Jump to content
Interceptor121

Mirrorless Cameras Opportunity or Necessary Evil?

Recommended Posts

One of the great advantages of mirrorless cameras is that with their kit lenses (16-50 mm Nikon APS-C sensor, 15-45 mm Canon M APS-C sensor, 15-45 mm Fuji APS-C sensor, 16-50 mm Sony APS-C sensor, 14-42 mm Olympus and Panasonic micro 4/3 sensor) , behind a flat port, you can use wet lenses such as the Nauticam WWL-1. These kit lenses have a greater length in wide-angle and tele positions, with a shorter length in the intermediate focal lengths.

I asked Nauticam if the kit lenses of the reflex cameras, such as the 18-55mm, could be used with the Nauticam WWL-1 and they answer no, without explain me the reason for the incompatibility with the wet lens.

For me this great advantage of mirrorless cameras is enough to prefer them instead of reflex cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tom_Kline said:

Here is a far better comparison of DSLR vs mirrorless AF than this thread: https://www.zsystemuser.com/nikon-z-system-news-and/dslr-versus-mirrorless.html

BTW the rumored next FW update for the Z9 is supposed to have an AF improvement - we shall see!!!

Wow, some fabulous images. Problem is, Tom, they're all not underwater :man_in_love:

I really would like a Z9 though. And Land Rover Defender (new one). And a Ferrari. A megayacht would be kinda cool too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, TimG said:

Wow, some fabulous images. Problem is, Tom, they're all not underwater :man_in_love:

I really would like a Z9 though. And Land Rover Defender (new one). And a Ferrari. A megayacht would be kinda cool too.

Yes, there is a need to extrapolate from non-underwater users! The Z9 is not all that bad in cost. The housings, something else....

What will be interesting is to see which aspects of the tech in the Z9 end up in the next gen cameras. Nikon has already indicated that this will be the case. Possibly one of these will be better for warm water UWP (smaller and less expensive a housing). However in the post-covid world we may have to get used to much higher prices. :<<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Pedro said:

I asked Nauticam if the kit lenses of the reflex cameras, such as the 18-55mm, could be used with the Nauticam WWL-1 and they answer no, without explain me the reason for the incompatibility with the wet lens.

As I understand it, the big requirement for compatibility with wet lenses is that the entrance pupil is placed well forward inside the lens. Given the same angle of view, the further back within the lens you put it, the wider you need to make the exit glass of the wet lens in front of it in order to avoid vignetting, and this quickly becomes impractical. I know very little about lens design, but it's an interesting observation that all those small collapsible zooms with relatively narrow maximum apertures - M43 12-42mm, APS-C 15-45mm/16-50mm from Sony, Nikon, Canon and Fuji, Sony 28-60mm FF - have a forward-placed entrance pupil (indicated by a relatively small front element) and all use a mirrorless mount. I'm guessing that they all use the same or similar lens design, and for whatever reason, this design requires a short flange focal distance, making it incompatible with an SLR camera's mirror box.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2022 at 1:56 AM, Interceptor121 said:


I think whoever is putting those messages out there must not consider the thousands of photos of sunburst taken with mirrorless and even compact cameras
 

Pretty sure it was Berkley White.   And he knows what he talks about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pretty sure it was Berkley White.   And he knows what he talks about.

A lot of people think they do

The question is if this is or not a mirrorless user

I shoot plenty of sunbursts I have non problem and on land I have no problem either

There are many evf implentations to overcome pretty much any limit but there are poor implementations that go dark

It really depends

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I have used the Nikon D800 for about 7 years and still own it. And I've been using the first generation mirrorless of z6 for about two years now.
The lens experience is F mount for Sigma 15MM, Nikon 8-15, and 105MM.

Both models are rated as having poor AF... However, it is not a big problem at a wide angle. Macro photography requires patience in both models.

I don't have experience with cameras like D500 or A1 or Z9, but I think AF will be more comfortable and easy to shoot.

Mirrorless has seen a lot of talk about the difficulty of photographing the sun. My experience is that EVF is harder to see the sun than OVF, but mirrorless doesn't mean it can't be filmed. Once I got used to exposure setting, I felt that there was no significant difference between mirrorless and DSLR.

In fact, I replaced the mirrorless at DSLR, but nothing much has changed about filming. It doesn't feel like an upgrade or downgray.
The convenience of just the latest model has improved. (Charge C-TYPE, Fast file movement due to fast memory usage)

I think creativity and shooting skills are more important than equipment.

