DSLR?

[ChrisM]

I recently took the jump Canon 300D in an Aquatica housing -- and would never look back. I've had it on 4 dives, and already gotten shots I never would have gotten with the 5050.

Re: canon v., nikon. I bought last year, so it was a canon. Would I buy a nikon now? Dunno, but no buyer's remorse now. Canon is a great camera. I am sure the D70 is as well. There are issues to consider for UW photography.

Price - Canon is $1000 with 18-55 kit lens. D70 is $1300 with 18-70 kit lens. But in the grand scheme of things if you are going to house it, $300 isn't much (although it could buy most of a WA lens)

Nikon is a 1.5 crop factor. Canon is 1.6. Nikon slight edge in WA

Canon's CMOS sensor (I am told) is superior to Nikon's. True? I've got no idea. I've seen crummy 300D pics and great D70 pics, and vice versa. A good photographer can take good pics with any camera. A bad photog can't with any camera...

ISO. Canon's lowest ISO is 100. Nikon's is 200. Lower ISO = less noise. Important for UW.

Shutter sync speed. Canon's rated at 1/200. This can be changed with slight modification and testing I've seen shows sync speed accurate at 1/320. Above that you start getting masking. Nikon's shutter sync speed is higher.. 1/500? Someone will correct me.

The 300D was originally a dumbed down 10D, which is the Canon equivvalent (more or less) of the Nikon D100. There are (unauthorized) firmware updates that replace some of the features of the 10D that Canon disconnected in the 300D.

Lenses - Nikon has a 12-24 that people seem to love. Sigma makes a 12-24 for Canon mounts, but I don't thnk a port has been made for it. Canon is supposedly making a 12-25 f2.8 lens. You'll need/want a macro/ portrait lens (for Canon, Canon 50 mm or Sigma 50 mm (does 1:1), or Nikon 60 mm), a WA lens (canon or sigma 15 mm FE) and a macro lens (Canon 100 mm or Nikon 105 mm)

The main drawback of DSLRs is the crop factor - a 1.5 crop factor means you add 50% to any focal length. For example, a Canon 50 mm is actually 75 mm lens (actually, a little more because 1.6 crop, you get the idea). This is great on the macro end. A 100 is a 150. Bad on the WA end. A 15 is a 22.5. I'd like to see development of more WA lenses from Canon.

General prices
Price - Camera and kit lens - $1000 - $1200
Additional lenses - 50 mm, $350, 100 mm $400, 15 mm $400
Housing - $1500- $2000
Ports (need at least two) - $250 -300 each
Sync cords - $150-300 (extras, T cords, etc)
Need strobes? $500-600 each
ULCS arms - $400

Cards, batteries, etc etc etc etc

It all adds up. Bt as I said, I am MUCH happier wth my rig than I was with the 5050 in the Oly housing. The Oly looks like a toy in comparison

Chris

 

[marpacifica]

Lisa,

When I went through all the research of DSLRs, I also turned to this board for advice and comments. I decided on the Fuji S2, which takes Nikon lenses, and I'm very happy with what I've got. Chippy seems to be, too, and he was really helpful in pointing me to various websites where I could find the elusive Nikon 12-24DX lens. The Fuji S2 goes down to 100 ISO all the way up to 1600. I always use 100 u/w, and have used 1600 on some dimly lit traveling circus shots I took the other week and was very pleased with the results. www.bytom.com has some nice reviews on the S2, D70 and Rebel (although he is a Nikon fan and that shows in his less than glowing review of the Rebel). The S2 is twice as much as the D70. Whatever digital body you get, I think you'll see your keeper rate rise significantly after you get over the learning curve. When you want to take that shot of a fish yawning, you'll be more likely to get it with the almost imperceptible shutter lag. That's been my experience, which was reinforced when I got lazy the other weekend and decided to go with my Oly 4000 u/w rather than take the hour or so setup time with my S2. I kept expecting the Oly to take the shot as I saw it, and of course it took the shot as it saw it a few milliseconds later. Lots of missed shots on that dive, and I don't think I'll go back to Oly unless the S2 is down for whatever reason.

