Jump to content
Scubysnaps

Why do you not use dSLR?

Why do you not shoot dSLR  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. What is it that stops you making the move

    • too big
      10
    • too dear
      14
    • no live preview
      1
    • Other reason....please add a response
      1


Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not me personally but I know people who have health issues lugging a larger rig around underwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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 :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ 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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less money, less worry. In a small bag I can carry two point 'n shoot cameras, 2 housings, a wide angle lens, strobe and arms. It's especially handy when I'm doing other activities during my vacation. Not buying a DSLR rig has enabled me to max out my 401k plan, add to my Roth IRA and put in additional savings.

 

I do a lot of diving from day boats (never been on a liveaboard). The smaller rig does less to put off other divers who might otherwise expect photographers to hog the animal encounters.

 

My future wife will hopefully be a doctor, preferably ortho/spine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...

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.

 

Referring only to the LiveView part, the new Sony DSLRs have a very similar implementation to the Oly E330, second sensor up in the viewfinder tunnel for a true "no extra mirror action" liveview, they just do it by having an optional tilt on secondary mirror (illuminate optical viewfinder or secondary sensor) while the E330 did it with a partially silvered secondary mirror. So they have the 'same' function but without the loss of light to the OVF when live-view is not in use. Otherwise I think I'd be in agreement with you that the Canikon liveview implementations are really more intended for 'tripod macro' or extremely wide DOF (no need for sharp focus) use.

 

I think from my readings that Panasonic is getting pretty close with single-sensor solutions and a fast electronic viewfinder that doesn't suffer much 'video lag' (at least their autofocus speed with liveview is getting a bit higher marks than Oly's EP1, in my readings) but not necessarily on all existing 4:3rd's lenses. Still the whole m4:3 family is still so new, there's a lot of room for improvement to happen very quickly.

 

I'm still hoping for a true Olympus successor to the E330 with a "Live View A" mode that works with all the original 4:3rd's lenses, but I'm no longer holding my breath expecting it. More than likely I'll be taking a serious look at a future m4:3 camera.....or outgrowing liveview and learning to use an OVF. Either will hurt, but the former would hurt the pocketbook (lens replacement in addition to camera/housing replacement, and high end m4:3 camera costs aren't that different from the entry-level DSLR bodies in my price range) and the latter more my pride. ^_^

Edited by rtrski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier this year I went thru an exhaustive investigation of DSLR vs PS for my new UW camera system. In the end I chose a Canon G10 with FIX housing. The deciding factors were:

 

Cost: Almost $10,000 for SLR system I wanted (Canon 50D, S&S housing, ports, lenses, strobes, 45deg viewfinder, etc etc) vs $2500 for Canon G10, FIX housing, macro adapter, YS-110A strobe

 

Flexibility: With the G10 I can shoot supermacro to moderate WA on the same dive and also shoot video.

 

Travel: With the G10/FIX systems (my wife also got a G10/FIX) we are able to pack both housings, cameras, strobe arms, 3 strobes, FIX fisheye dome port, batteries, chargers, macro adapters, and spare parts into one carry on bag.

 

UW Photos from Cozumel with the new G10 system: http://www.onewolf.org/Album/09Cozumel/UnderWater/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too heavy given today's airline bag & weight policies. Do all my diving travel diving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...