Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Going from S100 to M43, signifigant upgrade?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 gargar

gargar

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 33 posts

Posted 07 April 2014 - 03:23 PM

Hey all,

 

Over the last year, I've gone from a massive ikelite DSLR rig (that i loved, but did not love packing) to a much more compact S100/fisheye setup.  I love how compact the new setup is, and being able to switch from macro to WA with relative ease.  But I am missing the sharpness of my DLSR!

 

I refuse to go back to a DSLR rig because of the size, but would a micro four thirds set-up such as an EPL2 or EPL3 be worth the upgrade?

 

My ex had an EPM1 and I didn't really find the images all that impressive.

 

Thoughts?

 

I'd likely get a M43 setup, precision dome and panasonic 8mm fisheye. I am currently running one YSD1 strobe with the S100 and loving it, might need a second with the pana 8mm fisheye though.



#2 kc_moses

kc_moses

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

Posted 07 April 2014 - 04:22 PM

Have you consider the higher end side of Point and Shoot, such as the Sony RX100 or even the Panasonic LX-7? Here is example of what the LX-7 can do (these are not my photos, but are the best I have seen done with LX7):

 

https://www.flickr.c...cipio2010/sets/



#3 gargar

gargar

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 33 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 05:51 AM

those shots are awesome.  really awesome.  But on paper the LX7 is hardly an upgrade from the S100...

 

It makes me think maybe I just need to learn how to get the most out of the s100...



#4 ChrigelKarrer

ChrigelKarrer

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Playa Herradura-Costa Rica and Sardinia-Italy

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:14 AM

The OEM housing of the EPL is rather big and not really so much smaller than a small DSLR housing.
I am not a fan of 4/3 cameras as i see no real advantages regarding a good P+S and a DSLR.

For space and weight reason a S100 or G12+ in a small housing (S100+Ikelite or G12+Fisheye/Recsea) is unbeatable.

The S100 in the fisheye housing and the Inon dome gives you more than you need in a super tiny package.
The quality is certainly not of an DSLR, but you save a lot of weight and space in your luggage and drag while diving.

Chris


Nikon D800 - Sigma 15mm - Nikon 105mm Micro VR - Hugyfot Housing - 3 Inon Z-240 strobes - 2x2 8'' ULCS arms

Canon G12 with Patima aluminium housing - Fuji E900 with Ikelite housing
Visit My Costa Rica Website - Visit My Italy Website


#5 kc_moses

kc_moses

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:15 AM

The highlight of the LX-7 are:

- Faster lens (even on telephoto side)

- built in ND filter

- P/S/A/M video shooting control

- Very fast focus speed

- very fast burst mode

- Very close macro

 

Some people insist that color on Canon is better, but I would leave that to Lightroom. Some people insist bigger sensor is better so I suggest them to go with RX100 series.

 

I just added a Sea & Sea YS-D1, so hopefully I can get some result like that too.



#6 gargar

gargar

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 33 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:43 AM

The OEM housing of the EPL is rather big and not really so much smaller than a small DSLR housing.
I am not a fan of 4/3 cameras as i see no real advantages regarding a good P+S and a DSLR.

For space and weight reason a S100 or G12+ in a small housing (S100+Ikelite or G12+Fisheye/Recsea) is unbeatable.

The S100 in the fisheye housing and the Inon dome gives you more than you need in a super tiny package.
The quality is certainly not of an DSLR, but you save a lot of weight and space in your luggage and drag while diving.

Chris

 

This is good info chris.  I have the S100 in a fisheye with a inon dome just as you described.  with a single YSD1 the color is superb.  My main issue would be ambient light wide angle shots not being as sharp.  I have a great shot of some dolphins in honduras that has great comp and lighting but is just not nearly as sharp as my DSLR shots in similar situations.  I also find the performance of custom white balance at shallow depths (for ambient light photo and especially for video) is not as good.  Video on the S100 is always over exposed. 

