Opinions from experience please

[Puffer Fish]

Well, I still haven’t checked what is on the CD... I used Lightroom trial to convert RAW to JPEG and do some enhancements.

BTW Water wasn’t as clear as it seems on pictures; a lot of tiny marine life – cause for backscatter. I studied how to avoid it appearing on the picture before getting camera wet, and then some work on pictures...

That water is sparking clear, compared to what I normally dive it. A good day is over 20ft, with a lot of pictures taken in around 5.

Backscatter control is not rocket science, just start a thread on it. (so it does not distract from this thread) That striped drum was shot in around 10 ft of vis.

 

[KyBuck]

Okay. Wow! I am very grateful and shocked at the number and quality of the responses to my request. I have read each one carefully and spent literally hours reading past threads and posts about this (I tend to go a little over the top about stuff like this when I get into it). I am definitely not looking to get photos published or anything like that but I would like to print and display a good shot if I get lucky. The RAW info seems to make sense. I dont have alot of time to spend on the computer adjusting each shot when I return home but it seems to be worth learning by the examples posted.

To answer some of the questions posters have asked me:

The coolpix is a S630 and is discontinued and it appears as if Ikelite quit making housings for it.

I said INEXPERIENCED. Kidding. Thanks for your response.

After reading these responses and other threads I want to tell you all that I do own a Canon Rebel XTi 400D that is three or four years old. We bought the Coolpix camera to simplify taking pics of my cagle of kids. To be honest I have not spent an appropriate amount of time using it to understand 10% of what it does. Now that I have to use the Nikon at work I am starting to understand how some of the settings work on the camera. I have done some research and found that a quality housing and strobe for this camera is gonna cost alot of money.

Do you all think I should get a housing and a strobe for that camera and use it and if so what do you recommend?

Again, your responses have been more than I expected and I appreciate it.

Buck

P.S. The photos you all posted are amazing!

 

[Puffer Fish]

To add to Herbdb's excellent post, here is the original and adjusted versions of a shot taken at around 90 ft (where there is just a tiny bit of red light):

I could make the background "Bluer" on the second pictures, but just wanted to show a simple white balance change.

 

[Puffer Fish]

Buck, Buying a case for a Dslr (any of them) is a major expense and diving with one is some serious task loading (and drag). It is fairly normal for the ports and other parts to exceed the cost of the case.

If I were to pick one camera, and housing that was the best deal, it would be the new Fuji. It shoots raw, it has a 24mm wide angle, it can do macro, their case is very well built and the price, at this point, will be lower than any other system.

That camera also makes a great travel camera.

Any of the new camera's also do High Def video , but this guy also does high speed video.. kids in slow motion can be so cool.

The zoom ration is rather silly for an underwater camera... 24mm to 360mm (equv), but great for land.

The camera and case should be just over $500, which would be well over $100 less than the next closest camera that shoots raw.

You can start by just carrying it and take snapshots, and then as you get more comfortable, gradually build.

Only worry I have is that they use something called "intelligent" flash, and I hope that is not something that would mess up using a strobe with...I doubt it, but it is a tiny worry.

Okay. Wow! I am very grateful and shocked at the number and quality of the responses to my request. I have read each one carefully and spent literally hours reading past threads and posts about this (I tend to go a little over the top about stuff like this when I get into it). I am definitely not looking to get photos published or anything like that but I would like to print and display a good shot if I get lucky. The RAW info seems to make sense. I dont have alot of time to spend on the computer adjusting each shot when I return home but it seems to be worth learning by the examples posted.

To answer some of the questions posters have asked me:

The coolpix is a S630 and is discontinued and it appears as if Ikelite quit making housings for it.

I said INEXPERIENCED. Kidding. Thanks for your response.

After reading these responses and other threads I want to tell you all that I do own a Canon Rebel XTi 400D that is three or four years old. We bought the Coolpix camera to simplify taking pics of my cagle of kids. To be honest I have not spent an appropriate amount of time using it to understand 10% of what it does. Now that I have to use the Nikon at work I am starting to understand how some of the settings work on the camera. I have done some research and found that a quality housing and strobe for this camera is gonna cost alot of money.

Do you all think I should get a housing and a strobe for that camera and use it and if so what do you recommend?

Again, your responses have been more than I expected and I appreciate it.

Buck

P.S. The photos you all posted are amazing!

 

[dmoore19]

Buck, Buying a case for a Dslr (any of them) is a major expense and diving with one is some serious task loading (and drag). It is fairly normal for the ports and other parts to exceed the cost of the case.

If I were to pick one camera, and housing that was the best deal, it would be the new Fuji. It shoots raw, it has a 24mm wide angle, it can do macro, their case is very well built and the price, at this point, will be lower than any other system.

That camera also makes a great travel camera.

Any of the new camera's also do High Def video and high speed video.. kids in slow motion can be so cool.

The zoom ration is rather silly for an underwater camera... 24mm to 360mm (equv), but great for land.

The camera and case should be just over $500, which would be well over $100 less than the next closest camera that shoots raw.

You can start by just carrying it and take snapshots, and then as you get more comfortable, gradually build.

Only worry I have is that they use something called "inteligent" flash, and I hope that is not something that would mess up using a strobe with...I doubt it, but it is a tiny worry.

Do you have the model # for that new Fuji?

I used to have a Fuji 35mm SLR that was a great camera, lost in in a fire though. I always thought they made a great lens and their film was good too!

 

[Osric]

About photo. It is more like a lucky exception from the rule. It probably was a sunny day and crystal clear waters. Anyway, I think you wouldn't argue that if you had an external strobe, the picture would be much more colourful and sharp.

