Canon PowerShot SX130 IS
- Thread starter Zung
- Start date
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
This camera would be a poor choice for an underwater camera. If you like it for surface use, get it and get something better for underwater use.
The long zoom ratio lens is hard to deal with and precludes accessory mount lenses and makes housing the camera a challenge. Ikelite may house it, you will have to ask them if they have plans for it, thus far it is not on their listed housings.
N
The long zoom ratio lens is hard to deal with and precludes accessory mount lenses and makes housing the camera a challenge. Ikelite may house it, you will have to ask them if they have plans for it, thus far it is not on their listed housings.
N
PatW
Contributor
I just checked Ikelite's web site. They say that they are considering a housing for it in the future but it sounded pretty indefinite.
If you go Canon, I would suggest the S90 or G11. Ikelite makes housings for both of them.
If you go Canon, I would suggest the S90 or G11. Ikelite makes housings for both of them.
OP
Zung
Contributor
Canon S90 and soon to be released S95
Canon G10/G11 and soon to be released G12
Olympus ELP-1
Those are the top cameras right now in this class of camera, nothing else even comes close. The ELP-1 is a bit more camera than the S90 and G11 series, larger sensor and interchangeable lenses, but it has drawbacks right now with wide angle capability. Nonetheless, the ELP-1 is competitive in total system price and an excellent choice as is the S90 and G11, especially when housed in the FIX housings.
N
OP
Zung
Contributor
Thanks guys, I just drowned my 2nd Panasonic TZ3 and I'm wondering if I should get a Canon for a change.
Btw, the TZ3 has a 10x lens and it doesn't get in the way; but then it's true that I only use the widest setting (28mm).
Btw, the TZ3 has a 10x lens and it doesn't get in the way; but then it's true that I only use the widest setting (28mm).
OK, your TZ? has a 10X lens. Let me ask you this, what exactly is it that you are trying to improve upon, in particular regarding underwater photography?
IMO, others can disagree, I don't care, I have found several things to be of paramount importance to underwater photography:
1. Getting close. Getting close requires a wide angle lens. You cannot mount an accessory wide angle lens on either your Panasonic or the Canon 130IS so exactly what have you improved there by getting the Canon?
2. External strobe(s). Almost a necessity for anything beyond casual snaps and especially in water with floaties and turbidity. Do either of these cameras have manual strobe control and manual power selection?
3. Did I mention getting close, OK, define close, less than 5 feet and preferably no more than 3 feet. Therefore, to preserve any field of view to encompass your subject, macro aside, a wide angle lens must be used. Define wide angle lens, OK, greater than 100 degrees diagonal field and preferably more like 120 degrees to 180 degrees so that you can get in CLOSE and still have sufficient area to grasp the subject.
If you purchase, over and over, what you had before and use it just as you had before, what is the gain, improvement you are expecting?
BTW, the 28mm Canon lens through the flat port is not wide angle, not even close, there is only about a 60 degree diagonal FOV or roughly equal to a 35mm lens above water. The three lenses I use on my FIX/Canon S90 yield a DFOV of 130 degrees, 150 degrees and 165 degrees more or less plus my macro lens.
In this example, Canon S90, FIX, dual Inon strobes, Fisheye UWL-04 lens, my wife is about 6 feet away, the sponge in the foreground is about a foot away, with the 28mm lens and flat port, I would have needed to be back about an additional 6 feet.
This pool shot, for FOV only, 28mm though flat port:
Shot from exactly the same place with the same camera but with the Fisheye UWL-04 accessory lens installed:
Why does this matter? In order to eliminate the typical bluish "fish picture" you must get close, the only way to get close and preserve FOV is to use a wide angle lens, you cannot do that with either camera you mention.
My rendition of a bluish fish pic, 28mm flat port, shooting distance about 12 feet (Canon A570):
Similar photo, distance about 4 feet but with wide angle lens installed (Canon A570):
Oh, the cameras I mentioned have RAW.
N
Last edited:
OP
Zung
Contributor
Great pics!
Nemrod, I agree with you 1000%! Water is what you DON'T want between the subject and the lens, so the closer the better, and therefore the wider lens the better.
In fact, what I'm REALLY trying to achieve is just to while away some time (a lot of time) that I need to make up my mind for a "big guy". I used to shoot a film Nikon SLR in an Ike housing, with a 24mm (22mm?)/dome port and a Micro-Nikkor/flat port, and an Ike strobe. The only issue I had with that rig: whenever I fit the macro lens, some big guys would show up, and vice-versa:depressed:.
My secret dream: the manufacturers get their act together and make full-frame sensor DSLR's for a grand or less, preferably Nikon so I can reuse my lenses, maybe even the ports.
Nemrod, I agree with you 1000%! Water is what you DON'T want between the subject and the lens, so the closer the better, and therefore the wider lens the better.
In fact, what I'm REALLY trying to achieve is just to while away some time (a lot of time) that I need to make up my mind for a "big guy". I used to shoot a film Nikon SLR in an Ike housing, with a 24mm (22mm?)/dome port and a Micro-Nikkor/flat port, and an Ike strobe. The only issue I had with that rig: whenever I fit the macro lens, some big guys would show up, and vice-versa:depressed:.
My secret dream: the manufacturers get their act together and make full-frame sensor DSLR's for a grand or less, preferably Nikon so I can reuse my lenses, maybe even the ports
.
Great pics!
Nemrod, I agree with you 1000%! Water is what you DON'T want between the subject and the lens, so the closer the better, and therefore the wider lens the better.
In fact, what I'm REALLY trying to achieve is just to while away some time (a lot of time) that I need to make up my mind for a "big guy". I used to shoot a film Nikon SLR in an Ike housing, with a 24mm (22mm?)/dome port and a Micro-Nikkor/flat port, and an Ike strobe. The only issue I had with that rig: whenever I fit the macro lens, some big guys would show up, and vice-versa:depressed:.
My secret dream: the manufacturers get their act together and make full-frame sensor DSLR's for a grand or less, preferably Nikon so I can reuse my lenses, maybe even the ports
I used to have two Nikonos IIIs and one Ikelite housed Nikon FMII, I feel your pain and I also am not about to invest in a full size dSLR for what is essentially hobby use at this time in my life. I do think over the next few years we will see a bunch of new cameras like the new Sony Alpha and a rumored Nikon EVIL and Canon mini-dSLR that may push underwater photography in new directions other than today's chunky dSLR products.
BTW, some years ago, I unloaded all of my film junk and have no regrets, my S90 shoots better photos and I do mean better than I ever got back then but by luck with my film cameras and I now know I got the shot on the spot and can make corrections on the fly, shot to shot, rather than dive to dive or even trip to trip with all of those undeveloped rolls of slides riding in my suitcases awaiting review.
James
Similar threads
