Thinking about upgrading ... but still want simplicity

[Nemrod]

The biggest thing you can do to improve your pictures is to take them yourself, don't let the camera do it for you. That is, shoot in manual, including the flash. It is really not hard, it just seems daunting.

I completely agree, having a FULL MANUAL capable camera is critical. However whenever I mention my wish for a digital but otherwise MANUAL ONLY camera I get beat up to smithereens, like what sacrilege am I saying? I want a Nikonos III with a digital sensor. The shutter would activate the camera sensor eliminating even the need for an ON/OFF button. I would take a live view/review but that would require a ON/OFF switch, but could live with an optical VF with mask. So, I agree with you fully, so my question is why do we have cameras that we spend all of our time wading through multiple menus to trick the camera into doing what we want it to do instead of what it wants to do? Those of us who owned film RF or SLR cameras learned how to focus a camera (quickly) and with the Nikonos there was something called zone focus or simply prefocus. The only controls needed are focus, shutter speed, aperture and a shutter button. And if there is a built in meter then an ISO selector and add an ON/OFF switch for live view and image review. Like WTH with cameras with 28 controls and ten menus each with multiple sub menus? This is why our poor OP is flustered as much as anything. And it is why camera photography is dying. Let me make my photo please Mr. Sony, Nikon, whoever! I want an authentic expression of my vision, not a computer chip interpretation thereof.

N

 

[tursiops]

Alert Diver | The Critical Instant

The technical quote:

I'm a minimalist and take most of my images with a Nikon D800 with a Micro-Nikkor 60mm lens inside a stripped-down Ikelite housing with a single Ikelite DS160 strobe centered above the lens port. I use manual focus, manual f-stop and low ISO settings, and I tend to keep the power output on my strobe dialed down for rapid-fire situations.

True, but what Ned is shooting is fish (and nudibranch and worm, etc) portraits. He is not doing anything else...no people, no reef scenes, no wrecks, no wide angle, no CFWA. He is a superb, but very specialized photographer. The wonderful effects you can get with just the right lighting he ignores; composition is not important; he goes for identification and behavior. If that is what you want, then emulate his camera/strobe setup. Otherwise, it is the wrong setup for you.

 

[BoundForElsewhere]

I like that pie diagram, very nice work. But I would relabel the Ambient and Strobe Lighting as just Lighting. Some photos are perfect with ambient only like some WA reef scenes, wrecks and B&W, some with flash only like most Macro where a black background is often desirable and the strobe is needed to expose the subject and some photos rely heavily on both ambient and strobe lighting for depth and dynamic range such as CFWA.

I usually try to have a plan (which goes to hades as soon as I get in the water) as to what I want to do, what I am trying to realize and what type of subject matter I want to emphasize. If I am going for Macro I will not enter the water with a WA lens on my port. Of course, that is when a Russian nuclear submarine drives by in formation with two whale sharks and a UFO in tow! So it goes .

N

This is the way.

 

[Kimela]

This is why our poor OP is flustered as much as anything. And it is why camera photography is dying. Let me make my photo please Mr. Sony, Nikon, whoever! I want an authentic expression of my vision, not a computer chip interpretation thereof.N

This!! ^^^^^^^^ And ... I think I'm spoiled by being able to get such wonderful pics from my iPhone without having to dial in anything!

 

[Jcp2]

You know, you can get underwater housings for your iPhone...

 

[tursiops]

This!! ^^^^^^^^ And ... I think I'm spoiled by being able to get such wonderful pics from my iPhone without having to dial in anything!

Part of why it works so well even on "auto" is it is optimized for the kinds of pictures you take topside.
Underwater cameras on "auto" work well topside too!
Nothing is optimized for underwater: focus is weird, or has to be really really exact (macro); you are constantly balancing ambient and artificial light, in both intensity and color; the dynamic and color range of an image is quite different from topside; many things reflect light back at you (the side of a tarpon, for example); and composition is critical because most things try and blend into the background.
It is a different world, underwater, which is why we are there.
But there is a happy medium between "auto" and a thousand different settings in a hundred different menus. MOST of thos settings are not even relevant U/W, so we can ignore them. Others you set once and then never again. A few are quite specialized for U/W. You go find a guide for the use of your camera underwater (for example this one for the TG-6 or this one for the Canon g7XII or this one for the OMD EM10) and spend some time setting it up, over a nice glass of wine. Then you spend time using your camera topside in various conditions to get used to the interplay between ISO, shutter speed, aperture. You'll find that U/W you only have to change a couple of things a little bit to get pretty good pictures exposure-wise, then you can concentrate on focus and on composition and on the "critical moment."

 

[Kimela]

Part of why it works so well even on "auto" is it is optimized for the kinds of pictures you take topside.
Underwater cameras on "auto" work well topside too!
Nothing is optimized for underwater: focus is weird, or has to be really really exact (macro); you are constantly balancing ambient and artificial light, in both intensity and color; the dynamic and color range of an image is quite different from topside; many things reflect light back at you (the side of a tarpon, for example); and composition is critical because most things try and blend into the background."

Thank you for this - I hadn't thought of the differences (though they're obvious after you point them out). I used a Watershot housing for my iPhone 4 about 6 years ago and got some great pics, but they weren't at depth and definitely not trying to get anything close to a macro shot.

 

[arcticat99]

Amazon.com : Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS7 12.1 MP Digital Camera with 12x Optical Image Stabilized Zoom and 3.0-Inch LCD (Blue) (OLD MODEL) : Point And Shoot Digital Cameras : Camera & Photo

That thing is rated to 105 ft? Seriously?

ts7 sorry my bad not ds7 and the camera you posted zs7 Panasonic LUMIX TS7 Waterproof Tough Camera, 20.4 Megapixels, 4.6X Zoom Lens - Orange (DCTS7D)

 

[peterak]

For what it's worth, given reasonably clear water the TG-6's internal flash can be quite useful for macro. I usually shoot available light, but the little internal flash can really make things pop. (I was snorkeling, without housing, for both of these shots.)

 

[Kimela]

For what it's worth, given reasonably clear water the TG-6's internal flash can be quite useful for macro. I usually shoot available light, but the little internal flash can really make things pop. (I was snorkeling, without housing, for both of these shots.)

Wow! Those are great!