And I thought you already had a sugar daddy????? hehehehe

 

[kidspot]

Hey Leesa,

I don't have a housing yet, but I love my 300D - you've already seen some of my "dry" pics at http://www.scenicmaui.com I think. and the price has dropped a bit lately - I saw the 300D w/lens kit for $799 at costco.com - so it's getting less expensive. Also with CMOS sensor it's not too hard to filter out artifacts even at 1600 ISO (Which is wonderful to have available)

Just my .02 worth

Tim

 

[nlbford]

Canon's CMOS sensor (I am told) is superior to Nikon's. True? I've got no idea. I've seen crummy 300D pics and great D70 pics, and vice versa. A good photographer can take good pics with any camera. A bad photog can't with any camera...

I have heard one or the other get the nod from various sources. After looking at photos from both, if one is superior to the other, it is not consistently evident in the results. There's no doubt the Canon's is a higher resolution censor by .3 million, but resolution doesn't always mean "better". Nikon's is physically bigger, so one could say a smaller and higher resolution censor on Canon's product is "superior" because it's denisty captures more detail in theory. However, To my less than totally technical mind, a physically larger censor is going to catch more light hitting it before it becomes digital info, and to my old fashioned photo mind, more light is going to give more leeway when it comes to catch it and the denisty to capture detail can be offset with optics. I am sure more technically savy people can tell me if that is faulty logic. Also, they are different types. Canon's is CMOS and Nikon's is CCD. I know CMOS was originally designed as a cheaper and faster array sensor for lower end cameras that developed into higher end cameras later. Nikon's is a CCD type which has been the norm on higher end cameras since their inception. I can't speak to whether CMOSes have caught CCDs, but their use in the 10D would indicate they probably have. CCD's in the Nikon are also made by Sony (who uses them in their prosumer mini-DVs and DVcam) and that is another brand I know and trust from experience.The CMOS in Canon's is their own.

ISO. Canon's lowest ISO is 100. Nikon's is 200. Lower ISO = less noise. Important for UW.

That was almost a break-it issue for me. Then I did some inquiries and found out that noise is not really a problem of note with the D70 even at much higher ISO's than even 200. I have taken many low-light and heavily color cast images at various ISOs so I knew what I could expect. I have yet to see any noise in any shots at all, and certainly under the parameters I will really be shooting under. And in a digital realm, where grain is not an issue and actual pixel resolution is, I wasn't sure that the difference was great enough to make it a real factor in my decision.

One difference I know of that did make a difference to me was the LCD on the back. That's my guide in the field as to what my images are coming out like, and thus the D70's higher resolution was a factor for me. Especially with the D70's ability to zoom in on the image in the LCD - how Canon's ability to do that compares I don't know.

Shutter sync speed. Canon's rated at 1/200. This can be changed with slight modification and testing I've seen shows sync speed accurate at 1/320. Above that you start getting masking. Nikon's shutter sync speed is higher.. 1/500? Someone will correct me.

Not sure of that . . but I know that the max shutter speed on the Nikon is 1/8000 as oppossed to Canon's 1/4000

If flash is something you will be using (and I mean on board flash) I know that Nikon's allow's more flash exposure compensation and has things like rear-sync and all that, which I do not THINK the Canon has. Exposure compensation is more varied in the Nikon and allows 1/3 stops.

Otherr things that may or may not be a big deal are the greater latitude in self-timing with the Nikon, faster continuous drive photo capturing with a larger buffer (in JPEG) and the USB 2.0 capability.

Anyway, those are things I considered, and am again, a Nikon guy. I can say this though, I don't think one can go WRONG with either choice, and I know owners of both are consistently pleased.

 

[ChrisM]

Nice post nlbford (sorry, don't know your name )

Not sure of that . . but I know that the max shutter speed on the Nikon is 1/8000 as oppossed to Canon's 1/4000

If flash is something you will be using (and I mean on board flash) I know that Nikon's allow's more flash exposure compensation and has things like rear-sync and all that, which I do not THINK the Canon has. Exposure compensation is more varied in the Nikon and allows 1/3 stops.