 

But very good to know the oly EPL housing is big.  I like how my entire current setup fits in the bag that used to barely fit my DS160 strobes!



#7 gargar

gargar

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 33 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:45 AM

The highlight of the LX-7 are:

- Faster lens (even on telephoto side)

- built in ND filter

- P/S/A/M video shooting control

- Very fast focus speed

- very fast burst mode

- Very close macro

 

Some people insist that color on Canon is better, but I would leave that to Lightroom. Some people insist bigger sensor is better so I suggest them to go with RX100 series.

 

I just added a Sea & Sea YS-D1, so hopefully I can get some result like that too.

 

You are shooting the LX-7 kc?

 

You will be pleased with the YS-D1.  It blew me away.  And gets stellar battery life with just 4 AA batteries.  So much better than the 2 dive battery life of my DS160's.



#8 kc_moses

kc_moses

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 359 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:45 AM

I shot with the YS-D1 last summer in Lembeh. It was a loan one so when I return to US, I saved up money to buy one over Thanksgiving. I will use it next weekend in Cozumel, so looking forward to it!

 

If you shoot video, the LX-7 definitely is great, especially when you mention you have over expose issue at shallow. The ND filter in the LX-7 will help, and you can manual control the shutter and aperture even during video mode. Having ISO 80 is also great. I haven't have enough practice yet, but hopefully I can capture some nice sunball/ray at shallow depth. The only down side is the LX-7 Wide Angle lens choice.

 

Anyway, this is the Mirrorless section, so head over to the Consumer Digital section and search for LX-7 or Sony RX100 and you can learn quite a bit.



#9 chris_l

chris_l

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:38 AM

I shoot an epl2 in the OEM housing with the Zen 100 dome.  If you search you'll find other posts where I extol the virtues of this setup.  It doesn't give you a fisheye capability, but it gives you the ability to use 3 lens in the same port (14-42 kit, 9-18WA and 60mm macro).

This is very versatile and you don't have to change the port, just the lens.  You can go from a 100 degree WA view to very good macro with just lens changes.  The olympus 60mm macro is superb and you will probably not be able to match it's performance in the P&S world.  

 

I very much disagree with the comment about the size of the olympus OEM housing.  It is no where near the size or weight of a DSLR housing.  My bro-in-law has gone from an ikelite D300 to an aquatica D7000 and while the aquatica is smaller and much more ergonomic it's still larger and very much heavier than the oly OEM housing.

I used to shoot an older high end P&S.  While my epl2 is larger than that, once you add the strobe (D2000), it's really not that much of a difference in the total package.

 

While I have not used the panasonic 8mm, it is considered excellent.  

 

I would imagine your ex was shooting the kit lens on the epm1.  The kit lens is ok, but I rarely use it any more.  I pretty much stick to the 9-18 or the 60mm.   The 9-18 is very good and the 60 is exceptional.

 

I also really like the ergonomics of the OLY housing.  It just fits my hand well (average sized guy).

 

I'm sure that some very skilled photographers can get a better image from a S100 than I can from a m4/3 camera.  But, I own an S95, and 3 different m4/3 (em5, epm1, epl2) and everyone of my m43 cameras will outperform my S95 very significantly (as they should).  BTW, at one point I had nikon DX equipment (D50, D7000).  The D7000 is excellent, but the em5 can match it or beat it 98% of the time.  (note, i've never used either of those underwater).

It's the lens that make a big difference.  If you're only ever going to shoot the kit lens maybe you should stick with P&S, but in the m4/3 world you have available to you 2 very highly regarded lens at opposite ends of the spectrum, the 8mm FE and the 60mm macro.

 

You could also go the nauticam housing route.

 

So you've seen first hand a big ikelite rig, a smaller P&S rig and an oly EPM1.  I think you can judge for yourself the size/weight trade off of them all without other folks telling you something is big/small.  The only thing you're missing for reference is an ergonomic aluminum housing for a DSLR (nauticam, aquatica, etc).


