What are the HOT cameras and housings?

[sunnyboy]

Another question or thought for those with the Canon SL1 & housing... I started looking into the SL1 yesterday, and found it was introduced in 2013. That makes it 3 years old now. I realize the plus side of this is they are coming down in price ($619 CDN many places now) but it also means Canon is probably about to release a newer model.

Given the price of the UW housings (around $1500 CDN for the less expensive) I wonder if it's worth waiting for the newer version (SL2 ???) before buying. The alternative is to get the UW housing + SL1 (with lens) + SL1 body perhaps used to save money.

Anyone here waiting for the next gen SL1?

 

[jmartel]

Given your requirement for faster focusing and little to no shutter lag, I wouldn't look at any compact camera. Look at the mirrorless ones or the SL1. Mirrorless cameras would be lighter, smaller, and less expensive than the SL1. That goes for the lenses as well.

 

[Nemrod]

Thanks. The RX100MV has shutter and focus as fast as a dslr at 50ms.

N

 

[tarponchik]

Another question or thought for those with the Canon SL1 & housing... I started looking into the SL1 yesterday, and found it was introduced in 2013. That makes it 3 years old now. I realize the plus side of this is they are coming down in price ($619 CDN many places now) but it also means Canon is probably about to release a newer model.

Given the price of the UW housings (around $1500 CDN for the less expensive) I wonder if it's worth waiting for the newer version (SL2 ???) before buying. The alternative is to get the UW housing + SL1 (with lens) + SL1 body perhaps used to save money.

Anyone here waiting for the next gen SL1?

If I had this kind of money I'd go for Olympus. They have the best optics and the cameras are not bulky.

 

[jmartel]

Thanks. The RX100MV has shutter and focus as fast as a dslr at 50ms.

N

In good light and slow/non-moving subjects. Nowhere close when it comes to lower light underwater and faster moving things.

 

[Nemrod]

In good light and slow/non-moving subjects. Nowhere close when it comes to lower light underwater and faster moving things.

Can you reference a source because I am told it is as fast anywhere due to having both phase and contrast hybrid auto focus, first of its kind in a compact. This is the new V.

N

 

[jmartel]

Can you reference a source because I am told it is as fast anywhere due to having both phase and contrast hybrid auto focus, first of its kind in a compact. This is the new V.

N

Basic camera physics. Smaller sensor means less light to gather. Sure it is going to be significantly better than any other compact out there, but in low light situations (such as underwater), it's going to lag behind. The focusing technology is great, but it needs light to work. Big sensors and big lenses gather more light.

Regardless of that, your other stated requirements lean heavily towards mirrorless cameras or a SL1 anyway. The only requirement you list that they aren't as good as a compact is, is the size.

I'm sure an V will take nice photos. Strobes matter more than anything else. But, a compact with a diopter isn't going to get as good of wide angle or macro shots as a camera that has a dedicated macro or wide angle lens on it. A mirrorless setup will get you most of the way to DSLR images, while still staying lightweight and less costly.

 

[mattia_v]

The basic physics argument is a bit ridiculous - absolute amount of light may be lower, but units per surface area are the same, and AF points don't necessarily scale with sensor size. Plus a lot of these small cameras have fast lenses. Some very fast.

As for mirrorless vs. DSLR, the image quality is a wash, depending on models. The Sony A7rII probably blows away any DSLR for pure IQ (except the A99, which has the same sensor). Mirrorless is often not cheaper than DSLRs, and I don't see why it should be. Depends on which mirrorless camera you're specifically considering. Even with a micro four thirds camera, you can spend 2000 bucks on a body (e-M1 mk II, probably same for the Panny GH-5 that's in the pipeline), and another 3000-4000 on glass, ports and housings. Or half that on a lower end DSLR with very similar IQ.

Wet lens options need not be inferior to dedicated lenses in ports; depends on what you're comparing to. The other advantage of smaller sensors is the greater DOF at any given aperture; in terms of performance relative than sensor size I find the 1" compacts to be supremely impressive per pixel. Definitely punch above their weight at base ISO. Sensor size does not tell the whole story.

Would I like to shoot my Sony FF or my E-M1 underwater? Yes. But other than price (the major hurdle), size is a massive concern for me. And my indecisiveness means I don't want to choose macro OR WA, I want both on tap for every dive

 

[Nemrod]

Basic camera physics. Smaller sensor means less light to gather. Sure it is going to be significantly better than any other compact out there, but in low light situations (such as underwater), it's going to lag behind. The focusing technology is great, but it needs light to work. Big sensors and big lenses gather more light.

Regardless of that, your other stated requirements lean heavily towards mirrorless cameras or a SL1 anyway. The only requirement you list that they aren't as good as a compact is, is the size.

I'm sure an V will take nice photos. Strobes matter more than anything else. But, a compact with a diopter isn't going to get as good of wide angle or macro shots as a camera that has a dedicated macro or wide angle lens on it. A mirrorless setup will get you most of the way to DSLR images, while still staying lightweight and less costly.

Nah, does not work that way. I try to go by factual sources but separating advertising hype and urban legend is a challenge. The RX100MV is blazing fast. An f number represents a light gathering power of the lens proportional to the area of its projected cone. A f1.8 lens on a one inch sensor is the same light gathering for it's image size as an APS-C at the same aperture. The RX100MV has phase detection with 425 points and contrast detection as well. The new Sony sensor is possibly the most advanced sensor to date, one inch or not.

But, I am not sold yet and other cameras are in the play. I can wait another year if need be. My Nauticam-FIX 90 will be back in action either way. My loyalty to Nauticam is the service down the road their dealers are able to provide because they support their products with spare parts. I am not a professional, I take photographs for fun so I do not need a pro level dslr and the bulk.

The lens of choice right now, for the RX100MV or the Oly/Pan 4:3 or the Sony E mount is the Nauticam WWL-1. The testing indicates it is a very sharp lens again per Nauticam and a few independent users seem to back this up. In any case, not sure about the new camera yet but the lens that will be up front is the WWL-1. Yeah, I am bad that way, I tend to choose lenses and strobes first and then get the camera that works with them. Old fashioned film think I know. I plan to continue with my dual Inon D2000 strobes.

N

 

[Allison Finch]

If I had this kind of money I'd go for Olympus. They have the best optics and the cameras are not bulky.

I would SOOOO beg to differ. If you like it, fine. but to say their glass is better than some of the Canon lenses....well......