Camera System Recommendation

[jayceebutler]

I've been shooting with a Sony RX100 IV + Nauticam + Sea n Sea DS-2's for a few years now, but have recently moved to Hawaii, so my diving frequency has increased to a point where I can justify a more high performance kit.

I follow camera tech closely, but the above water performance doesn't always match the underwater performance, and there aren't a lot of unbiased underwater reviews. I dive several times a week locally, but also plan to travel 2-3 times a year on dive vacations. I want to keep my camera rig as small as possible, but still benefit from the best auto-focus and image quality as possible, realizing there are trade-offs between size and performance. Mirrorless seems like the path for me. I realize the next purchase I will make for camera gear will be substantial and would like to ensure i'm making the best possible decision for my needs and expectations.

I have spent many hours combing through information and feel that the Sony 6XXX and Olympus EM-1 Mark II are are candidates for my needs.

I am a general shooter. I have a Dyron wet wide angle lens that I use 30% of the time. I take many close eel shots and fish portraits without a wet lens 50%, and i've recently purchased a Bluewater Macro wet lens 20%,which I'm still learning to use...jury's still out on the diopter. We also have a great Tiger Shark shore dive i've been visiting, but the Tiger's don't typically get close enough for the wet wide angle. Auto focus is really important to me, as I seem to lose a fair percentage of photos to bad focus, and my vision isn't as awesome as it once was.

Sony released the 6600 several weeks ago with highly rated auto focus and a bigger battery, but no housings announced yet. The 6400 also has the same auto-focus system. I've heard this auto -focus system isn't as good underwater. The Olympus is supposed to be good at auto-focus, but is several years old now. I like that the Olympus uses small lenses and ports and the lenses are affordable, although price isn't my primary concern.

Given the state of the Camera business right now, is 4/3 going the way of the Dodo? I'd like to know what your recommendations on jumping into one of these two systems would be based on what I've described my needs are. Or should I be considering the Nikon D500, D850 or one of the Mirrorless Full Frame offerings? Any advice you could provide would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Hoag]

I shoot a Sony A7iii above water, and an A6000 below water. I use the theory that no matter how careful I am, accidents can happen so I never take a camera system underwater that I am not willing to lose if it floods (and I am not willing to but my A7iii at risk).

I personally don't think that the m4/3 format is dead - at least not yet. The sensors are much better than they used to be. This small size does make them a good option for anyone looking to build a small system that they can fit in carry-on bags. Lens selection for m4/3 is outstanding with 8mm fisheyes and an outstanding Olympus 60mm macro lens.

The Sony A6xxx series offers a very good selection, but each one gives you different features, so take a look at the newer ones and see which one meets your needs. I will leave it up to you, but some offer IBIS while others do not. Some offer better AF than others. One offers the same battery as Sony uses in the A7iii and A9 so it has much better battery life than its counterparts.

I personally think that a Sony A6xxx would be a good choice, but temper this recommendation with the fact that I shoot it, so I am probably pretty biased.

 

[Chris Ross]

mirrorless produces small camera bodies, but dome and lens size scales with sensor size, bigger sensors need bigger domes. m43 has the advantage of a wide selection of lenses of good quality available for UW use, native fisheyes and various rectilinear wide options and a few choices of macro lens. I shoot the EM-1 MkII and find the camera does a great job, AF is pretty snappy and accurate. I shoot it in C-AF plus tracking it is quite effective. For your shooting with stuff not too close sounds like the 12-40 f2.8 lens (24-80 equivalent) would do well, it focuses really close and will do 0.3x at 40mm right up close to the dome and the wide end while not superwide is suitable for larger creatures that won't come too close and AF is very snappy with that lens.

I can pack it into a carry on size backpack (Think Tank streetwalker hardrive:

The dome is the Zen 170mm type II, there's a macro port and a 100mm ZEN fisheye dome as well as two INON Z-240s.

 

[jayceebutler]

I shoot a Sony A7iii above water, and an A6000 below water. I use the theory that no matter how careful I am, accidents can happen so I never take a camera system underwater that I am not willing to lose if it floods (and I am not willing to but my A7iii at risk).

I personally don't think that the m4/3 format is dead - at least not yet. The sensors are much better than they used to be. This small size does make them a good option for anyone looking to build a small system that they can fit in carry-on bags. Lens selection for m4/3 is outstanding with 8mm fisheyes and an outstanding Olympus 60mm macro lens.

The Sony A6xxx series offers a very good selection, but each one gives you different features, so take a look at the newer ones and see which one meets your needs. I will leave it up to you, but some offer IBIS while others do not. Some offer better AF than others. One offers the same battery as Sony uses in the A7iii and A9 so it has much better battery life than its counterparts.

I personally think that a Sony A6xxx would be a good choice, but temper this recommendation with the fact that I shoot it, so I am probably pretty biased.

Thanks for your recommendation, Hoag. I didn't add 'risk assessment' to my criteria. I've been using a nauticam vacuum valve for a few years now, and it has saved my gear several times. Any housing I buy will include one of these.

