U/w camera for Pro, compact or dslr?

[sunkarm]

Hi,

I have a divebuddy down here in Indonesia. He is a professional photographer. recently he became an u/w photographer. he is so great that Olympus have appointed him to be an olympus Instructor. So he is busy giving lectures and instructing about Olympus camera nationwide. He has also been asked by many reputable diving centre down here to open up an U/W photoraphy workshop. On land he uses a manual SLR. But the funnuy thing is that for u/w pictures he uses C8080 with a Nikonos strobe 105SB and old Ikelite strobe, he doesn't use DSLR of any kind.
So my question is, do u/w pros really need to use dslr to make great shots? My dive buddy did not do so, and now he has been asked by the local province of Papua to be one of the Jury/judges of u/w pictures taken in Rajaampat.
However, he does have a plan to get E330 with its housing.
Thx for the commenst from the pros.

 

[ThatsSomeBadHatHarry]

Thx for the commenst from the pros.

this does not apply to me but....

I have seen many incredible photos posted on this board alone that could be money-makers by divers without dslr cameras

 

[Peter Guy]

As so many people have said, good pictures come from the eye behind the lens. The modern digitals are technically good enough to let those with "the eye" create beautiful images that I can only dream about.

 

[Mike Veitch]

yep, its the photographer, not the camera..

 

[AUTiger]

If we were wise underwater photographers, we would spend more money on classes/experience and less on new camera gear. Of course I say this after just having bought a D80 dSLR and a new housing!

Its kind of like driving/racing cars. Every hotshot with $500 burning a hole in his pocket asks what new hardware he should buy. The best way to spend that money is almost always to take a driving class! A skilled driver can make even a basic Civic outperform an untrained driver in a performance vehicle.

David

 

[Mo2vation]

There are very few things a Compact P&S can do (except for the multi-lens thing) that a DSLR can't do as well or better.

There is nearly nothing a DSLR can do that a compact P&S can do better.

You will not see the major differences online, as the DSLR image is been dumbed down considerably so you can view it online. The lenses are better, the image sensor bigger and the light management is simply better on a DSLR. There are very few exceptions, so put down the keyboards. But as a category, they are as different as Pepsi and Tomato Juice.

That's not to say that a compact P&S can't get great shots. It can. But the finest P&S simply cannot hold the pixels of a housed up DSLR. Lighting, features, menu, versatility - DSLR wins. Period.

Having shot digital exclusively since 1997, and UW P&S for years, and a UW DSLR for about 14 months, I can tell you I'll never go back to a P&S. No way.

That said, the camera's job is to get out of the way of the artist. DSLR's just do a better job of getting out of the way.

Anyone who tells you its the camera is trying to sell you something.

Its never the Camera.

---
Ken

 

[bladephotog]

Of course it's mostly the photographer. However, there are reasons why most pro photographers shoot SLR or DSLR. One less obvious reason is that many magazines set standards that P&S cameras can't reach.

Look at it this way. Give David Doubilet a good P&S and he'll out shoot me any day of the week. Give me a DSLR and I'll out shoot just about anything I do with a P&S.

I've been a pro photojournalist for 15 years so I did okay UW with the P&S I was using last year. I published two newpaper stories and one magazine story with another one in the works with my P&S system. But the limitations of that system pushed me to get a housed DSLR system this year and I don't regret it. My images are much, much better.

 

[alcina]

It also depends on what you mean by "pro" and what the intent for images is.

If you're primarily shooting for National Geographic, I don't think a compact as your main rig will do the job. If you're primarily teaching uw photo, a compact might be just the thing as it's relevant to your students, produces great results and offers all the controls etc that you will need to accomplish your goal.

If the image is good enough, magazines will publish from compacts. DSLRs do have advantages for publishing, but sometimes publishing isn't the primary goal and so jumping into slr isn't a must.

Seems like your friend is doing just fine with the gear he already has so I think that answers the question quite nicely.

Most everything else has been said already above.

 

[Warren_L]

There is the tendency by some to assume it is more about the equipment than it is ability, which I do find at times frustrating. It's not that having decent and proper equipment isn't important; knowing how to use it and having the skills is a much larger piece of the pie than the gear. I was recently asked by someone I know, why my pictures had absolutely no silt or particles in them as they were crystal clear. He asked if that's where photoshop came in. I wasn't too sure where to start explaining that the best way to have no silt is not to create any to begin with....

 

[bladephotog]

Many people's reactions to improving in ANY endeavor is to spend more money. When I was bicycle racing we used to laugh at these old guys spending tons of money on the fastest wheelsets and lightest bikes when they weren't that fast to begin with.
Now that I'm one of the "old" guys I see things differently.

The point I was trying to make in my earlier post is that better gear can only do so much. The greatest camera in the world is not going to compose a picture better for you. Nor is it going to tell you when to trip the shutter.

But better gear can level the playing field. If you have the money feel free to buy the best stuff you can. I won't judge. There are certain photographic fields that require specialized gear and there is no way around it.

One other point. There is one big advantage to a compact P&S system and that's it's smaller size. It's much easier to tote a small system over a DSLR system underwater. Therefore one might be more apt to take it on every dive, lessening the chance of missing something.

If you're happy with the gear you have and the results you're getting than don't worry about what anyone else thinks.

Back to the OP's question - "So my question is, do u/w pros really need to use dslr to make great shots?" The short answer is no.