What are the HOT cameras and housings?

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

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......

I've shot and owned both, and I don't think there's a big difference in quality between their high end glass. Both make excellent stuff. Oly does particularly well in the extremes - their PRo 8/1.8 fisheye and 7-14/2.8 are amazing, and compact, and relatively affordable for what they are, and despite its age, the 150/2.0 is stunning.

But I still miss my 135/2.0 and 35/1.4 L's, and sort of still want the 17 tilt shift...
 
And unless you are shooting at extremes, for a living, the lens quality is a wash. I am strongly looking at the Oly OM M5 as well. This camera came out a year ago though so I hate to buy at the tail end of a run. I like the M10 II but for the battery life and no weather sealing.

Oh woe upon me, no system is perfect. I tell you, the same forces that eight years ago shoved me into the FIX/S90 system are pushing the new Sony RX100M5 at me as much as I resist. It comes closest to covering all bases for an advanced amateur who makes no pretentious of ever working for National Geo. And I am sure if I get a shot of a UFO with Santa Clause riding atop go swimming by, National Geo will settle for my one inch sensor. If I go that way.

N
 
No, no, no. ;-)

I am sure there is a law that states any photo of a UFO must be taken with the worst, broken, crappy camera available. Also, as much camera shake as possible and a slow shutter speed to ensure maximum blurring. You should also use the largest lens opening so there is no depth of field to correct for the absolutely wrong focus.

Taking a photo of your thumb also qualifies.
 
What are you guys shooting as I apparently need a new one. Prosumer, mirrorless, dslr even.

N

Maybe this guy has already responded to your query, but just in case he didn't you might want to take a look at this:

Cozumel trip report and pictures - August 2016

There are many pictures that include the whole fish ;) I didn't see where it said what he was using.
 
Maybe this guy has already responded to your query, but just in case he didn't you might want to take a look at this:

Cozumel trip report and pictures - August 2016

There are many pictures that include the whole fish ;)I didn't see where it said what he was using.

He is shooting the EM5.

Thanks.

Nonetheless, I would like to know what the numbers are for focus speed?

IMG_6886_zpsspjyecdk.jpg


IMG_6844_zps6zbppp85.jpg


IMG_6810_zpsc4nuzx7w.jpg


IMG_6752_zpspzfhugjb.jpg


IMG_6720_zpskjtvdsq3.jpg


IMG_6708_zpst2qojrhl.jpg


Of course I lost the camera half way through the trip and had to resort to the GoPro, yuk. I have about as much interest in video as getting bitten by a snake.

N
 
Last edited:
No, no, no. ;-)

I am sure there is a law that states any photo of a UFO must be taken with the worst, broken, crappy camera available. Also, as much camera shake as possible and a slow shutter speed to ensure maximum blurring. You should also use the largest lens opening so there is no depth of field to correct for the absolutely wrong focus.

Taking a photo of your thumb also qualifies.

That makes me an outlaw--I took many clear pictures of UFOs, but not since I was about 7 years old. That was with the camera I got with 500 Bazooka comics. It was better than it sounds ;)
 
What are you guys shooting as I apparently need a new one. Prosumer, mirrorless, dslr even.

N
I have a Subal ND3 complete setup available. Dm if interested :)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6429.jpg
    IMG_6429.jpg
    190.2 KB · Views: 13
  • IMG_6430.jpg
    IMG_6430.jpg
    156.7 KB · Views: 14
  • IMG_6491.jpg
    IMG_6491.jpg
    119.9 KB · Views: 13
  • IMG_6492.jpg
    IMG_6492.jpg
    130.8 KB · Views: 13
  • IMG_6494.jpg
    IMG_6494.jpg
    116.9 KB · Views: 12
Back
Top Bottom