I can feel this way because i am amateur. Its a subjective opinion.

Edited by Edy park
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Edy park said:

I think creativity and shooting skills are more important than equipment.

Totally agree!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I had the Nikon D800, an older mirror camera, and made the mistake of selling it, as when I review its underwater photos, they were fine, discounting my mistakes.   My current mirror camera also works just fine.

This leads me to ask: Why waste time and money on a mirrorless, with no clear advantages, when some of them reportedly have poor auto-focus and/or underwater white balance?

To me, the evidence says leave mirrorless to evolve for later time, as it is better to enjoy diving, blow bubbles and paparazzi the fish with the camera we have. 

Edited by Kraken de Mabini

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if there are shortcomings in certain areas with mirrorless, the biggest advantage to me is portability and the size of housing. I can never see myself carrying a DSLR housing, the fact that the kit lenses can be used and paired with WWL for example to produce great quality image whilst still maintaining a small food print is huge.

I am in the process of buying a Sony A7 IV to replace my A7 III and by all counts it provides a much better AF and obviously video capability that no DSLR can match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2022 at 4:52 AM, Interceptor121 said:

Sorry about the capital letters

I shoot at night and I can guarantee you that you can’t see a thing in an optical viewfinder in really low light because it is not illuminated

In fact all the DSLR people are there with their screens shining in live view

While the human eye can adapt to darkness I can guarantee you that your camera will see things you just won’t see

With regards to the dynamic range of the display that is frankly another myth yes a screen will have ten stops dynamic range but at the end your optical viewfinder has no dynamic range is just a piece of glass and you will not base the exposure on what you see but on the meter reading the image may or not clip depending on the sensor

In fact clipping if a highlight on the screen doesn’t even indicate that the image will clip in addition most mirrorless cameras have options to dissociate the display from exposure and this makes the composition much easier

On the focus front no comment that for me is mostly a red herring and actually focus aid in an evf are better than an ovf anyways

 

I have the impression you don’t actually use a mirrorless camera and a quick test is not the same in fact one of your examples about the camera not able to show a dark image sounds just incorrect as Sony as live view boost since more than 8 years now

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Umm no.

Across several hundred night dives with either a D500 or D850 I've never turned on the equiv. of live view. There are certainly situations where someone may shoot in a low light/darkened environment (hold of a wreck comes to mind given recent experiences), but many times in these situations there is some ambient light, focus light, or off camera lighting being utilized.

I would still suggest that there is a fairly straightforward test case that clearly illustrates the current delta between high end DSLRs and mirrorless options. The A1 may be an exception (I have not had an opportunity to try this yet) but shooting blackwater with a D850 or D500 w/60mm lens (low light, fast moving subjects) will demonstrate where mirrorless still lags a bit.

This is not just a stated opinion - if you talk to any of the folks who offer black water diving and ask what kind of gear they are seeing the most successful results from, (to date) the answer continues to be DSLRs with lenses like the 60mm (conversely, also illustrative of the types of systems people struggle with on a blackwater dives). 

Again, the A1 may be the first mirrorless system that can provide similar performance, I haven't seen it yet in this type of environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, newdiver said:

Even if there are shortcomings in certain areas with mirrorless, the biggest advantage to me is portability and the size of housing. I can never see myself carrying a DSLR housing, the fact that the kit lenses can be used and paired with WWL for example to produce great quality image whilst still maintaining a small food print is huge.

I am in the process of buying a Sony A7 IV to replace my A7 III and by all counts it provides a much better AF and obviously video capability that no DSLR can match.

@newdiver

Interesting... my daughter was shooting with an A7III, and now shoots with A7R4 (slightly older generation, I know) - still not close enough in AF performance (shooting macro) compared to either my D500 or D850.

The difference is tangible and obvious when you shoot them side by side on same subjects (which we did recently and will be doing again in a couple of weeks).

Edited by oneyellowtang
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oneyellowtang said:

Umm no.

Across several hundred night dives with either a D500 or D850 I've never turned on the equiv. of live view. There are certainly situations where someone may shoot in a low light/darkened environment (hold of a wreck comes to mind given recent experiences), but many times in these situations there is some ambient light, focus light, or off camera lighting being utilized.