Otherr things that may or may not be a big deal are the greater latitude in self-timing with the Nikon, faster continuous drive photo capturing with a larger buffer (in JPEG) and the USB 2.0 capability.

Shutter speed I was referring to was external sync, just to clarify. Not sure the 300D's onboard flash can be used with any housing, perhaps Ikelite's? Definitely not Aquatica's.

TO get FEC on the 300D you have to download the "russian hack" which enables that feature.

Faster continuous drive shooting is a drawback definitely topside, Nikon is 9 (I believe) Canon is 4. Less of an issue UW shooting with strobes since you have to wait for the strobes to recycle anyway, but shooting that ambient light whaleshark or hammer head school, or topside action shots, it'd be nice to have a bigger buffer.

No idea on your CMOS vs. CCD comments, I simply don't know enough. I know SOny was having "issues" with their 8 Mp CCD, no idea whether it was resolved.

SO Leesa, made your decision any easier? Can't go wrong, in my book. My advice is research as much as you can, then buy one and, as Mo2vation sez, no reserves, no regrets....

Chris

 

[nlbford]

Nice post nlbford (sorry, don't know your name )

Thanks Chris. Since I doubt I have formally introduced myself anywhere, my name is Nick.

Faster continuous drive shooting is a drawback definitely topside, Nikon is 9 (I believe) Canon is 4. Less of an issue UW shooting with strobes since you have to wait for the strobes to recycle anyway,

Good point - particularly given the context of the comparison.

No idea on your CMOS vs. CCD comments, I simply don't know enough.

I would have to be the first to admit that as a photographer whose background is in the artistic rather than technical, I really rely on tidbits I pick up as I have to as opposed to a well rounded and researched technical approach. Some of my own understanding comes from a degree of personal theory rather than hard technical fact. ( :06: ). As a onetime Fine Arts major, the technical mumbo-jumbo is a neccessary (and evil ) means to an end.

SO Leesa, made your decision any easier? Can't go wrong, in my book. My advice is research as much as you can, then buy one and, as Mo2vation sez, no reserves, no regrets....

Chris

Couldn't agree more.Make a decision you feel comfortable with and don't look back. It will just make the experience with whichever camera more productive and enjoyable. As Chris says, both are excellent choices (as are others).

 

[justleesa]

Well I dug this one up and and have to say I still haven't made up my mind. I had the newest canon in my hot little hands on Saturday, now that was a treat....but I still have time and some selling to do before I go on to the next toy....

 

[ssra30]

I am another happy D70 owner. I started from scratch with no lenses. I chose to go Nikon route mainly because of the lenses, specifically 12-24mm and 70-180mm macro lenses which are both supported by quite a few housing manufacturers.
Canon is catching up on the WAL side but no idea how long it will be before any housing manufacturers will support it. So if I have to buy a new setup again right now, it is still going to be the Nikon route. Also I just got the 10.5mm lens which is also very nice.
As far as D70 vs Fuji S2, I went with D70 mainly because of the local support I get with Nikon.
Having Nikon distributer and repair center right about 5 train station away from my condo make life easier ( My D70 died a few days ago and I dropped it off at the Nikon distributer and got the camera back a few days later in good working condition -if I don't have easy access to support for Nikon, I definitely would seriously consider S2 as well).
The new Canon D20 looks very nice and if there are more lenses support for UW use, I probably would seriously look at it as well but as of right now, I wonder if I could start a D2X fund!

 

[chippy]

I'd maybe even wait for the S3. I read an article on it the other day, and it got a very good review.

Likewise, the D20 was also reviewed and also got top marks.

My choice would be the S3, because I prefer Nikon Glass. Ten years or so ago I used to have half a dozen Canon "L" series lenses which I must admit performed flawlessly with my EOS1, but they are mega $$$$$. I don't feel that Canon's cheaper lenses are anywhere near the equivalent Nikon glassware, so when I need to start from scratch again (i sold all my Canon gear years ago), I'd already made the choice to go for the Nikon lenses.

SSra - Count me in on the d2X fund - I want one too!

 

[chippy]

Leesa, Don't forget all the "other" bits you'll need, as the cost soon mounts up:-

Sync leads
Lens gears
port shades (for domes)
port extensions