So I do have to agree that for taking photos on deep dives a strobe is probably preferable (as I said above, you can do without one on shallow dives). But a strobe is not without its disadvantages: it will light up any particles in the water, cast ugly shadows, and add another item to manage on the dive. Many have already said they don't see what the big deal is, so maybe a strobe is the way to go. I just had a negative reaction to your claim that a strobe is a must have since I have thus far been too cheap to add one to my equipment (I also like to travel light).

Osric

 

[Osric]

After reading these responses and other threads I want to tell you all that I do own a Canon Rebel XTi 400D that is three or four years old. We bought the Coolpix camera to simplify taking pics of my cagle of kids. To be honest I have not spent an appropriate amount of time using it to understand 10% of what it does. Now that I have to use the Nikon at work I am starting to understand how some of the settings work on the camera. I have done some research and found that a quality housing and strobe for this camera is gonna cost alot of money.

So obviously I'm an advocate of this approach, but even so it depends. If you're not enjoying your SLR already, don't want to invest in lenses (the macro lens I dive with alone costs $600), and wouldn't take it with you normally, this is going to be a lot of $ and space for kit you don't really need to get good results.

For me, the Fantasea enclosure was $850 (they don't seem to make the right enclosure for your camera anymore) and that plus photoshop at around $700 completed my gear for underwater photos. Photoshop has tons of uses besides underwater ... but honestly for every above ground photo I use photoshop on I probably shoot and process 100 underwater photos. I also always take this camera and a laptop with me on trips and so it's not an extra thing to lug around; whereas for you it might be.

I'd say someone else's advice is more likely to be a good fit for you.

Osric

 

[Puffer Fish]

Do you have the model # for that new Fuji?

I used to have a Fuji 35mm SLR that was a great camera, lost in in a fire though. I always thought they made a great lens and their film was good too!

Its a F550...

Amazon.com: Fujifilm FinePix F550EXR 16 MP CMOS Digital Camera with Fujinon 15x Super Wide Angle Zoom Lens and GPS Geo-Tagging Function: Camera & Photo

While not "released", there also seems to be a F505...which is the identical size. The 505 seems to be the F550 without the GPS...

The F500 does not do raw. I will add one to my camera collection, just so I can try it out. Fuji cases have always been better designed than the Canon's or the low cost Oly's, and I would expect this to be the case with this one.

 

[Puffer Fish]

I'll do natural light...even when deep if one wants a "big scene..but there is another optio, Big blue makes an adjustable focus light, and you can get a glove it fits into. One can take very nice images with it, and completly skip the strobe.

It is really small and makes a great video light...and for travel is great.

Note: using a camera and a light kind of uses up both hands, so it does take some buoyancy skills.

So I do have to agree that for taking photos on deep dives a strobe is probably preferable (as I said above, you can do without one on shallow dives). But a strobe is not without its disadvantages: it will light up any particles in the water, cast ugly shadows, and add another item to manage on the dive. Many have already said they don't see what the big deal is, so maybe a strobe is the way to go. I just had a negative reaction to your claim that a strobe is a must have since I have thus far been too cheap to add one to my equipment (I also like to travel light).

Osric

 

[spoolin01]

RAW images on my camera have 12 bits per channel. This is the single biggest reason to shoot RAW in my opinion - the extra 4 bits of precision means the red histogram is still present even if invisible before processing. I have tried to process JPG images people have sent me and the red channel just isn't there and you have to resort to hacks like using channel mixer to invent red light out of nothing. I find it a lot easier to work with a true red channel.

Aside from colour, all digital cameras apply some sharpening and contrast adjustments before saving the JPG. If you plan to crop your image you can get significantly better detail starting from RAW and applying contrast and sharpening after the crop.

Osric

Spoolin01, Thanks, don't usually post any of them. I hope you double clicked on them (and then once more) to see in the size I downloaded. Those tiny animals around the Chromis can then be seen.

Regarding raw, Osric has it dead on, Raw data contains information that is simply not there in a Jpeg. The difference can be quite amazing. In addition to white balance correction, typically there is at least one stop's worth of unseen information to the dark side and around 1/2 to the light side, allowing an image a little off to be corrected, no such information is present in a JPEG.

Note: One can also use this information to increase the dynamic range of the image, another thing that a JPEG cannot do.

...
Regarding focus, well that spotted drum (or jacknife as they look the same at this age) was shot with a P&S, and that is one ADD fish. You can usually tell P&S images of fish, because there will not be any fast moving, nervous fish close ups.

The LX-5 I am currently using, for example, once focus and exposure is set is under .1 seconds, much faster than a human is. This is obviously not the case with a lot of other point and shoots.


Of note is that all the evil camera's are roughly the same speed, so using one of them over several high end point and shoots would not make a lot of difference.

Well, you guys have already exceeded my knowledge of RAW processing! I usually shoot in RAW, but let Picasa do it's thing with adjustment - I find with the Canon RAW it does a very passable job for viewing on my computer or TV. I did have a set of Hawaii pics I took in jpg and I took a look at the histogram and indeed there wasn't much red there and attempts to color adjust didn't do much good, whereas with the RAW from the same trip (and depth, no strobe) there was much more latitude, seen both in the histogram and the adjusted image. Thanks for that insight!

I wonder, would this comparative benefit narrow at all had I used a red filter?

Puffer, I'm not sure I understood your last point about shutter speed. Are you saying that even with both cameras focus- and exposure-locked, the high-end P&S will have a significantly faster shutter time than the cheaper cam? I don't have anything to compare to, but my old S70 seems plenty fast like that...