I would still suggest that there is a fairly straightforward test case that clearly illustrates the current delta between high end DSLRs and mirrorless options. The A1 may be an exception (I have not had an opportunity to try this yet) but shooting blackwater with a D850 or D500 w/60mm lens (low light, fast moving subjects) will demonstrate where mirrorless still lags a bit.

This is not just a stated opinion - if you talk to any of the folks who offer black water diving and ask what kind of gear they are seeing the most successful results from, (to date) the answer continues to be DSLRs with lenses like the 60mm (conversely, also illustrative of the types of systems people struggle with on a blackwater dives). 

Again, the A1 may be the first mirrorless system that can provide similar performance, I haven't seen it yet in this type of environment.

If you use a focus light than nothing matters for focus anyway

Most shooters in UW world come from DLSR the migration is slow that does not mean there are advantages and if there is really low light mirrorless actually works better as the camera does better than your eye in the dark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

If you use a focus light than nothing matters for focus anyway

Most shooters in UW world come from DLSR the migration is slow that does not mean there are advantages and if there is really low light mirrorless actually works better as the camera does better than your eye in the dark

Yeah... no.

One example... side by side shooting in dark conditions (A7R4 and D850) - D850 performed better (in a hold of a wreck). I've actually seen some Sony shooters turn off their Live View in some dark conditions because it absolutely screws up your night vision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, oneyellowtang said:

Yeah... no.

One example... side by side shooting in dark conditions (A7R4 and D850) - D850 performed better (in a hold of a wreck). I've actually seen some Sony shooters turn off their Live View in some dark conditions because it absolutely screws up your night vision...

I shoot nightscapes I think I have a pretty idea of what happens in real low light

Cameras that are optimized for really dark environment have live view in red monochrome there is no issue and a screen even without when dimmed is not having the effect of a focus light for example

With regards to your example of side by side unless the same person takes the shot with two different cameras and knows how to use them properly I believe nothing of that sort sorry

Both cameras focus at -4EV and today most cameras focus at -4EV but none achieve continuous autofocus at that level of brigthness this is the issue not to be confuse with absolute ability in low light

Edited by Interceptor121

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Interceptor121 said:

I shoot nightscapes I think I have a pretty idea of what happens in real low light

Cameras that are optimized for really dark environment have live view in red monochrome there is no issue and a screen even without when dimmed is not having the effect of a focus light for example

With regards to your example of side by side unless the same person takes the shot with two different cameras and knows how to use them properly I believe nothing of that sort sorry

Both cameras focus at -4EV and today most cameras focus at -4EV but none achieve continuous autofocus at that level of brigthness this is the issue not to be confuse with absolute ability in low light

Again... no.

You continue to make assumptions that are incorrect.

I've shot side by side using both systems on the same dive, same subjects (to continue to evaluate when mirrorless may be ready to replace my DSLRs). 

Having shot deep space astrophotography for 2 decades... I'll just disagree.

You do not need to believe anything - you stated an opinion, it seems to be factually inaccurate (DSLR shooters turning on "live view...") given the responses.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, oneyellowtang said:

Again... no.

You continue to make assumptions that are incorrect.

I've shot side by side using both systems on the same dive, same subjects (to continue to evaluate when mirrorless may be ready to replace my DSLRs). 

Having shot deep space astrophotography for 2 decades... I'll just disagree.

You do not need to believe anything - you stated an opinion, it seems to be factually inaccurate (DSLR shooters turning on "live view...") given the responses.

 

You shot deep space on an optical viewfinder? Deep space requires guiding and typically capture on another screen

I do not know anyone that can track a nebula using any camera DSLR or Mirrorless reliably without guiding 

I suggest you learn how mirrorless camera do metering and control the EVF as there is a way to see the shadows if you know how to than it is possible that the camera you is lacking somehow but I doubt it. On Sony you need to disable the setting view usually or otherwise it will be dark

https://helpguide.sony.net/ilc/1930/v1/en/contents/TP0002688430.html

Besides when you see the OVF and click if you don't apply corrections it will clip anyway

There will not be a day where the screen of a mirrorless has more than 10 stops DR so you may be in for a very long wait if you don't work around the limitations and believe a screen can emulate the functioning of your eye which ignores the bright area does not manage them in a backlit shot as your field of view for focus is actually less than 10 degrees

Edited by Interceptor121

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Edy park said:

I think creativity and shooting skills are more important than equipment.

