how good does a camera need to be?
- Thread starter Virgil
- 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
sheck33
Contributor
how good do you want your pictures to be?
A reasonably good photographer can do some pretty decent stuff with a point-n-shoot camera, while a lousy photographer can't buy a good shot at any price. So, if you are already pretty good at photographic composition, and comfortable with f-stops, film speeds, light levels, shutter speeds and focal lengths and how they all fit together, then go ahead and buy the most expensive camera you can afford to flood.
Otherwise, get yourself a (reasonably) cheap point-n-shoot and learn composition and basic underwater lighting techniques first. For example, I took this one with a $12 Kodak disposable camera in a $99 Ikelite Aquashot housing.
Rick
Otherwise, get yourself a (reasonably) cheap point-n-shoot and learn composition and basic underwater lighting techniques first. For example, I took this one with a $12 Kodak disposable camera in a $99 Ikelite Aquashot housing.
Rick
I think, at least a digital camera and housing with no external strobe is always a good place to start. Sure you can try regular point and shoot camera but let say that you are a novice, you will have to wait until you develop the film to find out what the pictures look like. With digital, you get instant feedback and can always try to take the same picture again with different setting or angle right away so your learning curve will be much faster.
Most of us don't get to go diving every day or every week so when we go, it is nice to use the opportunity to learn as much as possible. Like anything else, practice makes perfect so with digital, you can shoot more pictures in one dive and in a long run, cheaper since you won't need to pay for more films and development.
Most of us don't get to go diving every day or every week so when we go, it is nice to use the opportunity to learn as much as possible. Like anything else, practice makes perfect so with digital, you can shoot more pictures in one dive and in a long run, cheaper since you won't need to pay for more films and development.
I'm another fan of beginners and digitals. For all the reasons ssra outlined and the fact the a basic digital can be bought very reasonably, sometimes cheaper than the point and shoot film cameras.
Not only do you have to wait to see your results, but the cost of film and developing just keeps mounting. With digital, once you purchase your camera, housing and memories cards, you don't have any other expenses until you print only the photos you want.
Not only do you have to wait to see your results, but the cost of film and developing just keeps mounting. With digital, once you purchase your camera, housing and memories cards, you don't have any other expenses until you print only the photos you want.
I'm deffinately not a pro at taking UW stills, all I've had is the UWphoto speciality class and not much experience after that.
This pic was taken with an Ikelite Aquashot 3 and a Fuji Endeavor 10 APS camera, all had for under $100 off Ebay.
Not bad for a beginer with a cheap camera.
Scott
This pic was taken with an Ikelite Aquashot 3 and a Fuji Endeavor 10 APS camera, all had for under $100 off Ebay.
Not bad for a beginer with a cheap camera.
Scott
James connell
Contributor
as long as the camera body has the features you want - price really doesn't matter. all a camera is is a light tight box with a hole in it. as far as the quality of the picture ( with film and a housing) is concerned almost any camera ( with the same lens) will give you the same pix. the amjor difference in camera price is in the materials of construction, the quality of the shutter, and how well sealed against dust/moistur. useing nikon as an example - the n55 will take ( in average conditions) just as good a pix as the F5. but it won't do it for 100,000+ frames and it won't do it day in day out in all kinds of conditions. the 55 also has a slower shutter slower sync time ( a factor in fill flash photography) a weaker auto focus and simpler metering.
most likely a 'hobbiest' shooter will never notice the shortcomings particulary underwater. it's the LENS that makes the image not the camera body!
for underwater work strobes are an important thing so any camera you choose should have some method of strobe control other than useing reflected internal flash.
my favorite (film) camera for underwater is still a motormarine II. for all around amature ( i know! i know!) work it just can't be beat. i still use it for exploritory dives before i being down the full blown housed rig. it's small enough it tucks against your side for stream lining ( a housed system is like pushing a piece of ply wood though the water!) flexible - goes from 16mm to 2T macro without surfacing ( beats the snot out of the nikonos there), and can run 2 strobes.
