what a crock!

[clive francis]

I found this site while surfing, and it seemed very informative.

that is until i went to their digital section!

I have never seen such an outdated and biased review of underwater digital cameras.

just a few of the errors:

In terms of resolution, contrast, color saturation film picture quality wins hands down. However, when the mantra is ‘good enough’ either system will give most people a decent 6x4 print. It is only when you require larger prints that it matters. Let's face it though, most of us want a nice BIG print to hang on the wall to remind us of the underwater environment.

For pro's the issue is more clear cut. Digital is no good (yet). If your aim is to see your work on the front cover of a diving magazine (and who wouldn't) only film will do. At magazine quality (300dpi) the file sizes are just not big enough even with high end DSLR's. - the front cover of a dive mag was shot with a digital camera recently!

Remember, these facts are still imperative…

Underwater Photography is wide angle photography
Underwater Photography is flash photography
And, unfortunately, digital is not strong in either category… - thats funny i thought there was macro as well?

The housed consumer compact digital camera sector of the market is another story. The angle of view problem is probably not such a tough a nut to crack as it can be solved with the addition of a supplementary lens. However, will the lens mount be compatible with existing systems? No, I didn't think so! - not such a problem as there are many housing that have the same size thread, plus there are adaptor rings

Compacts are worse! No TTL at all and no prospect of anyone ever making one. The problem is compounded by the fact that most people wanting to get into U/W photography buy the camera first, then the housing. Have you seen how many cameras are out there. It used to be the familiar names (Nikon, Canon, Kodak, Fuji) but now you have Sony, HP, Epson and so on.

There are some universal workarounds. Sea & Sea’s solution is a strobe with 12 power settings! You’re supposed to take a test shot, compensate this dial, then hope your subject comes by again! - thats funny olympus use ttl as do quite a few others

here is the url digital photogrpahy underwater

i sent them an email suggesting they look at the market again and try to write an unbiased review

it might help if others do the same.

 

[MikeS]

I think that the article missed the point. The point I would make is that at all levels, especially at the entry level, dollar for dollar, film cameras provide better quality photos than digital. However, the gap is quickly narrowing as digital technology improves, especially CCDs, while film technology has remained stagnant.

 

[clive francis]

this is true when you look at it quickly, but dig a little deeper and you would not belive the costs!

the price of a good film camera is £300 plus the lenses another £200 each lense, then you have the cost of a housing and domes which can cost £2,00 plus (some are £3K plus)

so when you had this up you can spend £3K plus and then you have another £1,000 to £2,000 for strobes

top of the range oly 5050 is about as good as you can get without going ridiculous on a pro digital camera £480

housing is £160

ikelite ds125 is £800 x 2 = £1600

512m CF card £150

so for a oly 5050 £2390 gets you a dogs doo dars underwater

photo kit

at the low end beginers i dont think you can beat the price of the film camera the likes of th reef snap snap jobs, but people will soon tire of them and spend more.

 

[vicky]

IMHO flsh is the most important thing in UW photography. And I think that in this field SLRs beat most digital cameras (consumer ones do not support external strobes, other only manual strobes).
I also think it is true that SLRs beat digital cameras in Wide Angle photography. Yep. Even most latest DSLRs have the annoying "multiplication factor" (and the ones without factor are e-x-p-e-n-s-i-v-e).
Macro? If you have a good SLR macro lens it beats most digital camera. Actually top quality SLR lenses are no match to most digital cameras (even DSLRs, because of the factor...).

And one more thing- although digital cameras are amazingly fast developing, film is not so stagnant. Lots of improvements are being made all the time, making film better than ever before. For example, we are supposed to see very soon 100ASA velvia... Just can't wait any more to get my hands on these

And most digital cameras have this awful delay between the time you press the shutter and the camera makes you a favor and shoots a frame. Hate it.

And nothing compares to the sound of a real camera (film, what else?) when the shutter moves.

Oh, I forgot- time to focus. Eternity (digital, what else?) vs. notime in fast focusing lenses like Canon's USM. Uncomparable.

Yep,
One can get excellent photos either film or digital. But digital socks..

 

[docmartin]

to mention the cost of buying film and developing gazillions of shots that land in that special album called trash bin. i also believe that digital is way more beginner friendly because you can fix a lot of mistakes after the fact in your editing software.

 

[clive francis]

vicky once bubbled...
IMHO flsh is the most important thing in UW photography. And I think that in this field SLRs beat most digital cameras (consumer ones do not support external strobes, other only manual strobes).

the olympus range support TTL flash and the Ikelite DS range of strobes follow the Olympus (or any digital flash that is TTL)

I also think it is true that SLRs beat digital cameras in Wide Angle photography. Yep. Even most latest DSLRs have the annoying "multiplication factor" (and the ones without factor are e-x-p-e-n-s-i-v-e).

we have the add on wide angle lens

Macro? If you have a good SLR macro lens it beats most digital camera. Actually top quality SLR lenses are no match to most digital cameras (even DSLRs, because of the factor...).

this is true, but we are not far behind

And one more thing- although digital cameras are amazingly fast developing, film is not so stagnant. Lots of improvements are being made all the time, making film better than ever before. For example, we are supposed to see very soon 100ASA velvia... Just can't wait any more to get my hands on these

but what progress has been made in film cameras over the last 5 or 10 years? not much

And most digital cameras have this awful delay between the time you press the shutter and the camera makes you a favor and shoots a frame. Hate it.

i have to agree and i hate it too, and have missed shots because of it, but that too should reduce as technology improves

And nothing compares to the sound of a real camera (film, what else?) when the shutter moves.

what has this got to do with the price of fish?

Oh, I forgot- time to focus. Eternity (digital, what else?) vs. notime in fast focusing lenses like Canon's USM. Uncomparable.

they are quicker than you think, but how much did you set up cost?

how much would it cost brand new?

Yep,
One can get excellent photos either film or digital. But digital socks.. [/B]

valid points, but it still doesnt change the fact that the person who wrote the review, which is intended to aid people in their decision on choosing between digital or film did not represent digital cameras in a fair way and it was obvious they did not like them, and some of what they said could not be further from the truth if they tried.

 

[cdiver2]

You can also work a slide in the computer once it has been scaned
They have been saying the gap between digital and film is closeing for years I dont have time to hang around Im 54 years old.
Film is harder to work with but as you learn it will pay of ten fold

 

[clive francis]

you old fart digital is moving that quick before you even reach 56 they are going to have a digital equiv of a 35mm at a reasonable price.

hell they have the digital equiv of the medium format cameras they use for advertising and modelling shots, you would need a small mortgage to buy one but they are there.

not only does the pixel res increase every couple of months to a year but the cost comes down just as quick.

 

[cdiver2]

You can also work a slide in the computer once it has been scaned
They have been saying the gap between digital and film is closeing for years I dont have time to hang around Im 54 years old.
Film is harder to work with but as you learn it will pay of ten fold

 

[clive francis]

see what i mean you're even repeating yourself now