Let's chat about DSLR vs Point and Shoot - looking for some wisdom / experience

[Barmaglot]

@BLACKCRUSADER are you running a tray with your TG-6 to handle the light? or do you have it on the cold shoe?

He has shared his setup on page 5

Let's chat about DSLR vs Point and Shoot - looking for some wisdom / experience

I have a feeling that a DSLRs are being replaced by mirrorless cameras. If I was in the market to get an (new) underwater housing I would shop for one accommodating a mirrorless camera. Recently Nikon D/C the Nikon D6 and D500. That sent a chilling message to many of us. I think you are 100%...

scubaboard.com

 

[Blackcrusader]

@BLACKCRUSADER are you running a tray with your TG-6 to handle the light? or do you have it on the cold shoe?

When you asked what video lights I used I already linked you to page 5 where I posted my setup. You should never put anything heavy like a light in the cold shoe as they have been known to crack or break. Big Blue lights are not light due to the battery itself being quite heavy.

DIY tray. My old Go Pro sits in the dry port. Sometimes with my other dive buddies who don't have camera's I have other DIY trays they can use the Go Pro on. So yes need something for my Big Blue VL4200p lights. Sticky pads and Ikelite ball mounts for the video lights.

Originally used the tray for Go Pro and some Knog lights

 

[nanohawk]

He has shared his setup on page 5

Let's chat about DSLR vs Point and Shoot - looking for some wisdom / experience

I have a feeling that a DSLRs are being replaced by mirrorless cameras. If I was in the market to get an (new) underwater housing I would shop for one accommodating a mirrorless camera. Recently Nikon D/C the Nikon D6 and D500. That sent a chilling message to many of us. I think you are 100%...

scubaboard.com

Thanks for the reminder, that was 6 days ago and I had forgotten the picture of the rig. I did look at the critter photos after it though.

When you asked what video lights I used I already linked you to page 5 where I posted my setup. You should never put anything heavy like a light in the cold shoe as they have been known to crack or break. Big Blue lights are not light due to the battery itself being quite heavy.

I had forgotten that you had posted a picture of it. It's good to know the cold-shoe shouldn't be trusted. You didn't mention that previously so I'm glad I asked.

DIY tray. My old Go Pro sits in the dry port. Sometimes with my other dive buddies who don't have camera's I have other DIY trays they can use the Go Pro on. So yes need something for my Big Blue VL4200p lights. Sticky pads and Ikelite ball mounts for the video lights.

That's a clever bit of work. Not sure how much cheaper it is, but you get exactly what you want and there is much to be said for that. I'd be worried about the acrylic base cracking. I'm guessing it's cast acrylic and 4 to 5mm? Anything lighter and it would probably be pretty flimsy.

Originally used the tray for Go Pro and some Knog lights

That makes alot of sense. The GoPro trays I've seen on the market are not that sophisticated looking.

 

[nanohawk]

After a couple of weeks of research, reviews, digging and more digging I wanted to summarize what I've uncovered for anyone else in the same situation - needing to reboot your UW photo gear.

TG-6 hands down the most cost-effective option.
Sensor is 28.52 mm2
Cost outfitted is $1202
Assumptions include: extra o-ring, housing from ebay (new), used camera, backscatter burp o-ring to facilitate over/under shots and both backscatter wet domes for 81 and 120 degree options.

Pen E-LP10 (9 would work if you can find one used)
Sensor is 224.9 mm2
Cost outfitted is $4543.99
Assumptions include: New camera/housing, extra o-ring, tray. Lenses 8mm, 7-14mm, and 60mm. Comes with a 14-42mm as well. AOI flat 60mm port, Zen WA-100 Dome (specific to the 7-14mm lens) and ports for the 8mm fisheye.

Option 2: $2634.99
Backscatter has a cheaper way to run this with just the 14-42 lens, but I'm not sure it would give the best results.
Option 2 for the E-LP10 is the 14-42 lens, housing/tray from above and quick release base/adapter, Backscatter M52 lens, M67 flip adapter and a UCL-09 +12.5 lens.
NOTE: there is a better wet lens, but you only gain 10 degrees and it jumps from $450 to $1150 I don't have any experience with wet lenses, but the pattern I saw over and over again was using specific lenses for specific dive scenarios. I'd really want to dig into the results before I was okay with using wet lenses instead of various ports. Various ports and lenses were not any cheaper with the PEN E-LP10 and as best I could tell the E-M1 holds it's own with the 5D and the PEN E-LP is similar to a EOS Rebel TI. Not a bad camera, but lacking some of the features like phase detect auto focus that are in the M1. All things being equal I think the M1 is a better camera and the cost difference is minimal.


