Camera for beginner

[RJP]

View attachment 211588

Buoyancy skills slice looks too small... by about half.

 

[scubadada]

I just flooded my old Olympus FE-360 with an Olympus housing, I'm going with the Canon G16 with the Fantasea FG16 housing. I'm not a serious photographer/videographer, but would like to capture something unique or unusual. This combo allows for a number of flash, video lighting, wide angle, macro, and corrective lens opportunities. The camera and housing is available for just $800

I forgot to mention, I have a strong bias that divers should have good control over dive skills prior to considering photo or video activity. Digital UW photo/video has certainly not been a universally positive advance for scuba diving.

 

[rob1967]

I totally disagree on the "manual" requirement. It all depends on what type of shots you want. I really don't like to cut out all ambient light by shooting at small apertures and fast shutter speeds, because I shoot wide angle and want the ambience of the natural light in my pictures. If you shoot macro and want to isolate your subject against a black background, it's a totally different story, and manual is probably a good way to shoot.







Henrik, I see you don't have too many dives in your log yet.

Storker, I don't understand how you can be so eager to "totally" disagree. Perhaps I should have elaborated that a beginner is probably best off to start with macro, then later go to wide-angle and start adding ambient light to the background. But I still maintain that ideally you want your foreground illuminated mostly with strobe in order to have true colours. Of course it is also a matter of one's own personal style, and I did say IMHO (which means: In MY Humble Opinion). Regardless of how much ambient light you want in your shot, the best way to control that (again, IMHO) will be to shoot in manual mode. Of course you can have your opinion, but to "totally" disagree is not going to help those trying to learn.

Another advantage for shooting in manual is that only then will you begin to understand how different settings affect exposure and depth of field, and how to control foreground vs. background exposure. IMHO, you are smarter than the camera and should take full control of it!

Storker, I see that you don't have many dives in your log book yet. I would agree that excellent buoyancy skills are mandatory before starting to take photos underwater. I didn't feel comfortable with that until I had about 200 dives (which was 6 years and 1000 dives ago). I didn't see your post until now because I was away on a dive trip. I would perhaps suggest that when your posts exceed your dives by a factor of 10 or more, it is perhaps time to get out diving!

 

[spoolin01]

I think you can get excellent results from any of the mid- to high-end point and shoot cameras made in the last several years. For budget, you probably want to find one where the manufacturer makes a housing as well, or where Meikon makes one. When you come here, you'll almost invariably be advised to go straight to the high end of the P&S range, if not beyond. Nothing wrong with that, but it distorts the budget perspective. Personally, I prefer to buy quality high-end used gear, so the occasional accident doesn't bite as deep.

If you like video - and you probably will, if not already - then my recommendation is to make sure you can get 60 fps in HD. 30fps is choppy. I think most anything at the high end of P&S made in the last couple of years does this. I find I shoot mostly video in the tropics, because it makes for a great recap of the dive, and it takes more skill and patience - and light - to get good stills of moving critters.

For the tropics, I'd forgo a video light and get one good strobe. You can get great video with just a removable red filter for the housing, and some will say you don't even need that. More gear can possibly increase your satisfaction with the various photography modes and situations, but the gear can quickly overtake the diving as the focus of the outing.

I agree that for stills, RAW is nice to have, but there are many satisfied U/W photo snappers who don't think that way.

 

[snowdog61]

Don't do it - it'll lead you to the darkside eventually. You'll start with something small and lightweight "just to take some pictures". Then you'll want more light, better lenses, editing software, bigger strobes, full controls and it goes on and on and on..... and suddenly you are now taking photographs and spending more time with your computer in Lightroom then socializing post dive at the bar. seriously, though, spend your money on a good strobe. There are many good point & shoot compacts and decent housings are way cheaper than DSLR. Get one that can shoot in RAW - You can save a good bit of marginally bad photos in the software as long as you didn't 'burn' the original with too much light. Buy used - there's always someone wanting to upgrade.

 

[Storker]

a beginner is probably best off to start with macro, then later go to wide-angle and start adding ambient light to the background.

Why? IME, macro leads more easily to mental tunnel vision and a propensity to lose track of your buddy. Besides, macro or WA is a matter of personal preference. Some photogs like to shoot small, cool critters, some like to capture the ambience. You prefer macro, I get that. I don't. It takes all kinds.

Another advantage for shooting in manual is that only then will you begin to understand how different settings affect exposure and depth of field, and how to control foreground vs. background exposure. IMHO, you are smarter than the camera and should take full control of it!

