adamhanlon

Just to gently steer this excellent discussion back on track... The original premise was: Rather than tell us why you actually chose a specific camera, what would you have if we were to ignore cost, lens and port ownership? You should not ignore factors like lens availability (e.g. is the lack of a native fisheye with Sony and Nikon full frame mirrorless cameras a deal breaker?), but blue sky thinking is most welcome. This is not real world of course. I think it is an interesting exercise though to see how "desirable" different camera models are being viewed and which features underwater shooters see as being important. Adam

The only new "flash trigger" at DEMA from Sea&Sea is a 90° prism that allows fiber optic slave triggering. There is a new TTL trigger from UWTechnics. Adam

Mine is on my strobe arms when I am shooting. It allows me to check status (including air pressure) without moving my eye far from the viewfinder. If I need to ditch my camera that badly, I don't think my computer is relevant any more! Like John, I had the issue with the Aladins blanking out when you fire a strobe. I am happy to report that with Suunto and Shearwater at least, this is no longer an issue. Adam

I am a huge supporter (and a board member) of the Sea Save Foundation: https://seasave.org Adam

The other option is dedicated photographic trips (like the ones Wetpixel runs....) These are hugely productive and have the added bonus of having a bunch of photographers to bounce ideas and thoughts off! Adam

@Matt Sullivan There are actually quite a large group of shooters that prefer the D500. D500's AF is light years ahead of the D4's. Compared to full frame cameras, it also has better (and cheaper) lens options (for underwater) and will work with smaller domes. The only downside is the amazing high ISO performance of the big sensors, but given that corner performance is better with cropped sensors, this is not as big a deal as many think. In my mind, the only option that gives acceptable performance for wide angle (not fisheye) with high resolution cameras like the D850 is WACP. While amazing, the 13mm RS is actually pretty curved. I think the weight/bulk argument in favor of mirrorless full frame is completely moot when you have to add a WACP or 9" dome! @SimonPierce Just to be sure I am understanding your reasoning... You are willing to forgo effective AF for macro and a native fisheye option in order to use an LCD? How do you check for critical focus with the LCD? Peaking? Adam

I use the Nikon 8-15mm for fisheye. The 10-17mmTokina look horrible (and is a DX lens...) The Nikon 16mm doesn't really focus close enough. The 105mm is great for macro, although it has a horrible working distance compared to the 60mm on a cropped sensor. My question was more aimed at wide angle as opposed to fisheye. The reason for asking is that my "go-to" underwater camera is the D500. I do have a D850 and housing, but outside of some very specific uses, I find the D500 is a much better camera (underwater). Adam

Hi Simon, Which wide angle lenses do you use underwater? Adam

I would guess that your privacy settings for this video in Vimeo are set to private...it is the default. Adam

There is a new version of the YS-01 being released soon: https://wetpixel.com/articles/report-dema-2019/P3 Adam

IBIS or any other form of image stabilization is not really useful for underwater use. The water buoys up the weight of the housing, making hand holding possible at shutter speeds that are considerably slower than those possible on land. Think of the water acting as a "semi-tripod". Most people leave theirs switched off, to avoid battery drain. I don't see any reference to IBIS in their review. For what it is worth, the AF on the new full frame Sony cameras seems to be significantly better than that of the EOS R. However, I agree with the advice that full frame adds a bunch of complexity and expense that you could avoid with micro 4/3 or APS-C cameras. The lack of rinse bucket is not an issue. Tracking gear on a dive boat is simply a matter of being organized and telling others your needs/requirements. I dive globally with a huge variety of operators and most are good at taking are of gear, once they have been told how to do so! Adam

Thanks for starting us off Walt...why would (did) you chose the D850? I understand you wanting to use the RS, but you could use this with a D5, a D500 or an older Nikon full frame? I'm really wanting to drill down on why people are chosing cameras.. Entirely separately, are you at DEMA? Adam

It is hard to correct white balance in post if the actual white balance used while shooting is not correct. If using RAW (as it happens for both stills and video), simply applying a correction shifts the whole color spectrum. So unless WB and lighting are as close as possible to "correct" at time of capture, if you attempt to get pleasing reds, the spectrum shifts and your blues go funky and vica versa. Local WB corrections are certainly possible for stills (and I would guess for RAW video too?), but it is really hard to get them looking good. This would be complicated by the movement of parts of the video scene, which would potentially require re correcting each frame!

I'm interested to find out the Wetpixel community's views on current (and older) full frame cameras for underwater use. If you had the choice of any one full frame still camera on the market and expense, current lens ownership, housing choice etc. were no object, which would you chose and why? When responding, please ignore space/size/weight as a selection criteria as all full frame system housings and ports all seem ultimately pretty much the same in terms of weight and bulk. The weight of the camera itself seems to be largely irrelevant! My purpose on this is just to get an idea of what people are thinking. It has no purpose beyond this and I must confess that I am personally very happy with my current choices. Several recent discussions have raised some interesting ideas however, and I think it is a topic that would be useful to explore? Thanking you all in anticipation.

The issue here is that there is no comparison point. The OP is seeking guidance on camera choices and has asked for an opinion about Sony full frame mirrorless. Bear in mind that at this point he can chose any camera as he is seeking to buy into a whole new system. The lack of a native fisheye makes it hard to justify the Sony full frame mirrorless cameras for underwater use when pretty much every other manufacturer offers one. Specifically in terms of your post above, no one knows whether the AF on a native (Sony) fisheye would be fester/more accurate than the 8-15 and MB adaptor, because the lens doesn't exist! As you point out, the AF speed quoted is slower, but this should be balanced by the fact that this statistic is (probably) not based on lenses that we use underwater. Speed is also only part of the issue. Given that we rarely photograph really fast moving subjects (cheetahs hunting, motorbike racing etc.), accuracy is probably more important. Given that we use our cameras in environments that are often challenging for AF, any advantage we can add will help us to capture our images more reliably. Speaking to numerous people that have used both SLR and Sony Full Frame mirrorless in these environments, the consensus is that SLR AF (and particularly Nikon's) is more accurate and faster than Sony's. Many underwater pros initially bought into the Sony system but have now reverted to SLRs. The Metabones adaptors do add additional conversion circuitry (from Sony's to Canon's and across the flanges) and this is in turn does mean that inevitably, speed and (to some extent) accuracy is affected. Adding extra components will always affect performance to some extent. MB adaptors are very good, but they cannot get away from this. Perhaps we should turn this discussion around? Why should an underwater photographer chose a Sony Full Frame camera over a Nikon or Canon SLR (or perhaps other brand full frame mirrorless cameras)? What are the specific advantages of doing so? If you had the choice of any one camera on the market and expense, current lens ownership, housing choice etc. are no object, which would you chose and why? Perhaps when responding, we should ignore space/size/weight as all full frame system housings and ports are ultimately pretty much the same in terms of weight and bulk. The weight of the camera itself is largely irrelevant!