: Sony SLT-alpha99, Sigma 150-500mm + 1.4TC (Saving for Sony 70-400 G2), Sigma 15mm diagonal fish, Sony 24-70mm f2.8 CZ, Tamron 180mm f2.8 Macro...all the gear and nary a clue...


#11 Draq

Draq

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 370 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 October 2009 - 09:27 AM

At one point a couple years ago I had decided to house my E330. I looked for a few months for the housing I wanted (not an Ike) without success. I am waiting to see what some of the new Olympus and Panasonic cameras may offer, but I have my doubts.

#12 jander4454

jander4454

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 07 October 2009 - 10:08 AM

A point and shoot with add-on lenses is much more versatile.

Sony a6000 in Nauticam with Inon D-2000 flashes
www.nudibranch.org/


#13 arunk

arunk

    Damselfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 07 October 2009 - 03:36 PM

A point and shoot with add-on lenses is much more versatile.



Some may be but not my G9 in the Ike housing. Like it or not, I have to use it like a DSLR in the sense that I cannot really use the macro lenses and the wide angle lenses in one dive, due to the fact that I have to change the standard port to a flat port in order to use the wide angle lens and dome. If you then tried zooming in, the lens would crash into the port and a "Lens error" message would come up. The G9 with double stack macro lenses work brilliantly, but you would be limited to small fish portrait shots after taking off the macro lenses, as the fov underwater is not great. That is quite apart from the fact the other stuff that would start to bother you after a while...shutter lag (after a while you get tired of taking pictures of the tails of fishes), digital noise when shooting anything above ISO200 and the limited aperture (F8).

#14 CompuDude

CompuDude

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 346 posts
  • Location:Studio City, CA

Posted 07 October 2009 - 04:40 PM

A point and shoot with add-on lenses is much more versatile.

More versatile in that you can use wide angle and macro on the same dive, yes.

More versatile in the ability to capture higher quality images in a wider array of conditions, no.

No P&S can touch a DSLR in super macro... pick up a MacroMate or Subsee and it blows away stacked Inon lenses, both in terms of image quality and in terms of possible photo variations.

The few P&S cameras that have a true wide angle/fisheye option still don't have the same image quality, in terms of corner sharpness, etc., compared to a true fisheye lens mounted to a DSLR behind a big dome port.

No P&S can touch the dynamic range (perhaps there's a better term) of a DSLR, either... referring to usable ISO settings above 400-800, referring to Aperature settings better than f/8.0 (show me the P&S that can shoot at f/32), and even higher shutter speeds.

You can do some amazing photography with a P&S, but you're working within the limits of the camera. With a DSLR, there are still limits, but they're pushed farther back.

See, I'm slowly selling myself on my need to go DSLR, whether I can afford it or not. :P

#15 ce4jesus

ce4jesus

    Giant Squid

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1639 posts
  • Location:Aurora Colorado
  • Interests:Anything Ocean (How'd I end up in Colorado?)<br /><br />A Christian Marine Conservationist?

Posted 08 October 2009 - 05:50 PM

More versatile in that you can use wide angle and macro on the same dive, yes.


Maybe. When I dive with my 14-42mm lens with a woody's diopter on it, I get almost 1:1 macro and without the adapter I can get to the 35mm equivalent of 28mm with the WA. If I could afford the 12-60 lens it would be even better. Some zoom lenses are now becoming very sharp and versatile underwater. Furthermore, with a manual zoom, you can quickly adjust your framing. Not so with a P&S.
Gary
Olympus E-520, TLC arms, Inon Z-240s, 50mm, 14-42mm woody's diopter

#16 .Greg

.Greg

    Clownfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 22 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Philippines

Posted 09 October 2009 - 08:36 PM

Too expensive

Too big

No live view



Too big

Size is not that much different if you get an aluminum case for the DSLR.

Ikelite housing G10: 7x6x6x
Aquatica housing D90: 8x6x7

Handles and strobes are the same size.

Lenses are larger but not enough to push me off the image quality.


No live view

Quite a few DSLR cameras like D90 and D300 have Live View.


Too expensive

Yeah, that one hurts...

Edited by .Greg, 09 October 2009 - 09:54 PM.


#17 Hani Amir

Hani Amir

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 187 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maldives

Posted 11 October 2009 - 04:36 AM

^ Live view is pretty standard on all new DSLRS.