Really? IME, understanding DOF and background underexposure doesn't require shooting manual. S auto or A auto according to the situation, and proper use of exposure compensation is just as effective. And less task-loading than manual. Even P auto has its advantages, letting the diver concentrate on composition and buddy obligations instead of fiddling with camera settings. Besides, with a small sensor compact you don't have much control of DOF anyway. f/2.8 on one of those gives roughly the same DOF as f/11-16 on a large sensor dSLR. I started shooting with an SLR more than 30 years ago, and after getting my first auto-capable camera I've hardly ever shot manual. It's mostly A auto, sometimes M with auto ISO and once in a while S auto. P auto is also used, but only when "getting the shot" is my primary concern. But I still control DOF and exposure comp on nearly every shot. I don't need to shoot manual to do that.

Storker, I see that you don't have many dives in your log book yet. I would agree that excellent buoyancy skills are mandatory before starting to take photos underwater. I didn't feel comfortable with that until I had about 200 dives (which was 6 years and 1000 dives ago). I didn't see your post until now because I was away on a dive trip. I would perhaps suggest that when your posts exceed your dives by a factor of 10 or more, it is perhaps time to get out diving!

Wow. You don't like people disagreeing with you, do you? Or did someone pee in your cornflakes?


--
Sent from my Android phone
Typos are a feature, not a bug

 

[doctormike]

a beginner is probably best off to start with macro, then later go to wide-angle and start adding ambient light to the background.

Why? IME, macro leads more easily to mental tunnel vision and a propensity to lose track of your buddy. Besides, macro or WA is a matter of personal preference. Some photogs like to shoot small, cool critters, some like to capture the ambience. You prefer macro, I get that. I don't. It takes all kinds.

Well, not to get in the middle of a heated debate, but I have to agree that wide angle photography, especially with strobes, requires FAR more work and attention to detail than macro.

Macro strobe photography is technically pretty trivial - if you have your strobe(s) positioned appropriately, it's really just point and shoot to get perfectly exposed images with most modern cameras. The challenge is in finding the subjects.

OTOH, getting good foreground and background exposure with wide angle and strobes takes a lot of skill and messing with controls. So a relatively new diver might have more fun and be less task loaded with macro.

But of course, you shoot what you want to shoot, that's a personal preference and dictated by the sealife at the dive site.

 

[rob1967]

As doctormike quite rightly points out, macro is easier to learn than wide-angle. So beginners are perhaps best off starting with macro. Pretty basic stuff. I'm not sure why Storker wants to argue with that.

I guess he also did not notice the at the end of my post (despite quoting it), which indicates that until now there has been no issues with the taste of my cornflakes. I enjoy rational discussions about cameras and underwater photography as it helps all of us learn from each other. But argument just for argument's sake is just a waste of time. I will refrain from saying anything more on this particular thread as it unfortunately seems to promote troll-feeding. Perhaps if Storker wants to engage in 30 page arguments, he can go back to the "Advanced Scuba discussions" forum and debate with his buddies over there.

 

[klausi]

I really like the Olympus TG-3 "tough" for beginners. This is one of the cameras which is water-proof till10 m without a housing; so if you have a small flood, it will still probably survive. It's also a very good camera, especially for macro and super-macro (there is a special mode for this). This is one of the shots I took with it in Anilao in May:

View attachment 211899

 

[insomniac]

I really like the Olympus TG-3 "tough" for beginners. This is one of the cameras which is water-proof till10 m without a housing; so if you have a small flood, it will still probably survive. It's also a very good camera, especially for macro and super-macro (there is a special mode for this). This is one of the shots I took with it in Anilao in May:

View attachment 211899

I second this STRONGLY.... On my first "real" dive trip, the DM had been through over 15+ camera's floods in his long career before he gave up on underwater photography. With the TG-3 you can get an ultra cheap housing and not worry if it floods a little as the camera itself is waterproof to 50' deep. Not only that it's super easy to get decent enough shots... Below is link to pics from my first time ever using the camera underwater (and my first time with a camera underwater). I have a YS-D1 Strobe (overkill) on one arm and a 2000 Lumen Video Light on the other. It's crazy that I spent over 2k on a camera mount, light and strobe for a $300 camera. But I was very happy with the results (this was cold water diving in BC). You can start out with just the camera and build from there.

https://picasaweb.google.com/111484...cket?authkey=Gv1sRgCMvt94Sggs_zggE&feat=email

PS: Obviously, you would purchase the TG-4 (it's virtually identical but has some cool new stuff, like RAW capability)