GoPro 3 VS. point-and-shoots?

[stanw]

I want to get a simple camera rated to 50-ft or less that is easy to use and produces good quality video and pictures. The GoPros are not the most user friendly in my opinion, so I started looking into some point-and-shooters such as the ones on this page:

2013 Waterproof Camera Roundup: Digital Photography Review

There seems to be pros/cons both ways, though the things I like about the point-and-shooters is that they have optical zooms and easy to work with LCD screens. What am I missing here?

1. Can anyone tell me some reasons besides depth rating to go with the GoPro 3?
2. Any specific recommendations for point-and-shooters that record longer than 30 minutes at 1080?

Thanks!

 

[Craig66]

Having used both I feel that the only benefit the gopro has is its size. It does not handle light as well and even with a filter I have not been impressed with colors. The advantages it does have is size and it is great to just clip it on your bcd between uses. The WAL is also a really nice features. The specific point and shoot I have used is the Sony WX-10 in an ikelite body. Although a little more bulky and lacking WAL it gave far superior imaging and color (above 40-50 feet)

It might also depend on what you are using it for. Are you intending on diving with them? I do not get the impression that you will get optimal results and will also risk flooding them if you go any deeper.

 

[seaworm]

Gopro has 4k which mean its higher then 1080!!!!! Wants you pass 1080 there is 2k if I recall and there is 4k the highest. You can buy a LCD screen for the gopro $79..... I'm down to 4 cameras on my list canons g15 & 16 and Sony rx100

 

[Craig66]

If you are looking for a camera for beach, water sports, etc than the cameras listed on the review might work. If you are looking for an underwater camera you are best served by a regular camera with housing.

 

[AwkwardSwimmer]

I love my GoPro Hero 3 Black but it has it's serious limitations for advanced photography. I run mine in either 1080p or 720p with continuous photos (I think every 4 or 5 seconds?). It takes a lot of video ending afterwards but you can get some pretty cool video with them. I run them with the headstrap and then tuck that under my hood.

As for the photos, I've gotten some REALLY nice ones but it is all luck. Due to the style of the lens and everything things will tend to look a farther away but depending on the shot that can be good or bad.

Honestly I love my GoPro, I set it and forget it. If you want something where you really sit down and take pictures with that is in the cheaper "budget" category I had great luck shooting with a Canon Powershot S95 and I've only heard great things about the newer ones.

If you do get a gopro check out Polar Pro filters, they just added snap on filters for the gopro 3 including one with a macro flip lens.
GoPro Accessories - Filters, Lenses, & Microphones For GoPro Cameras

Gopro has 4k which mean its higher then 1080

There is absolutely no point in filming in 4k or 2k at this point. The frame rates are too low, it's a cool feature but not for something with as much movement as diving. I think that's going to change when the Hero4 comes out.

 

[justinsthompson]

The GoPro has produced some great snapshots for us. We recently went to see a dive photographers shots of us on a dive taken with a DSLR / flash and were not impressed. We've gotten better photos by using the time lapse feature of the GoPro set at 1 photo / 0.5 seconds. I've set down my point and shoot for a long time now topside as well and prefer the GoPro snapshots.

All of the photos below were taken on a GoPro with post editing:

 

[ronscuba]

I like my GoPro, but if your pictures are better than the guy's who shoots a DSLR with a flash, then the issue is the not the GoPro is better than the DSLR, it's the guy with DSLR does not know how to properly use his camera yet.

The GoPro is great. 90% of divers will be totally satisfied with it. But there are better cameras. They just cost a lot more and are substantially bigger.

 

[dfx]

The problem with those waterproof P&S cameras is usually the depth rating. From your list, only the Nikon satisfies your 50 ft requirement, and I can already tell you that waterproof to 60 ft isn't going to be good enough in the long run.

It's all about the right tool for the job. Those cameras aren't really made for scuba diving. Neither is the Gopro, it's a wearable action video camera, which is something it does well, but even in that category it isn't necessarily the best nor the cheapest option.

The best option is to find something that's specifically geared towards diving. The problem with that is usually the price tag, but there are exceptions. Intova makes a Gopro-style camera with features specific to diving, it's reasonably priced but of course it's a small video camera and as such, quality of photos taken is questionable at best. It's also still meant as a wearable action camera, meaning that unless size is important to you for one reason or another, you will run into limitations sooner rather than later.

The most common and probably best choice is to go with a dive housing for a good quality "dry" camera. The trick is to find a combination of housing and camera that doesn't break the bank, where usually it's the housing that's the most problematic item. But there's exceptions here too, for example Canon housings for certain models can be had for relatively little money, especially for models that aren't top of the line any more. The same is true for other brands.

 

[00wabbit]

Here is a post I recently made.

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ti...why-i-shoot-raw-video-tutorial-lightroom.html

I prefer to shoot raw for stills all the time. You can't do that with a go-pro.
I shoot with an RX100 and get good results. I am also very happy with the video. It has good image stabilization in camera and I can see what I am shooting from the back of the camera. You don't really need to shoot more than 15 mins at a time in one shot. No-one likes watching a 1 shot movie that is that long and it is a pain to edit to get the parts you want. With the RX100 I can set the white balance underwater and shoot stills. If I want to shoot video I can just hit the video button and it will start recording. And if I am shooting video but want a still I can press the shutter while shooting video and it will record a 17mp still shot of the scene without interrupting the video.

I bought a gopro and used it a few times, but I don't take it anymore. The only time I use it now is to clamp it to something underwater and leave it there while people swim by.

 

[flareside]

4k is 15fps so it is relatively useless. 2.7k is the next one down and it is a relatively useful mode especially should you desire to crop your video. 1080p (2k) is the next mode down from there.

The advantage of the GoPro is field of view. To get anywhere near the same field of view, you need to add a rather substantial (i.e. heavy) lens on the front of a p&s. Video is great but still photos can suffer from slow shutter speeds. Stills are also best done in timelapse mode as individual shots are cumbersome.

The advantages of p&s include zoom and flash. Stills will be better especially of small critters but video will suffer from narrow FOV. White balance is much more usable too. No need for red filters.