OM-D E-M1 Mk ii
Sensor is also 224.9 mm2
Cost outfitted is $4266
Assumptions include: used camera, Ikelite case/ports/vacuum system, tray, using 8mm lens, 7-14mm lens (semi wide angle) and 60mm lens for macro. Lenses bought used from various sources.
Note: In camera stabilization

OM-D E-M1 Mk iii
Sensor is also 224.9 mm2
Cost outfitted is $4916
Assumptions include: used camera, Ikelite case/ports/vacuum system, tray, using 8mm lens, 7-14mm lens (semi wide angle) and 60mm lens for macro. Lenses bought used from various sources.
NOTE: According to backscatter the only real difference between the ii and iii is some artistic stuff we wouldn't use. I threw it in as a comparison.
NOTE: The Mk iii has a mega-pixel feature that uses the in camera image stabilization to move the sensor around and capture additional pixel points which are then digitally combined to yield a 50 megapixel image. This works in tripod (8 shots) or handheld (16 shots). Given the camera's lightning 60 fps rate this happens faster than you might expect. This is something that backscatter did not mention in their review which might be workable in certain situations underwater. It is not flash compatible, so you would need video lights to pull this stunt off. No, I have no idea why you would need a 50 megapixel image.... unless you are cropping 90% of the image or planning on printing a billboard. lol.

The E-M1 options are stretching what I want to spend. However, there is alot of flexibility there and it can be done in stages. Lenses for the M4/3 systems are reasonably good, available, and somewhat affordable. Despite the sensor being the same size as the E-LP10

Canon 6D - no go.
Sensor 855.62 mm2
I had initially considered a used four locks Ikelite system with a pelican case that is on ebay. However, when I started trying to list and find the ports I discovered Ikelite is not making them anymore. My orphan allergy flared up and I scratched that option. It isn't any cheaper to buy a new case for this camera than any other camera. The 6D is a solid camera and IMHO delivers about 85% of what a 5D Mk iv delivers in terms of low-light and autofocus. It does not do 4K video and it's autofocus is a little squirrely at times. Sometimes it will hunt and that can be annoying to say the least.

Canon 5d Mk iV - really out of my budget at the present time.
Sensor 855.62 mm2
Cost $6795
Assumptions: Ikelite case, ports, vacuum system, tray. Using 8-15mm f/4L EF fisheye, 16-35mm f/2.8 II USM (specifically this lens is cheaper then the other variants and has come port re-use with the macro lens). 100mm Macro lens

Canon 5d Mk iii brings the cost down by $825 to $5970
The housing for the 5D from Ikelite supports the 5d Mk iii and iv so there is an option there to save some money. The 5D Mk iv has a dual pixel focus system that tries to approximate the phase detect while not being true phase detect. The key thing the Mk iv brings to the table is an exceptionally good predictive focus on video. Several reviews remarked that the predictive focus was better than what most people could do by hand in transitioning from one subject to another. Canon has always really nailed color compared to many other manufacturers.

There was a YouTube video of a UK show called "Gadgets" that did a shoot off between the e-M1 and the 5D Mk iv. Each camera had specific strengths, but both did surprisingly well.

Backscatter was a wealth of well done reviews, test footage, and were happy to answer some questions when I called them to ask some specifics about the AOI housing. I wasn't familiar with AOI at the time and wanted to know more about support as I'm accustomed to just packing the housing up and sending it to Ikelite for servicing when appropriate. They pointed out that AOI makes alot of OEM housings which wasn't really reassuring for me. The only housing that has ever flooded on me was a Canon OEM housing. Meh. It was a long time ago and I don't remember what happened, just that it was during a dive and it ruined the camera.

 

[Barmaglot]

both backscatter wet domes for 81 and 120 degree options.

Why would you need two wide lenses? The 81 degree lens is actually not a lens at all, it's just a wet dome which restores the in-air field of view of your camera - its chief virtue is that it's cheap. The 120 degree lens is a real wet lens, and it's zoom-through, so if you want a tighter shot, you don't change lenses - you just zoom in. Its drawbacks are that it costs more and weighs more.

