Alternative to Olympus TG6

[tursiops]

It looks like a nice camera, but why is better than the TG6 (or other models)?

Adjustable shutter speeds and real f-stops. Bigger sensor.
The BIG pro for the TG6 is its macro capabiity with no add-on lenses needed.
If all you ever want to do is macro, it is a good choice. Otherwise, it is frustrating.

 

[Barmaglot]

You can find an inexpensive (Meikon or SeaFrogs) housing for some m43 and APS-C cameras. If your budget for your first camera is higher, a Sony a6400 or a6600 (both are APS-C) and a SeaFrogs housing (around $280 - 350, I think) would be an option. The SeaFrogs housings for those have lens ports and support a variety of the different Sony lenses (i.e. for doing better macro or wide angle).

There is no SeaFrogs housing for the A6600 so far, as it has a much bigger grip than the rest of the A6xxx series due to containing the bigger Z-series battery. They said they're working on one, but it will likely take quite some time before it's available. They also said that it will have wired sync for strobes (A6600 lacks a pop-up flash) limiting your strobe choice even if you choose to invest in an LED trigger.

 

[stuartv]

There is no SeaFrogs housing for the A6600 so far, as it has a much bigger grip than the rest of the A6xxx series due to containing the bigger Z-series battery. They said they're working on one, but it will likely take quite some time before it's available. They also said that it will have wired sync for strobes (A6600 lacks a pop-up flash) limiting your strobe choice even if you choose to invest in an LED trigger.

No ports for optical sync cables? Boo! That sucks.

Oh, well. The a6400 is a nice camera and $500 cheaper than the a6600. And I think they do have a housing for that.

 

[Barmaglot]

Yes, the Salted Line housing that they sell fits models A6000, A6100, A6300, A6400 and A6500 - it's just the A6600 that is the outlier.

 

[Aqua-Andy]

Keep in mind that Olympus Tough cameras have small sensors, so the quality you get is of an iPhone level. Pictures look cute and with great colors, but only until you try to blow it up. So I use my TG-4 only for snorkeling. It is handy since the camera is small, and shooting in bright sunlight at low depths gives OK results.

Also, Olympus own photo processor, the Olympus Viewer, is clumsy and slow, and Olympus RAW files are not recognized by Lightroom versions before 6. So if you still use LR5, as I do, photo editing is a pain.

.

I use a TG-5 and have blown pics up to 16x24 and with a little upscaling the images look great. Are they Nat geo quality? That would be an easy no, but for what the majority of us are doing with are pics the TG-5 and later at least will take some great photos. It really does excel at macro and with Backscatters M52 lenses it hold its own with WA. I'm still using an Iphone SE so I can't comment on the quality difference between the newer phones and the TG line of cameras. As far as the RAW files, you can always convert to DNG then use your older software but there are loads of current software options that play well with Olympus RAW.

...for what I know (but I could be wrong) Ikelite housing is guarantee to 60 m, and if I'll do the investment, I think I'll go with Ikelite.
I'm aware of the light issue: I might build the kit slowly, depending on how much I enjoy taking pictures underwater.
At the moment, I'm "training" myself with a gopro (which I found at the bottom of ex-HMAS Brisbane) to see if I like the underwater-photography-mood...

My first UA camera system was a Canon S100, I purchased this camera because it was considered one of the best compacts at the time. The image quality between the S100 and the TG-5 is night and day even though the TG has a smaller sensor. Right now you can pick up a TG-6 with an Olympus housing for $650. If you post an ad in the classifieds you could probably entice someone into parting with their TG-5 and housing for considerably less than that now that the 6 is out. I've had the TG-5 for close to two years now and have absolutely no regrets. Is the G7XII more powerful? yes it is, but there are workarounds with the TG that work fine. As for going with the Ikelite housing, I would personally pass. I had the Ike for my S100 and hated the ergonomics of it, The buttons on the back were way too close together and there was almost no tactile feel for the shutter half press, and just forget using the thing with drygloves. Their newer housings may be better but the ergonomics of the OLY housings are so much nicer.

 

[tarponchik]

I use a TG-5 and have blown pics up to 16x24 and with a little upscaling the images look great. Are they Nat geo quality? That would be an easy no, but for what the majority of us are doing with are pics the TG-5 and later at least will take some great photos. It really does excel at macro and with Backscatters M52 lenses it hold its own with WA. I'm still using an Iphone SE so I can't comment on the quality difference between the newer phones and the TG line of cameras. As far as the RAW files, you can always convert to DNG then use your older software but there are loads of current software options that play well with Olympus RAW.


My first UA camera system was a Canon S100, I purchased this camera because it was considered one of the best compacts at the time. The image quality between the S100 and the TG-5 is night and day even though the TG has a smaller sensor. Right now you can pick up a TG-6 with an Olympus housing for $650. If you post an ad in the classifieds you could probably entice someone into parting with their TG-5 and housing for considerably less than that now that the 6 is out. I've had the TG-5 for close to two years now and have absolutely no regrets. Is the G7XII more powerful? yes it is, but there are workarounds with the TG that work fine. As for going with the Ikelite housing, I would personally pass. I had the Ike for my S100 and hated the ergonomics of it, The buttons on the back were way too close together and there was almost no tactile feel for the shutter half press, and just forget using the thing with drygloves. Their newer housings may be better but the ergonomics of the OLY housings are so much nicer.

TG-4 has a 16 mpx sensor compared with 12 mpx sensors of TG-5 and TG-6. Assuming the sensors area is the same, fewer pixels means larger pixels and less noise. I do not know for sure, just saying this is possible that TG-6 noise is lower than TG-4. As for your comparison with s100, it has a larger sensor than TG-6, 41.52 mm2 vs. 28.46 mm2, so I find it hard to believe. As for the RAW files conversion, sure, you can convert anything into something else, but it takes extra efforts and eats space on the hard disk.

 

[rabe]

the OLY housings are so much nicer.

Interesting, thanks!

P.S.: I'm diving where dry gloves are not needed

 

[kerry e]

TG-4 has a 16 mpx sensor compared with 12 mpx sensors of TG-5 and TG-6. Assuming the sensors area is the same, fewer pixels means larger pixels and less noise. I do not know for sure, just saying this is possible that TG-6 noise is lower than TG-4. As for your comparison with s100, it has a larger sensor than TG-6, 41.52 mm2 vs. 28.46 mm2, so I find it hard to believe. As for the RAW files conversion, sure, you can convert anything into something else, but it takes extra efforts and eats space on the hard disk.

Interesting - I am replacing my Olympus OMD EM5 II with a TG6 (don't ask!) and I will be interested to compare. I know the TG6 is a step down but I bet (not considering NatGeo) that the outcome will be comparable. I will let you know!

 

[tarponchik]

Interesting - I am replacing my Olympus OMD EM5 II with a TG6 (don't ask!) and I will be interested to compare. I know the TG6 is a step down but I bet (not considering NatGeo) that the outcome will be comparable. I will let you know!

Thanks, but i do not know much about EM5

 

[Puppeteer]

Also, Olympus own photo processor, the Olympus Viewer, is clumsy and slow, and Olympus RAW files are not recognized by Lightroom versions before 6. So if you still use LR5, as I do, photo editing is a pain.

Use the free Adobe DNG converter. It will ingest the Olympus RAW photos and output DNG's, which are universal RAW's. Any version of lightroom should be able to then import the RAW with no loss of quality.