OK, just have to put it out there...

[justleesa]

no, I don't think so at all, Great info from all that posted and luh-ve the pics ssra30 ....maybe I should also put it out there that I am willing to be adopted by some rich....errrr loving family (Mom & Pop, no kids) that doesn't have anyone to care for them in their old age....lol

 

[Warren_L]

Yes, I jsut use the regular flat port for the 60mm and the extension ring for my 12-24mm (40mm length) is ok for the 2x teleconverter. It also has enough room to accomodate diopter as well.

I think at least Lisa will get some idea about how much more fun/involving and more toys she will get to play with when switching to dSLR so hopefully this is not too out of the topic

You are using the TC-20E II (2x) AF-S, AF-I Teleconverter?

I am wondering if this would be possible with my Ike housing, as I only have a dome port for my 12-24. But it sounds like it is definitely worth looking into.

 

[ssra30]

You are using the TC-20E II (2x) AF-S, AF-I Teleconverter?

I am wondering if this would be possible with my Ike housing, as I only have a dome port for my 12-24. But it sounds like it is definitely worth looking into.

No, I used the Kenko 2X teleconverter (quite a bit cheaper than the Nikon and supposed to be almost as good although it is not compatible with VR function of Nikon VR lens and you won't get the proper F stop readout with the light reduction so you will have to subtract 2 stops yourself from whatever the camera tells you).
I think any port should work as long as you get enough clearance for it and if you don't plan to use manual focus. Flat port would be preferable as you will get a bit more magnification with flat port in comparison to domeport generally.

 

[PapaBob]

Thanks, but I think that I unintentionally mislead you with my phrase "limited use". I was really referring to the 60mm focal length in non-macro mode. I use the 60mm lens all the time for my macro shots. But otherwise the 60mm lens is virtually useless to me for my local diving as there is nothing of real interest around here to shoot macro, and for wreck photos, the 12-24 is the right lens for the job.

Warren:

No way my 60mm comes close to WA for the larger stuff. It still works for close up "out of macro". You gotta come down to Florida!

---Bob

 

[PapaBob]

Hmmm.... checking to see if there are any Leafs v. Panthers home games this winter.

---Bob

 

[Warren_L]

Warren:

No way my 60mm comes close to WA for the larger stuff. It still works for close up "out of macro". You gotta come down to Florida!

---Bob

I agree. For my diving locally the 12-24 is on there 99.9% of the time. But I suppose I could give the 60mm another try in warmer waters in non-macro mode.

As for the Leafs ... well, it's too early to tell if I even want to go see them live...

 

[RonFrank]

IMO are your best options for a budget DSLR.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos350d/

The Nikon has some advantages over the Canon that UW makes a difference. Selecting the ISO, Metering, and AF modes required hitting the set button on the Canon, and is a bit akward. The Canon Kit lens is junk compared to the Nikon kit lens, so IMO don't purchase the kit lens if you go Canon.

The Canon however does have one advantage over the Nikon which is high ISO noise reduction. However with noise ninja and other such products, the Nikon does well, but the Canon does better in camera.

Regardless of your Oly brand name preference, IMO it is a mistake to purchase a DSLR that comes in mounts other than Nikon, or Canon. The lens choices alone make these two mounts IMO the only option (Fuji uses Nikon mounts).

The future of other DSLR manufactures is a bit up in the air. They are struggling to keep up with the top two. Things will settle down, but in the 80's when AF came out, everyone jumped on that bandwagon, but at the end of it all, OLY had declared that it would no longer produce AF SLR's, and became a PnS only manufacture. That may happen again with digital if the Evolt models don't start selling better.

When you start down the SLR path, you maybe making a lifetime commitment to a camera brand as glass is expensive. IMO at this point, there are really only two choices in lens mounts that are worth consideration. Keep in mind that one way to save on glass is the purchase of third party lenses (Sigma,Tokina,Tamron). These companies make very good glass for about 1/2 the price of Nikon or Canon. BUT generally their glass comes out in Nikon and Canon Flavors, and they then MAY add Pentex, Oly, and Minolta IF they think the market is good.

I'm not trying to start up a flame war with those shooting DSLR's other than Canon, Nikon, or Fuji just pointing out that the future of other digital manufactures is IMO uncertain, AND that for the $$$ I don't think anyone else is making better camera's with more optic options, so unless one has glass in hand why even consider anyone else?

My $.12 :b_cowboy:

 

[RonFrank]

ain't that the truth!!

Fortunately I think we are nearing the end of massive technology breakthoughs in digital chip manufacturing, and things are slowing down.

The D2x, and 1DsMarkII are both so damn good, they blow away the results of shooting 35mm film, and approach near medium format quality in a digital package. Heck, my D1x is good enough almost everything I do, however it does not quite have the detail in prints bigger than 16x20' that I would like.

However the D2x is a camera that I could see using for well over a decade regardless of what else comes out.

This line of thinking holds true for Digital PnS camera's as well.

I'm very certain that camera manufactures will continue to put out the usual 5-10 new models every year, but the features will just not be all that much better vs. the older models, and that trend will slow as well IMHO.

 

[RonFrank]

Now I got to thinking about Canon, I had looked at them before and was interested in the Rebel XT. As far as the specifics go, not that much different than the 20D, but the price is a big difference.

Actually there are a LOT of difference between the 20D and the 350XT. Major ones are:

............350 XT...........20D

Build......plastic...........Mag Alloy
Sensor..22.2x14.8mm...22.5x15mm
ISO......100-1600........100-3200
focus....7 point...........9 point
WB - 350 is lacking the custom Kelvin adjustment
Buffer...5fps/23 frames.3fps/14 frames
LCD......115,000pix......118,000 pix
Shutter.1/4000...........1/8000
Sync....1/200.............1/250sec
View.....95% .8x.........95% .9x

For all intensive purposes, the two camera's are very similar, but expect the 20D's build quality to be much superior, and the focus is going to be faster. Overall the 20D is a much more robust camera, however it's difficult to say what kind of shutter life either has. Neither is robust when compared to the 1D lineup.

For most users especially UW, the 20D does not make sense. For those shooting action, or indoor sports the 20D has must have features. If I were a Canon shooter, for the difference in cost I'd likely end up with the 20D.

 

[justleesa]

First of all I want to thank you all for the fantastic help that you have given me!!!

This is what I have come up with for right now. I have 2 5050's. If the one dies I still have a back up and can continue taking pictures with it underwater. For now, this works for me.

I also take lots of surface pictures and am getting into portrait photography and so I think I am going to take the plunge with....drum roll please


The Canon EOS 5D , I have selected a couple of lenses and a few strobes (Regular and ring strobe)...and I think this camera will keep me happy for a long, long time. It will take a bit for me to get it (maybe around Christmas)...But when I do I'll post some of my results.

Again, thanks for all you do and all your answers.