it does have it's bad points, as any "doall" does - limited shutter speeds, only able to "set" iso in 2 speeds(and no comp), a 4 blade aperature makes any out of focus highlights square ( sure wish S&S woud go to 7 or 9 blades!), and because it uses wet add on lenses it has more distortion ( particularly in the corners) and less contrast then a nikonos.
if you shop around a good used one can be had for $250 maybe $300 with strobe. add on the aftermarket lenses as you go ( id recommend the 16mm and the 3T macro). this camera will stay with you for a long time.
as far as digital goes i can't help you - my digital goes in my film houseing and you wouldn't want to start out with That setup!!
most likely a 'hobbiest' shooter will never notice the shortcomings particulary underwater. it's the LENS that makes the image not the camera body!
for underwater work strobes are an important thing so any camera you choose should have some method of strobe control other than useing reflected internal flash.
my favorite (film) camera for underwater is still a motormarine II. for all around amature ( i know! i know!) work it just can't be beat. i still use it for exploritory dives before i being down the full blown housed rig. it's small enough it tucks against your side for stream lining ( a housed system is like pushing a piece of ply wood though the water!) flexible - goes from 16mm to 2T macro without surfacing ( beats the snot out of the nikonos there), and can run 2 strobes.
it does have it's bad points, as any "doall" does - limited shutter speeds, only able to "set" iso in 2 speeds(and no comp), a 4 blade aperature makes any out of focus highlights square ( sure wish S&S woud go to 7 or 9 blades!), and because it uses wet add on lenses it has more distortion ( particularly in the corners) and less contrast then a nikonos.
if you shop around a good used one can be had for $250 maybe $300 with strobe. add on the aftermarket lenses as you go ( id recommend the 16mm and the 3T macro). this camera will stay with you for a long time.
as far as digital goes i can't help you - my digital goes in my film houseing and you wouldn't want to start out with That setup!!
I have not played with digital under water yet (I've been playing with video vice stills lately), but the advantages mentioned by ssra30 and Dee are definitely worth considering. My above water experience with inexpensive digital cameras, however, tells me they have one disadvantage I know I would find irritating to me, and that's a distinct delay between the time the shutter button is pushed and the shutter itself fires, even with cameras that have a "primed" position on the shutter release. Of course that's balanced by the ability to just dump the tail shot and try again...
Rick
Rick
TheAvatar
Contributor
Depends on how serious you want to be, what kind of quality you want, and how much money you have.
Hi,
I definitely agree that if you can afford to go digital, the advantages are huge... The learning curve with film is so steep, especially for the average diver who can't go every weekend and refine his or her techninque based on results. There are so many more variables with underwater photography (natural and strobe lighting, visibility, depth, etc...). The instant feedback and capacity for quick adjustment of settings with digital photography makes for more and better results right away. Furthermore, the financial (and environmental!) advantages of dispensing with film, processing and prints are obvious, and help to eventually offset the added cost of the equipment. I use an olympus 4040z with a Light and Motion Tetra housing, and a Sea and Sea external strobe. This is a GREAT setup, but you can get something useful for a lot less if you try. The 4040z is also a terrific topside camera, with one of the fastest lenses in the field (f 1.8), and great ergonomics.
I definitely agree that if you can afford to go digital, the advantages are huge... The learning curve with film is so steep, especially for the average diver who can't go every weekend and refine his or her techninque based on results. There are so many more variables with underwater photography (natural and strobe lighting, visibility, depth, etc...). The instant feedback and capacity for quick adjustment of settings with digital photography makes for more and better results right away. Furthermore, the financial (and environmental!) advantages of dispensing with film, processing and prints are obvious, and help to eventually offset the added cost of the equipment. I use an olympus 4040z with a Light and Motion Tetra housing, and a Sea and Sea external strobe. This is a GREAT setup, but you can get something useful for a lot less if you try. The 4040z is also a terrific topside camera, with one of the fastest lenses in the field (f 1.8), and great ergonomics.
Similar threads