I can guarantee you that the equipment is not m limiting factor.  Have $100,000 to spend on camera gear will not make me a better photographer.  However having the available fund to spend $100,000 on photography would make me a better photographer. As you said its not the gear its the ability to get out and use the gear you have.  There are many many people out there making AMAZING images with the TG5/6 setups.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

You shot deep space on an optical viewfinder? Deep space requires guiding and typically capture on another screen

I do not know anyone that can track a nebula using any camera DSLR or Mirrorless reliably without guiding 

I suggest you learn how mirrorless camera do metering and control the EVF as there is a way to see the shadows if you know how to than it is possible that the camera you is lacking somehow but I doubt it. On Sony you need to disable the setting view usually or otherwise it will be dark

https://helpguide.sony.net/ilc/1930/v1/en/contents/TP0002688430.html

Besides when you see the OVF and click if you don't apply corrections it will clip anyway

There will not be a day where the screen of a mirrorless has more than 10 stops DR so you may be in for a very long wait if you don't work around the limitations and believe a screen can emulate the functioning of your eye which ignores the bright area does not manage them in a backlit shot as your field of view for focus is actually less than 10 degrees

Hmm...

The astrophotography comment was only meant to demonstrate that you are not the only one who shoots in dark environments.

For most astrophotography you don't use the viewfinder or the screen for much at all (other than maybe an initial setup).

The point remains: you made a statement that doesn't hold up to the data presented back to you...

If you can find a number of DSLR shooters that use a live view-like functionality on dark dives then we can reconsider, otherwise I think the point has been made (which brings into question why you made the statement in the first place).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an attempt to bring the thread back to the main question...

 

Since all the major camera brands are moving to mirrorless, that really is the future. However, for many folks who are happy with their current DSLR systems, there is a question of whether to/when to look at upgrading to the current generation of mirrorless cameras.

Some of the important issues that have been mentioned in this thread are:

Autofocus (AF) speed and reliability

Wide angle shooting into the sun

EVF verses OVF viewfinders

 

Underwater my experience of digital cameras is only with Nikon: D200, D7100/7200, Z7II

On land my experience of digital is (including the above) is: D850, D810, D610, Z7

So for a Nikon shooter I can give some perspective. I know nothing about Sony or other systems for UWater.

For AF the D850/D810 are superior to the Z7/Z7II - no question. For wide angle I will suggest that the difference in AF is not relevant, I've had no issues with the AF of the Z7II for doing underwater wide angle. For macro, the Z7II AF is prone to hunting and moving to the wrong object (my experience) but once I get the subject the way I want it minor AF changes work well and the EVF helps a lot for composition and nailing the focus (see below)

For wide angle shots into the sun. I find no difference between the mirrorless and the D7200, they are equally hard to get a nicely balanced exposure. I can see the sun just fine on the Z7II. For me, getting the sun exposure dialed in is challenging regardless of system type, but I never felt that seeing the sun in the EVF was the problem - it was the same as ever, getting a composition, getting a model into a decent position, balancing exposure in the foreground (strobe power) with the sun exposure (f stop/shutter speed combo) and other familiar challenges.

For the EVF v. OVF questions. I prefer the EVF, I can see everything I want to see. I have a sharper and brighter view of my subject. For macro I have been able to get a far greater number of properly focused images of small critters than with the D7200, especially for super-macro with a diopter. The other advantage of the EVF is that I can see the composition and the exposure of the image in the viewfinder without moving my camera from the subject. This makes it so much easier to refocus, modify strobes/camera settings since I don't have to move away from the subject or move the camera to view the screen on the back. For me the EVF is a great step forward.

 

Now, for someone who has a complete D850/D500/similar DSLR setup, the question is what's the point of upgrading and spending all the money to do. In my opinion there's not too much reason for it at this point. The D850 has better AF, you have a system that you are familiar with, you have already spent the money. The D850 and Z7II have essentially an identical sensor (I know there's a several year technology gap, but there's little to choose between them if anything) so switching to the Z7II is barely, if at all, going to change your image quality.

The Z system mirrorless housing is essentially the same size as a DSLR one so there's barely any advantage there. If you use 8 inch (or greater) domes then your pain will not be reduced by switching.

Now, if you are looking for a new system, moving up from a compact camera or just starting out there are different strategies. You can get a used system for a fraction of the cost of buying new. D850, D810, D7200 etc. are all available for very decent prices and you can put together a great system for a fraction of a new Z7 system. You will be happy with the image quality. No question.