 

[Manneca]

I use a very old Olympus PEN 5 with an Olympus housing. I'm committed to m43 because of size issues. I like to do macro and a smaller set up allows me to get closer than a bigger rig would. I have a 60mm macro and a Panasonic 8mm wide angle. I'm quite happy with this. When my last backup camera dies, I think I'll go with whatever the larger Olympus m43 is at the time. I photograph on land with a Sony A7Riii which I love but I don't want to take it underwater. Lenses are bigger, housings are bigger and heavier. There is no perfect set up; tradeoffs are everywhere and people are different in what they are happy with. I print on 17x34 paper with about a 1-3/4 inch margin and get fantastic prints. I wish focusing were a bit faster.

 

[jayceebutler]

mirrorless produces small camera bodies, but dome and lens size scales with sensor size, bigger sensors need bigger domes. m43 has the advantage of a wide selection of lenses of good quality available for UW use, native fisheyes and various rectilinear wide options and a few choices of macro lens. I shoot the EM-1 MkII and find the camera does a great job, AF is pretty snappy and accurate. I shoot it in C-AF plus tracking it is quite effective. For your shooting with stuff not too close sounds like the 12-40 f2.8 lens (24-80 equivalent) would do well, it focuses really close and will do 0.3x at 40mm right up close to the dome and the wide end while not superwide is suitable for larger creatures that won't come too close and AF is very snappy with that lens.

I can pack it into a carry on size backpack (Think Tank streetwalker hardrive:
View attachment 542547

The dome is the Zen 170mm type II, there's a macro port and a 100mm ZEN fisheye dome as well as two INON Z-240s.

Thanks Chris. That's a lot of flexibility in one carry-on bag. I'm leaning towards the 12-40 to begin with, then add a 8mm fisheye followed by a 60mm macro. Having used this system for some time, is there any guidance you can give on choosing ports/extensions which can be re-used for different lens combos?

Also, do you think it would be wise to wait for the E-M1 Mk 3 to be released before investing in a housing? Rumors are a new E-M5 is being announced in October, but nothing about a new E-M1.

 

[jayceebutler]

I use a very old Olympus PEN 5 with an Olympus housing. I'm committed to m43 because of size issues. I like to do macro and a smaller set up allows me to get closer than a bigger rig would. I have a 60mm macro and a Panasonic 8mm wide angle. I'm quite happy with this. When my last backup camera dies, I think I'll go with whatever the larger Olympus m43 is at the time. I photograph on land with a Sony A7Riii which I love but I don't want to take it underwater. Lenses are bigger, housings are bigger and heavier. There is no perfect set up; tradeoffs are everywhere and people are different in what they are happy with. I print on 17x34 paper with about a 1-3/4 inch margin and get fantastic prints. I wish focusing were a bit faster.

Hi Manneca,

Thanks for your response. It gives me confidence that you will be sticking with 4/3 after having used it for a considerable amount of time. I haven't really had any feedback yet from folks on 4/3 that they will be moving to full frame. If you aren't cropping heavily or printing giant prints, I don't see any advantage yet to full frame that compensates for the added expense and size/weight.

-J

 

[Chris Ross]

scour over the port charts. The Zen dome I have can be used with the 12-40 and 7-14 panasonic lenses. thats the DP-170 type II with 60mm built in extension. If you want to use the Oly 7-14 that requires the N120 dome dome and n85-120 adapter/extension and again that can be used with the 12-40 with a different extension adapter. In theory you can use the olympus fisheye with a custom 30 mm adapter (or Nauticam 34.7mm n85-N120) and the N120 170mm dome, but optically may not be as good and the big ports prevents you getting as close as you would like.

Zen ports: http://www.jaredparsons.com/portchart/zen-only/by-combination-group/nauticam-n85/
Nauticam ports: N85 MFT Rev 7.19.pdf

Or you could look into using the WWL with the 14-42 in theory swappable mid dive so you can shoot smaller stuff but the 14-42 in a flat port is not that great a lens.

You also might consider the 45 macro port plus extension for your 60mm macro lens which would allow you to use the really nice little 30mm m43 macro lenses which take the 45 macro port, great for macro dives where you also find a lot of bigger stuff so you don't have to back way off.

I'm not sure when a MkIII might be released, personally unless there's strong rumours I'd go with what is available. The EM-5 MkII has been out for 4 years now and the EM-1 original lasted 4-5 years. The EM-1 MkII really is quite a remarkable camera, AF is excellent - I use C-AF plus tracking and really customisable in the interface. The on board stabilisation is excellent, I was shooting handheld 1/2 second exposures last week with the 12-40 and they come out nice and sharp with good technique.

 

[Hoag]

Thanks for your recommendation, Hoag. I didn't add 'risk assessment' to my criteria. I've been using a nauticam vacuum valve for a few years now, and it has saved my gear several times. Any housing I buy will include one of these.

I use a vacuum valve on the Nauticam housing that I currently have for my A6000, but I also still consider that both accidents and mistakes can happen. So I continue to never dive with a camera system that I am not willing to put at risk.