Question camera upgrade. Should I bring the FF that I currently own?

[nasai]

I'm a TG5 user taking snapshots. I'm getting more interested into photography last year and tried to get better images out of TG. My current setup: 2x inon z240, TG5 with AOI 04a wide angle wet lens. Macro images are ok but I cant get what I want with wide angle. Id like to upgrade my camera and I use sony a7cii on land.

I dont own any lens that I intend to bring underwater. I think i'll get canon 8-15 for reefscape, sony 28-60 with WWL 1b for pelagics that are further away and sony 90 for macro. But that cost quite a lot and I may need a second suitcase for the camera and accessories alone! Im not a very good photographer and still playing with strobe positioning. I don't dive locally and do a few diving trips a year.

The question is should I stick with a7cii or get a new cropped senor/compact? I'm afraid Im not satisfied after a couple years and end up costing more with the compact choice.

 

[nasai]

some of my shots from recent trips

 

[Barmaglot]

A7CII is an excellent camera to house, but the question is, do you take photos while diving, or do you dive to take photos? If it's the former, then look at an RX100 or G7X series camera. If it's the latter, and you have the budget for it, it's hard to go wrong with an A7CII, but you will likely need new strobes to go with everything else, as the power output of Z-240s is somewhat marginal for a full-frame camera. Also, unless you want a circular fisheye look, maybe consider an FCP instead of 8-15mm + dome + WWL-1. Paired with a 28-60mm it has a very good zoom range.

 

[WS007]

As Barmaglot says, it depends on your desires...

For sure you need a second suitcase with gear when you go FF. Unless you dedicate your dives to make photos, a better compact is, by far, the better choice. A diver with a hughe exchangeable lens setup, just diving within a guided group and making snapshots is a horrible imagination for me. This is just extra exhausting (travel as well as diving) for nothing..

Regarding the difference between A7cII or A1/A7R5, I think this does not matter now. A7cII will be perfect for all needs, even the Z240 strobes will do their job at the beginning. I a couple of years you will go for a newer camera model and this is the time then to upgrade...

Wolfgang

 

[Trilobite]

Another option would be to go with micro 4/3s, e.g. Olympus EM-10 iv or EM-1 ii or higher, etc. These will give you a larger sensor than compacts and better image quality, but not much bulkier or heavier than a compact. I recently upgraded from a TG-4 to an EM-10 iv, and love the image quality and compactness for travel.

 

[Barmaglot]

Another option would be to go with micro 4/3s, e.g. Olympus EM-10 iv or EM-1 ii or higher, etc. These will give you a larger sensor than compacts and better image quality, but not much bulkier or heavier than a compact.

A7C is actually smaller than E-M1/OM-1 and is very similar in size to E-M5/OM-5. Sony 28-60mm lens is also very compact. Sony 90mm macro is massive compared to Olympus 60mm macro or Panasonic 45mm macro, but is actually slightly smaller than Olympus 90mm macro.

 

[WS007]

I had EM5II, EM1II MFT and now Sony A7R5, all in Nauticam housings. My WA rigs are about the same size, no matter whether MFT or FF. A big difference is macro: Zuiko 60mm (or Pana 45mm) vs. the much larger/heavier Sony 90mm rig...

=> When you go for an interchangeable lens system, you have to be strictly minimalistic in order not to lug around enormous amounts of gear: normal range zoom lens with wet diopter for macro and wet lens (e.g. WWL1B, better WWL-C) for WA. This is similar to how compact cameras are used and then size/weigth is o.k., but still bigger/heavier than compact. Also here not so much difference between different sensor sizes, especially when using Sony A7c cameras...


Wolfgang

 

[Trilobite]

A7C is actually smaller than E-M1/OM-1 and is very similar in size to E-M5/OM-5. Sony 28-60mm lens is also very compact. Sony 90mm macro is massive compared to Olympus 60mm macro or Panasonic 45mm macro, but is actually slightly smaller than Olympus 90mm macro.

I wasn't comparing them to the Sony but to the compacts, so not sure why you felt compelled to make this comment. But you are cherry picking comparisons. I didn't mention the OM-1; the EM-10 mk iv is the smallest and lightest of any of the bodies mentioned. But it's the lenses that make the biggest difference. Comparing e.g. a 90mm full frame lens to a 90mm m4/3 lens is misleading; a 90mm m4/3 lens is the equivalent of a 180mm full frame lens.

 

[Barmaglot]

When you go for an interchangeable lens system, you have to be strictly minimalistic in order not to lug around enormous amounts of gear: normal range zoom lens with wet diopter for macro and wet lens (e.g. WWL1B, better WWL-C) for WA

I wouldn't say that you have to, but it's an option. WWL-C has the limitation of not having many zoom FF lenses that work with it - the port chart only has the Z-mount 24-50mm; for Sony FF you only have 24mm primes. A Sony 24-50mm is rumored to be in development, but the leaked image seems to suggest a large front element, which means it won't play well with wet lenses.

I'm not super convinced about shooting macro with 28-60mm and diopters either. It's certainly an option, but a 90mm + flat port is not that much more stuff to pack, and it gives you a lot more capability.

Personally, shooting an a6300, I pack a 16-50mm + short flat port, AOI UWL-09F, Canon 60mm EF-S with Metabones, Sony 90mm, long flat port, and a Weefine WFL05S (+13 diopter). This covers wide-angle, mid-range, macro, supermacro and blackwater.

I wasn't comparing them to the Sony but to the compacts, so not sure why you felt compelled to make this comment. But you are cherry picking comparisons. I didn't mention the OM-1; the EM-10 mk iv is the smallest and lightest of any of the bodies mentioned. But it's the lenses that make the biggest difference. Comparing e.g. a 90mm full frame lens to a 90mm m4/3 lens is misleading; a 90mm m4/3 lens is the equivalent of a 180mm full frame lens.

You specifically brought up EM-1; it has been directly succeeded by OM-1 and now OM-1 Mark II. An E-M10 Mark IV is still a little bit bigger than an A7C II, although it is somewhat lighter.

 

[cerich]

I wasn't comparing them to the Sony but to the compacts, so not sure why you felt compelled to make this comment. But you are cherry picking comparisons. I didn't mention the OM-1; the EM-10 mk iv is the smallest and lightest of any of the bodies mentioned. But it's the lenses that make the biggest difference. Comparing e.g. a 90mm full frame lens to a 90mm m4/3 lens is misleading; a 90mm m4/3 lens is the equivalent of a 180mm full frame lens.

I agree with you, the comparisons aren't valid.

Plus, with MFT, the strobes OP has will be more than OK and that would save some money.