Or you can look into the high end mirrorless systems. Your budget will be way higher, you will have great image quality. You will most likely be happy with the images.

 

However, as pointed out by @Edy park and many others over the years, the real thing to work on is improving our composition and lighting skills. A new camera won't fix those things for us. A new camera may have some features that can help us with exposure or getting setup to take an images but it doesn't improve our skills, only practice and study will do that.

OK, so why did I upgrade then and spend all that money? I upgraded because I had already switched from using my D810 for landscape and other topside images to a Z7 and I was moving to mirrorless anyway. I wanted the ability to get better video than the D7200 offered underwater. I have always been unhappy with my Tokina 10-17 image quality at the edges so I was looking to switch to the 8-15mm and would need to get a new mini dome anyway. I wanted to switch to optical connectors so I could add the Backscatter snoot system. yes, the upgrade cost was huge, it was painful, and while my wife knows it was expensive, she doesn't know how expensive -_- But, for me, it's been fine to make the change with a small learning curve.

 

Hope this helps anyone who is interested.

 

Jon/Rinjani

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, rinjani said:

In an attempt to bring the thread back to the main question...

 

Since all the major camera brands are moving to mirrorless, that really is the future. However, for many folks who are happy with their current DSLR systems, there is a question of whether to/when to look at upgrading to the current generation of mirrorless cameras.

Some of the important issues that have been mentioned in this thread are:

Autofocus (AF) speed and reliability

Wide angle shooting into the sun

EVF verses OVF viewfinders

 

Underwater my experience of digital cameras is only with Nikon: D200, D7100/7200, Z7II

On land my experience of digital is (including the above) is: D850, D810, D610, Z7

So for a Nikon shooter I can give some perspective. I know nothing about Sony or other systems for UWater.

For AF the D850/D810 are superior to the Z7/Z7II - no question. For wide angle I will suggest that the difference in AF is not relevant, I've had no issues with the AF of the Z7II for doing underwater wide angle. For macro, the Z7II AF is prone to hunting and moving to the wrong object (my experience) but once I get the subject the way I want it minor AF changes work well and the EVF helps a lot for composition and nailing the focus (see below)

For wide angle shots into the sun. I find no difference between the mirrorless and the D7200, they are equally hard to get a nicely balanced exposure. I can see the sun just fine on the Z7II. For me, getting the sun exposure dialed in is challenging regardless of system type, but I never felt that seeing the sun in the EVF was the problem - it was the same as ever, getting a composition, getting a model into a decent position, balancing exposure in the foreground (strobe power) with the sun exposure (f stop/shutter speed combo) and other familiar challenges.

For the EVF v. OVF questions. I prefer the EVF, I can see everything I want to see. I have a sharper and brighter view of my subject. For macro I have been able to get a far greater number of properly focused images of small critters than with the D7200, especially for super-macro with a diopter. The other advantage of the EVF is that I can see the composition and the exposure of the image in the viewfinder without moving my camera from the subject. This makes it so much easier to refocus, modify strobes/camera settings since I don't have to move away from the subject or move the camera to view the screen on the back. For me the EVF is a great step forward.

 

Now, for someone who has a complete D850/D500/similar DSLR setup, the question is what's the point of upgrading and spending all the money to do. In my opinion there's not too much reason for it at this point. The D850 has better AF, you have a system that you are familiar with, you have already spent the money. The D850 and Z7II have essentially an identical sensor (I know there's a several year technology gap, but there's little to choose between them if anything) so switching to the Z7II is barely, if at all, going to change your image quality.

The Z system mirrorless housing is essentially the same size as a DSLR one so there's barely any advantage there. If you use 8 inch (or greater) domes then your pain will not be reduced by switching.

Now, if you are looking for a new system, moving up from a compact camera or just starting out there are different strategies. You can get a used system for a fraction of the cost of buying new. D850, D810, D7200 etc. are all available for very decent prices and you can put together a great system for a fraction of a new Z7 system. You will be happy with the image quality. No question.

Or you can look into the high end mirrorless systems. Your budget will be way higher, you will have great image quality. You will most likely be happy with the images.

 

However, as pointed out by @Edy park and many others over the years, the real thing to work on is improving our composition and lighting skills. A new camera won't fix those things for us. A new camera may have some features that can help us with exposure or getting setup to take an images but it doesn't improve our skills, only practice and study will do that.

