s95 vs xz1

[Esk]

I,m planning to upgrade from my ixus 870. The two camera's I was thinking of are the s95 and the xz1. Both camera's offer good image quality, manual settings and raw. The good thing about the canon housing is that there is an adapter with a bayonet mount wich I think makes it way easier to put on a wide angle lens under water. The problem is that canon compact camera's dont have ttl flash in manual mode. So I'm interrested in how other people deal with this. Is this problem realy as big as it looks or maybe there is some way to work around it? And what will be the biggest disadvantege: no ttl or the inconveniance of having to screw the lens in a 67 mm mount? I hope to see your reactions.

Eric

 

[Nemrod]

Optical coupling is better for me, I said for me, my opinion, I much prefer it to troublesome wired TTL.

The choice of the cameras depends upon which housing and which lenses you intend to use.

N

 

[diver 85]

Esk, I use TTL in Tv(or Av mode) on my S95, no big deal IMO---use a FIX housing.....

 

[Wisnu]

The Oly PT050 has 67mm screw port - you don't need any adaptor to use 67mm wet lens. have no problem or feel unconveninece to screw the lens under water - in fact, "feel" more secure.
One very clear, the Oly housing quality is much better than canon.
I do not have S95 but have been using G9 for 2 years; and I have to say - the XZ-1 autofocus is faster and more reponsive.
For some people, the sTTL in camera manual mode (Tv and Av are not best mode for uw, manual is recommended) can be more convenience.
Though for us (my daughter to be exact, ) mostly use manual mode strobe, since she can adjut the strobe power to her taste.
Check the blog melati luv diving below my signature, she's very proud with this camera.
The G9 is used by her older sister; now she jealous and asking for replacement - she has checked S95 and G12 seem not interested, and asking for EPL-3

 

[Nemrod]

The main problem with the XZ1 is it's inability to utilize the majority of wide angle accessory lenses unlike the S90/95 at least when installed in the Recsea or FIX housings. There is a Oly lens that works with the XZ1 and the new Inon H100 with or without dome is reported to work well but the popular Inon UFL165AD, UWL100 -67mm or FIX UWL-04 or Ikelite W20, probably not so good.

I agree, Olympus OEM housings or much better than the Canon barely a housing thingy but neither are up to the FIX/Recsea housings offered for both both cameras. JMO.

N

 

[cardog]

The main problem with the XZ1 is it's inability to utilize the majority of wide angle accessory lenses unlike the S90/95 at least when installed in the Recsea or FIX housings. There is a Oly lens that works with the XZ1 and the new Inon H100 with or without dome is reported to work well but the popular Inon UFL165AD, UWL100 -67mm or FIX UWL-04 or Ikelite W20, probably not so good.

I agree, Olympus OEM housings or much better than the Canon barely a housing thingy but neither are up to the FIX/Recsea housings offered for both both cameras. JMO.

N

Except you can buy the PT-050 housing, the Oly wide angle lens and a macro lens for a little less than just the Recsea housing.....

 

[Nemrod]

Except you can buy the PT-050 housing, the Oly wide angle lens and a macro lens for a little less than just the Recsea housing.....

But it is still a plastic housing with a single attach point. The Oly lens is a 100 degree lens, the FIX UWL-04/Inon UFL165AD are upwards of 130 degrees, actually a bit more and I know this because unlike many, I have actually measured them and the difference between 130 plus degrees and barely 100 degree DFOV is huge, my opinion. But the 900 dollars Inon H100 with the dome, now we are talking, huge DFOV, should be a great combination with the Oly XZ1. I think the H100 is available with a 67mm mount as well as the standard bayonet mount, not sure about that and don't feel like refreshing my memory on it right now.

N

 

[DelrayDM]

I think the H100 is available with a 67mm mount as well as the standard bayonet mount, not sure about that and don't feel like refreshing my memory on it right now.

It is. There are two types; the difference is whether the back lens is 'flush with' or extends behind the 67mm thread.

For the Olympus housing and XZ-1 use "type 1"

I see that with the addition of the dome that they claim 144 degrees field of view.

 

[diver 85]

But it is still a plastic housing with a single attach point. The Oly lens is a 100 degree lens, the FIX UWL-04/Inon UFL165AD are upwards of 130 degrees, actually a bit more and I know this because unlike many, I have actually measured them and the difference between 130 plus degrees and barely 100 degree DFOV is huge, my opinion. But the 900 dollars Inon H100 with the dome, now we are talking, huge DFOV, should be a great combination with the Oly XZ1. I think the H100 is available with a 67mm mount as well as the standard bayonet mount, not sure about that and don't feel like refreshing my memory on it right now.

N

Thought the total for a UWL 04 was greater---more like 160??......Does it matter on which housing it's on???......tia...

 

[Nemrod]

Thought the total for a UWL 04 was greater---more like 160??......Does it matter on which housing it's on???......tia...

I measure actually at least 150 degrees, slightly more than with the Inon UFL165AD in my application. My measurements were taken in a pool from known distances to objects of known size. However, being exact to a few degrees, lol, can be a challenge. I feel good saying 130 plus degrees, that covers those who might need to zoom in slightly so they do not fuss at me and tell me how wrong I was, that it was only 146.678 degrees and not the 150 I claimed.

I believe, without direct experience, that the new FIX housing does a little better than the original FIX with the S95 because if you notice, the S90 shows vignetting in the RAW files. No big deal but supposedly this was corrected in the S95 and FIX95 housing, not sure about that, so I am told. It really is not a big deal, either way the field of view is more than you will get with any other combination or at least as much without going to a dSLR with the Tokina 1-17mm fisheye lens.

If you read the specs on the old Fisheye page, they only claimed 130 degrees but did not state if that was horizontal or diagonal. I am referring to diagonal field. Yes, I think they too were being conservative, it is a very wide lens.

I think I shot this one with the UWL-04:

This one with the UFL165AD:

This one with UWL100-67mm and dome:

These with the UWL-04:

I like this one from last season with the UFL165AD:

When the stupid fish do this I am not sure any lens is wide enough, lol, taken with pro dSLR and Tokina 10-17mm:

Same murky dive, same murky place, taken with my S90:

The biggest issue with any of these lenses is the dang sun:

Moving around a little to try and control the sun:

At which point I gave up and swam away in disgust in search of something of more interest as had the fish.

N