This may not be the thread, but it seems somewhat relevant. I don't mean to be prick or deliberately inflammatory, but I've yet to see a photo from a TG6/7 that impresses me and I look at the thread occasionally. I got better results with my old Cannon compact. You have to decide what you want from underwater photography. If it's just some snaps of the dive to remind you what you saw, then it doesn't matter too much what camera you end up with. If you think you might want to get to the point where you can take beautiful, technically competent photos, then I would recommend starting with a M4/3 camera as the platform can be built upon.
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
tarponchik
Contributor
As long as you are happy with the output, that's all that matters.
I see this advertised all over. Anyone heard of it?
82.579 Aufrufe · 2.229 Reaktionen | Edit BOTH your photos and videos with just 1 click! This is the ONLY pack on the internet that lets you edit all your underwater content with ease. No more green videos. No more boring photos. Get the ultimate underwater editing pack today! | Barefoot Wandering
82.579 Aufrufe · 2.229 Reaktionen | Edit BOTH your photos and videos with just 1 click! This is the ONLY pack on the internet that lets you edit all your underwater content with ease. No more green videos. No more boring photos. Get the ultimate underwater editing pack today! | Barefoot Wandering
The TG cameras can take every bit as good of a photo as any SLR-type camera, at least in the macro range. I've seen award winning photos taken with the TG6, my buddy won the award. You might be conflating photos taken by entry-level photographers, rather than all photos possible with the TG camera.
OP
RobPNW
Contributor
And vice versa.
PatW
Contributor
It really helps to shoot RAW. Less advanced cameras shoot JPEGS. The camera takes the file, interprets it and makes a guess as to what it SHOULD look like. That often works well in nice sun lit situations. But underwater is funky. A RAW file records all the data a camera sees and you can use software to get the most out of the image.
First off, the spectra of light are absorbed by the water. You will not get any reds at deeper than 15’. By 60’, you only have blues and greens. I once took a photo of a queen angel at 80’. There was a grey wall of the wall behind it. When I looked at the photo later, I was struck that the grey wall was revealed by the strobes to be a riot of color of encrusting sponges (oranges, reds, and yellows), In order to get the colors, you have to bring a full spectrum light source down with you - either a flood light or a strobe. And your lights have limited range so most people try to get within 5’ of their subject (or better yet closer).
Now you can get good results with advanced point and shoot cameras. There was a guy here who got great shots with a Canon G8 and small strobe. He really knew how to use it.
For posting on the internet, you do not need a very big file size. A point and shoot will work. For big enlargements, you need about 24 megapixels.
The thing is a camera, strobe, and housing are not cheap. Each housing has to be made specifically for that camera so it is a low production which increases the cost.
Another thing is underwater photography is challenging. The water is very challenging envionment.
Also, photography is distracting. So you dive skills need to be solid lest you get lost in the shooting and put yourself in danger (or you collide with the reef and damage stuff).
If this information does not deter you, you can check out the camera gear choices at the Backscatter web site. They have a bunch of information.
First off, the spectra of light are absorbed by the water. You will not get any reds at deeper than 15’. By 60’, you only have blues and greens. I once took a photo of a queen angel at 80’. There was a grey wall of the wall behind it. When I looked at the photo later, I was struck that the grey wall was revealed by the strobes to be a riot of color of encrusting sponges (oranges, reds, and yellows), In order to get the colors, you have to bring a full spectrum light source down with you - either a flood light or a strobe. And your lights have limited range so most people try to get within 5’ of their subject (or better yet closer).
Now you can get good results with advanced point and shoot cameras. There was a guy here who got great shots with a Canon G8 and small strobe. He really knew how to use it.
For posting on the internet, you do not need a very big file size. A point and shoot will work. For big enlargements, you need about 24 megapixels.
The thing is a camera, strobe, and housing are not cheap. Each housing has to be made specifically for that camera so it is a low production which increases the cost.
Another thing is underwater photography is challenging. The water is very challenging envionment.
Also, photography is distracting. So you dive skills need to be solid lest you get lost in the shooting and put yourself in danger (or you collide with the reef and damage stuff).
If this information does not deter you, you can check out the camera gear choices at the Backscatter web site. They have a bunch of information.
Similar threads