Option 2: $2634.99
Backscatter has a cheaper way to run this with just the 14-42 lens, but I'm not sure it would give the best results.
Option 2 for the E-LP10 is the 14-42 lens, housing/tray from above and quick release base/adapter, Backscatter M52 lens, M67 flip adapter and a UCL-09 +12.5 lens.
NOTE: there is a better wet lens, but you only gain 10 degrees and it jumps from $450 to $1150 I don't have any experience with wet lenses, but the pattern I saw over and over again was using specific lenses for specific dive scenarios

M52 lenses typically target small sensor compacts and phones; using one with a micro four thirds sensor is liable to introduce vignetting. They're cheap because they're small. For an M43 or larger camera, you need to use a larger lens - Kraken KRL-01/Weefine WFL-01 (same product, different markets), AOI UWL-09/UWL-09Pro (the latter has a glass front dome), Nauticam WWL-C/WWL-1.
Also, keep in mind that good wet lenses tend to give better across-the-frame sharpness than wide-angle lenses with domes. Phil Rudin has tested WWL-1 and WWL-C and got better results than any wide-angle lens and dome combination that he's ever shot, only exceeded by Nauticam WACP.
A +12.5 close-up lens will put you very close to the subjects, it's a specialist tool for very small things. For general purpose macro, a +5~7 is better.

NOTE: The Mk iii has a mega-pixel feature that uses the in camera image stabilization to move the sensor around and capture additional pixel points which are then digitally combined to yield a 50 megapixel image. This works in tripod (8 shots) or handheld (16 shots). Given the camera's lightning 60 fps rate this happens faster than you might expect. This is something that backscatter did not mention in their review which might be workable in certain situations underwater. It is not flash compatible, so you would need video lights to pull this stunt off.

It requires both the camera and the subject to be completely stationary and thus is completely useless underwater; that's why the review omits it. This feature is what you'd use to take a photo of a painting in a museum, with the camera mounted on a tripod. Underwater, even if you use a tripod, everything living moves - even the slowest critters move enough to ruin this type of shot.

Canon 5d

In any DSLR option, factor in a magnifying viewfinder. Unlike compact/mirrorless, you have to shoot these cameras through the OVF, and using one without an add-on viewfinder is very frustrating. Your eyebox is very small, so you have to position your face just so, and then you're looking at a very small picture down a very narrow tunnel.

 

[nanohawk]

Why would you need two wide lenses? The 81 degree lens is actually not a lens at all, it's just a wet dome which restores the in-air field of view of your camera - its chief virtue is that it's cheap. The 120 degree lens is a real wet lens, and it's zoom-through, so if you want a tighter shot, you don't change lenses - you just zoom in. Its drawbacks are that it costs more and weighs more.

Backscatter didn't explain that. Thanks for the additional insight. It was one of my questions. That reduces the TG-6 by $180 ... still by far the least expensive option of the list.

M52 lenses typically target small sensor compacts and phones; using one with a micro four thirds sensor is liable to introduce vignetting. They're cheap because they're small. For an M43 or larger camera, you need to use a larger lens - Kraken KRL-01/Weefine WFL-01 (same product, different markets), AOI UWL-09/UWL-09Pro (the latter has a glass front dome), Nauticam WWL-C/WWL-1.

That confirms what I suspected. I mentioned the M52, but was somewhat suspicious of it. That AOI glass lens is quite a jump up in cost. Backscatter has nothing on their pages that I saw about the difference between the two lenses.

Also, keep in mind that good wet lenses tend to give better across-the-frame sharpness than wide-angle lenses with domes. Phil Rudin has tested WWL-1 and WWL-C and got better results than any wide-angle lens and dome combination that he's ever shot, only exceeded by Nauticam WACP.

I'll look for that later. Do you happen to have a link to his review or was it a WetPixel or SB post? It may benefit anyone who has slogged through this whole thread.

A +12.5 close-up lens will put you very close to the subjects, it's a specialist tool for very small things. For general purpose macro, a +5~7 is better.

Is a flip-style diopter better than the 60mm lens with the flat port? It's really odd that they wouldn't recommend something with a lower power. What you are suggesting makes total sense.

I have a 5x Macro lens for my Canon 6D and with it's ultra-thin depth of field I had to buy a micro-slide to use it. It's difficult to move the tripod in a controlled environment, much less in the field. So the micro slide lets you dial the camera position in and out in very small increments. Explanation for the benefit of those who may be unfamiliar with a micro-slide or call it something else. I happen to have a Manfrotto which is a pretty nice unit. Even with the microslide it's still an exercise in metered frustration trying to get the image setup. I even have the ring flash to go with that lens. You are usually so close there is no other way to light the subject.

It requires both the camera and the subject to be completely stationary and thus is completely useless underwater; that's why the review omits it. This feature is what you'd use to take a photo of a painting in a museum, with the camera mounted on a tripod. Underwater, even if you use a tripod, everything living moves - even the slowest critters move enough to ruin this type of shot.

Good point. They do have a hand-held option and I'm skeptical that anyone can hold a camera completely still over the course of 16 frames. I don't know enough about their sensor based image stabilization to have an opinion on how feasible it is. I wouldn't expect it to be moving much if they are using pixel interpolation to create higher res images. I still thought it was a neat trick. Kudos to the engineers who realized they could do it and got it to work right.