Edited by chris_l, 08 April 2014 - 11:43 AM.


#10 johnspierce

johnspierce

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver, CO

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:18 PM

Yep, EPM/EPL in an Olympus housing is definitely smaller and lighter than a D7000 DSLR.   Plus, the 4/3 sensor is quite a bit better than anything you will see in a P&S system.  

 

The Olympus EPM2 (currently on firesale in many places) has the same 16mp sensor as the EM5 Olympus which is quite excellent and it's *tiny*.  I bought one a few weeks ago for a quick grab-n-go camera for $240 -- a screaming deal!  Unfortunately, there is not a housing available for EPM2, you would have to go with the EPL5.

 

Plus, the size of the ports and lenses are about half the size of DSLR ports/lenses.  I would definitely recommend you go for the newer PEN systems with 16mp vs. 12mp since the price is not that different and the sensor is quite a bit better.

 

None of this is that important under water since a properly balanced DSLR handles quite easily, but if your goal is to have a much smaller, lighter load for travel, it's hard to go wrong with M43.  Didn't Alex Mustard win some sort of award last year shooting Olympus EM5?

 

http://www.nhm.ac.uk...h-sunbeams.html

 

 

Here's a pic showing size differences between P&S / M43 / DSLR from Reefphoto:

 

3sizes.jpg

 

To the original poster - is Canon S100 to M43 a significant upgrade in image quality?   Yes, definitely.


Edited by johnspierce, 08 April 2014 - 12:42 PM.

Nikon D800 | Aquatica Housing | Inon Z-240


#11 oskar

oskar

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Stockholm

Posted 09 April 2014 - 12:29 AM

Thats a nice size comparison pic. Somethinginteresting happens though if you configure them all for a fisheye / dome option. Anyone seen a pic like that out there somwhere?

With fisheye, the compact and m43 are almost on par!
Thats a nice size comparison pic. Somethinginteresting happens though if you configure them all for a fisheye / dome option. Anyone seen a pic like that out there somwhere?

With fisheye, the compact and m43 are almost on par!

#12 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:42 AM

There was a comparison I saw between the OMD-E5 and the Sony RX100.

At wide angle the Sony with an inon lens was better at macro the OMD-E5 was superior

The S100 is not as good as the RX100 and I would say that if you get an OMD-E5 or E1 or the new Panasonic there is a substantial improvement.

Of course then you have lost the convenience of wet lenses and also although the 4:3 are good there is no comparison in my opinion with a good DX SLR


Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#13 chris_l

chris_l

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 11:30 AM

That's quite a claim interceptor.

did you see the link john referenced with the photo by Alex Mustard with the em5 & 8mm FE?

Can you show anything equivalent from an rx100.

 

As far as the size issue.  I had an inon 165AD FE lens on a Fuji F30 about 5 years ago.  I replaced it with the epl2.

That little tiny F30 with the add on lens was essentially the same size as my epl2 with the Zen 100 port, but the F30 had worse handling characteristics because all the weight was in the front.  And an Oly PEN housing with the precision port is even a smaller profile.

So, for shooting FE, it's my opinion that the PEN with precision dome will be a better handling rig than an add on wet mount FE lens.

 

Understand, I'm not bashing the rx100 and if I was buying from scratch today it would be high on my list.

I just find some of these statements and claims hard to believe.  And most come with no proof.


Edited by chris_l, 09 April 2014 - 11:35 AM.


#14 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 09 April 2014 - 11:53 AM

It is not my claim and you need to compare the SAME photographer with the two cameras

 

This is a post somewhere else http://www.scubaboar...tml#post6697995

 

Somewhere here there is a similar one worth talking to the person


Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#15 ChrigelKarrer

ChrigelKarrer

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Playa Herradura-Costa Rica and Sardinia-Italy

Posted 09 April 2014 - 11:55 AM

This picture don't reflect the full truth and can lead to missinterpreting the size question.

