Choosing a camera format for Underwater Photography

[Interceptor121]

Am not sure what your point is
If I look at fisheye I shoot a canon 8-15 on MFT it is f/4 but lower than f/11 on full frame is unusable
F/11 is same as f/5.6 on MFT
Ok APSC you won’t shoot below f/8 back to the same point
You can shoot f5.6 on all platforms with wet lenses but the cost grows fast
On land where you can shoot f/2.8 on FF primes you also have 1.4 on MFT and they are not as big. On land however the full frame case is better as there is much more light
So DOF equivalence actually works naturally in favour of smaller sensors UW due to dome optics but on land maybe not as you have no restrictions

 

[Storker]

I shoot a canon 8-15 on MFT

When did Canon start manufacturing m43? I believed that only Olympus and Panasonic made m43 cameras and lenses.

 

[Interceptor121]

When did Canon start manufacturing m43? I believed that only Olympus and Panasonic made m43 cameras and lenses.

I use a metabones smart adapter so the field of view doesn’t change

 

[tarponchik]

"...larger pixel camera (less megapixel on the same size) will be able to work at higher ISO levels. This is the reason why MFT camera have a lower maximum ISO than full frame at same megapixel count. This for underwater photography is irrelevant and therefore at equivalent Depth of Field, SNR performance is not a concern."

And why exactly this is irrelevant for UW photography?

 

[Interceptor121]

"...larger pixel camera (less megapixel on the same size) will be able to work at higher ISO levels. This is the reason why MFT camera have a lower maximum ISO than full frame at same megapixel count. This for underwater photography is irrelevant and therefore at equivalent Depth of Field, SNR performance is not a concern."

And why exactly this is irrelevant for UW photography?

If you look at the graphs an MFT camera at 20 Megapixel is limited to around 6400 ISO which is 12800 on APSC and 25600 on Full frame at equivalent DOF
While on land you may still want to take a night shot without flash at those ISO levels underwater due to colour absorption by water you will use a strobe so in practical terms you will not even reach 3200 on full frame because even after white balance there would not be colours so you will not shoot with ambient light anyway

 

[Rollin]

I would like to see you use strobes on a pod of Orca whales in a dark fjord in Norway.

I have a GH-5, but I wished I had a Nikon D5. There are no rules on what is 'the best camera', it just depends.

 

[Interceptor121]

I would like to see you use strobes on a pod of Orca whales in a dark fjord in Norway.

I have a GH-5, but I wished I had a Nikon D5. There are no rules on what is 'the best camera', it just depends.

The article is not about the best camera. Perhaps you can read it first before coming out with comments

If you want to take the best shot on a D5 you need a Nauticam WACP with dome ports the smaller aperture required will cancel the benefit

 

[Rollin]

I did read it. I read all your articles. I was reacting on your comment.

 

[Interceptor121]

I did read it. I read all your articles. I was reacting on your comment.

The orca situation falls in the general situation so if you shoot at 800 on your camera you will shoot at 3200 with the D5 and produce the same image at equivalent DOF

You need a WACP type of optic to have a benefit on full frame otherwise there is no benefit unless you shoot at 51280 ISO

I am not sure how you take your orca shots but if you use a wet lens that is the best situation you can be in compared to a dome and will give you 1 to 1.5 stop improvement on a rectilinear lens in a dome

 

[Rollin]

Dof and corner sharpness in those cases are not of the same importance as in macro or CUWA. You just need all the light you can get or the image is lost in noise.

Furthermore, I find the large sensor camera's producing a much cleaner raw image, but I'll agree that it is of no importance to the final product.