In any DSLR option, factor in a magnifying viewfinder. Unlike compact/mirrorless, you have to shoot these cameras through the OVF, and using one without an add-on viewfinder is very frustrating. Your eyebox is very small, so you have to position your face just so, and then you're looking at a very small picture down a very narrow tunnel.

That sounds like a really un-fun way to do photography. I regularly do boroscope inspections and the field side of it really doesn't show much. I wind up reviewing the images and video on a large monitor at my desk to identify any issues. Same thing for drone images. Can't really see enough on an 11" iPad Pro, and surely can't see enough on a iPhone. iPad has a gorgeous screen, but you just can't zoom in or see enough detail while maintaining situational awareness with the drone. Sometimes you can see there is an issue, but most of the time you are reviewing footage after flight.

 

[Blackcrusader]

Backscatter didn't explain that. Thanks for the additional insight. It was one of my questions. That reduces the TG-6 by $180 ... still by far the least expensive option of the list.

Backscatter also fails to mention you can switch to landscape mode as well and that also works.

As for my tray it is flexible but doesn't lead to cracks. It is made from a sheet which is CNC'd and many were made and yes very cheap to make only a few dollars per tray and handles. The handles which are just extruded and have standard size screw threads in them so you can use the screws as seen in the photos. Also super light and easily carried around. These trays were made as another dive buddy and good friend works for a company that makes camera's for commercial clients. Their supplier of camera housings we approached about making the trays. Lucky I live in Taiwan where such things can be made cheaply.

Plus I leave the tray on the sand or other places to make videos. The two handles allow one to make steady video's as you swim along as well. One of the issues for super macro video is the slightest movement will show in your video. Taking this hermit crab feeding and being very close a lot of people have asked me how I got such a steady shot using super macro. Using the tray allows for the platform to remain stable.

 

[Barmaglot]

I'll look for that later. Do you happen to have a link to his review or was it a WetPixel or SB post? It may benefit anyone who has slogged through this whole thread.

UwPMag issue #114, page 25

https://www.uwpmag.com/?download=114

Is a flip-style diopter better than the 60mm lens with the flat port? It's really odd that they wouldn't recommend something with a lower power. What you are suggesting makes total sense.

Going by Nauticam port chart, a CMC-1 (about +15) with 14-42mm will give you a maximum 0.8x magnification, with a working range of 41-76mm. I would guessimate that at 76mm, magnification will be about 0.5x. Your sensor is 18mm wide, so you'd be able to frame subjects between 22mm and 35mm. On bare lens, your maximum magnification is 0.19x, so your smallest subject is about 90mm wide - 94mm if you go to absolute edges of the frame. This leaves you with a 'donut hole' between 35mm and 90mm.
Conversely, the weaker CMC-2 gives you a working distance between 63mm and 130mm, with 0.6x magnification at the closest focus. At 130mm you're probably getting about 0.25x, so your subject size range is approximately 30-70mm., and the 'donut hole' is almost gone, but your 'narrow end' for the tiny critters is not as strong.
The 60mm will focus right down to 1x magnification, so you can fill the frame with a subject 18mm wide, and there is no theoretical upper limit on your subject size, but for anything bigger than half a meter or so, you'll be too far away for effective lighting.
Finally, 60mm with CMC-1 will let you get down to 22mm working range with 2x magnification, filling the frame with a 9mm wide subject. However, lighting at this close range is a significant challenge and may require a ring flash.

 

[Blackcrusader]

In any DSLR option, factor in a magnifying viewfinder. Unlike compact/mirrorless, you have to shoot these cameras through the OVF, and using one without an add-on viewfinder is very frustrating. Your eyebox is very small, so you have to position your face just so, and then you're looking at a very small picture down a very narrow tunnel.

Yup one of the nice things with the TG6 even in the housing is the led screen so you can see what you are taking photos or video of. Especially needed for super macro. This very tiny moray only a few inches long was in a dark cavity I could barely get the camera tray into and just see my view screen.

 

[Barmaglot]

That sounds like a really un-fun way to do photography.

Indeed, hence the proliferation of magnifying viewfinders. They come in straight (also called 180-degree) and 45-degree flavors. The former are easier to use for wide-angle but not so much for macro. 45-degree viewfinders are excellent for macro, as they allow you to get the camera right down to the bottom and still have an unobstructed view through the lens, the way you cannot do with a straight viewfinder or the LCD screen, but they have a significant learning curve, especially when you use them for wide-angle - all your muscle memory gets thrown off by the bent viewpoint. Still, just about every serious UW photographer that I've met had a 45-degree viewfinder on their DSLR/mirrorless housing.