If you screw off the 2 handles of the Nauticam DSLR housing you will realize that it is actually not so sooo much bigger than the M4/3 housing.
As most of us usese at least 1 strobe it would be better to show a picture where the M4/3 has the same amount of handles than the DSLR housing.
That would give a helpful idea of the sizes.

Stepping up from a S100 to a DSLR is a big difference, stepping up from a S100 to a M4/3 rig is still a great difference in space and weight.

Chris

 


3sizes.jpg

 

To the original poster - is Canon S100 to M43 a significant upgrade in image quality?   Yes, definitely.


Nikon D800 - Sigma 15mm - Nikon 105mm Micro VR - Hugyfot Housing - 3 Inon Z-240 strobes - 2x2 8'' ULCS arms

Canon G12 with Patima aluminium housing - Fuji E900 with Ikelite housing
Visit My Costa Rica Website - Visit My Italy Website


#16 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 09 April 2014 - 12:03 PM

This picture don't reflect the full truth and can lead to missinterpreting the size question.

If you screw off the 2 handles of the Nauticam DSLR housing you will realize that it is actually not so sooo much bigger than the M4/3 housing.
As most of us usese at least 1 strobe it would be better to show a picture where the M4/3 has the same amount of handles than the DSLR housing.
That would give a helpful idea of the sizes.

Stepping up from a S100 to a DSLR is a big difference, stepping up from a S100 to a M4/3 rig is still a great difference in space and weight.

Chris

 

I think you can compare the EM-1 (that has handles) with the D7100 by weight

 

S100 housing 0.63 Kg add two handle and a tray gets to  1 Kg

EM-1 housing 1.8 Kg

D7100 housing 3.2 Kg

So stepping up to

S100 ->  4:3 means 1.8x the weight

S100 -> D7100 3.2x

 

From EM-1 to D7100 1.77x

 

There is a substantial difference but actually the compact to 4:3 step up is similar to the 4:3 to DSLR step up


Edited by Interceptor121, 09 April 2014 - 12:06 PM.

Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#17 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 09 April 2014 - 12:21 PM

I found the RX100 post with the comment of the shooter (that also did the EM-5)

 

http://wetpixel.com/...showtopic=48738


Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#18 johnspierce

johnspierce

    Tiger Shark

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver, CO

Posted 09 April 2014 - 01:17 PM

Interceptor, are you going to turn this into another thread where you will continually and laboriously argue with anyone who posts a different opinion than yours?

 

If so, this thread is now a waste of bandwidth, just like the vacuum thread.  


Nikon D800 | Aquatica Housing | Inon Z-240


#19 Interceptor121

Interceptor121

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 828 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Weybridge, UK

Posted 09 April 2014 - 01:23 PM

Who am i arguiing with exactly

The previous thread discussion was closed actually on another forum in peace though the contents are not here

 

As I said this was not my opinion is someone else post that shoots both cameras and the weights are from the nauticam specs so where is the arguiing?


Check my video, pictures and blog

YouTube Channel

Flickr Sets

Blog


#20 chris_l

chris_l

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 09 April 2014 - 01:54 PM

Ok guys, the original poster specifically asked about the 8mm FE on a PEN housing with precision dome.

Now, let's compare the size weight of a PEN housing with the precision dome and what ever RX100 housing you chose with the necessary add on lens to get you to equivalent FE view.  I don't have those numbers, but based on my experience with the Inon 165AD I'd be willing to bet there's barely a scintilla of difference in size & weight.

 

And what about the optical performance of the compact camera lens and then going through a flat port, then an add on lens.

As opposed to a dedicated FE lens and port.  That's what he asked about.

I gave my EXPERIENCE with the ZEN semi dome which works well for some of other lens.

It would be nice if someone gave actual experience of the precision dome with the 8mm on the PEN housing.

 

Interceptor in your list of weights, what is the weight with an add on FE lens?