OK, so why did I upgrade then and spend all that money? I upgraded because I had already switched from using my D810 for landscape and other topside images to a Z7 and I was moving to mirrorless anyway. I wanted the ability to get better video than the D7200 offered underwater. I have always been unhappy with my Tokina 10-17 image quality at the edges so I was looking to switch to the 8-15mm and would need to get a new mini dome anyway. I wanted to switch to optical connectors so I could add the Backscatter snoot system. yes, the upgrade cost was huge, it was painful, and while my wife knows it was expensive, she doesn't know how expensive -_- But, for me, it's been fine to make the change with a small learning curve.

 

Hope this helps anyone who is interested.

 

Jon/Rinjani

 

 

 

 

 

very good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2022 at 6:50 AM, Interceptor121 said:

A lot of people think they do

The question is if this is or not a mirrorless user

I shoot plenty of sunbursts I have non problem and on land I have no problem either

There are many evf implentations to overcome pretty much any limit but there are poor implementations that go dark

It really depends

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I take it you have no idea who Berkely White is.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, phxazcraig said:

I take it you have no idea who Berkely White is.

Yes is the owner of backscatter

When has me made this statement now or 3 years ago?

If you read here you can't take a sunburst with a mirrorless well I have around a million examples including mine

Besides you should be careful with including the sunball into the picture unless the rays are very low as clipping will occur no matter what

Actually shooting sunballs underwater is way easier than shooting sunballs on land where the dynamic range is 1000 higher

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, oneyellowtang said:

Yeah... no.

One example... side by side shooting in dark conditions (A7R4 and D850) - D850 performed better (in a hold of a wreck). I've actually seen some Sony shooters turn off their Live View in some dark conditions because it absolutely screws up your night vision...

I will have to agree with I 121, it seems more like an issue of user error. I do my share of night photography as well with my main subject being the aurora. The main trick is getting a good infinity focus which can be difficult with an SLR - focusing on stars if the moon cannot be seen (manual focus). The first time I used live view was for this task - it was with the Canon 7D2. Subject was a comet. Lens was an 85mm f/1.4 to be used at f/1.4. One night it was actually clear so that I could see it. The next night as well and that was it for the entire comet period due to being near the ocean (foggy at night when clear or otherwise overcast). My cometography was not planned in advance. It was a quick decision. I grabbed the camera, lens, and tripod and headed out the door (flashlight in pocket). I did not even know how to turn on live view!! So I had to go back in a few times to consult the instruction manual that I opened and read on my computer screen. I also grabbed a Lupe. In general I have found that live view on DSLRs works better for manual focusing than the OVF. One needs to use a lupe, however (keep in mind I am old and cannot focus as close as when younger).

And that has improved quite a bit with recent cameras due to improved screens as well EVF. I use the EVF (at 200% on my Zs) when manually focusing. If the EVF is not practical I will use the rear rear screen. For example, I have done a couple of night shoots with the 8-15 lens at 8mm with the camera pointed straight up with the screen flipped out (ended up in a vertical orientation). Besides focusing, I used the screen for composition (e.g., minimizing street lights) and for chimping (for exposure). I have not used the Z9 at night because it is the non-dark time of year (just twilight after sunset now).

No EVF experience night diving but plenty of DSLR screen usage. It is important to lower the screen brightness! I mainly use the screen to check exposure and have had auto-chipping off (but am considering having it on the next time). The reflectivity of subjects during blackwater photography varies by multiple stops so it is rather important to keep checking. I have blown a few shots such as when a fish quickly entered the scene. As well the gut contents, especially of comb jellies (carnivores), can be quite reflective. It is important as well to return the screen brightness back to normal after a night dive - I have forgotten once. It may have had something to do with getting back to the hotel after midnight and then scrambling to charge batteries and clean up and set up gear for the next day.

I do not use LV for diving (DSRs) at night because of the exposure simulation issue. I do not think it can be disabled on my D4S. I did not even try to turn it on with most of my Canons (easy-peasy on the D4 series). However I might if the view brightness could be controlled independently (of exposure) and fixed which is the case now with mirrorless. According to Thom Hogan the Z9 AF depends on “exposure” so this might be an issue for night diving at small apertures and using strobes. We do use focusing lights but are they good enough?

Edited by Tom_Kline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...