I'd like to come up with all sorts of cool reasons to not want a DSLR setup, but all it boils down to is me not being able to afford it :P

#18 Draq

Draq

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 370 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 October 2009 - 09:09 AM

To clarify a bit; Most DSLR housings are big and when you add a wide angle and proper port for wide angle..... the size can be an issue. Granted, there are some smaller housings. Yes, Ike housings for point and shoots are themselves fairly large. I don't use them. I suppose the smallest DSLR housings and largest P&S housings may not be too far off in measurements, until you add ports.

Price is relative. Ike is fairly affordable but then we go back to size and some strobe compatibility issues. Seatool and Aquatica are too expensive for me, especially with the cost of ports and the odd bits necessary to make everything work.

Live view: As far as I know, no DSLR has implemented a truly useful (for underwater photography) live view since the Oly E330 and now some recent Oly and Panasonic offerings for which there are no housings. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't believe the live view on the D90 and D300 are suitable for general underwater use. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

I should note that I have come closest to buying Olympus DSLRs and OEM housings. There have been some that are relatively compact and relatively economical; solving two of my issues. I am hopeful that with maybe one more generation of camera I could find a DSLR that I would enjoy.

#19 arunk

arunk

    Damselfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 13 October 2009 - 10:56 PM

To clarify a bit; Most DSLR housings are big and when you add a wide angle and proper port for wide angle..... the size can be an issue. Granted, there are some smaller housings. Yes, Ike housings for point and shoots are themselves fairly large. I don't use them. I suppose the smallest DSLR housings and largest P&S housings may not be too far off in measurements, until you add ports.

Price is relative. Ike is fairly affordable but then we go back to size and some strobe compatibility issues. Seatool and Aquatica are too expensive for me, especially with the cost of ports and the odd bits necessary to make everything work.

Live view: As far as I know, no DSLR has implemented a truly useful (for underwater photography) live view since the Oly E330 and now some recent Oly and Panasonic offerings for which there are no housings. Maybe I am wrong, but I don't believe the live view on the D90 and D300 are suitable for general underwater use. Please correct me if I am wrong here.

I should note that I have come closest to buying Olympus DSLRs and OEM housings. There have been some that are relatively compact and relatively economical; solving two of my issues. I am hopeful that with maybe one more generation of camera I could find a DSLR that I would enjoy.


Your comment on the size is quite right, but if you were to add the wide angle lens and dome to the Ikelite housing for the G9, its big and pretty heavy too. Ultimately I think most people are frightened off the DSLR route because you then set yourself down that slippery slope of "needing" new lenses and then needing new ports and extensions for those new lenses. Someone said on another forum, that the hardest part is actually making the decision.

Well, I've done it. I sold the Ike and G9 for the equivalent of USD 720.00. The way I figured it, at the moment, there is still a demand for this set up, even pre-owned. In another year, I do not believe anyone would want it and technology moves on. I think the G11 is going to blow the G10 and G9 well out of the water. The S90, with housing, even more so. It was the right time to sell, I think.

I have ordered the Epoque housing with the M100 port which will take the kit 18-55 lens, 60mm Macro lens and the 100mm macro lens and the Canon EOS 500D with kit lens and the 60mm macro lens. I will get used to this set up first before investing in the Dome port, zoom and focus gear and the Tokina 10-17mm Fisheye lens. Those bits are going to blow another hole in the wallet. I will probably have to wait another year or two before making that move. ^_^ . I now cannot wait to play with the camera topside before taking it underwater probably in November or December.

#20 diver dave1

diver dave1

    Great White

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 980 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:chess, u/w photography

Posted 14 October 2009 - 07:45 AM

For a time it was too dear and too big.
Then I realized I needed 2 more powerful strobes for my P/S (in place of my one puny one) and I bought them.
Then I realized I wanted better wide angle shots..needing an Ike housing for my G9 with add-on dome/lens parts.
Then I realized the G9 plus Ike housing plus associated parts would be larger and a good bit in price towards the dream and still not have the dream.

So a few months ago, I bought a Nexus DSLR housing for the D90.
Just the noise difference in blue water is enough for me to know...GOOD IDEA. I had read here about the noise differences and saw the noise in my shots...but never had the low noise in my photo's for comparison. The D90 at ISO400 is far better than the G9 at 80.
But the check book is crying...and the AFS60mm is coming for Christmas so the crying continues.

Nauticam D7000, Inon Z-240's, 60 micro, 105 micro, Tokina 10-17

www.shiningseastudio.com