Housing vs a Underwater Camera Package?

[scubatoys]

Looks nice - pity they put the internal flash so close to the lens and no forward diffuser. It looks like it will not be functional at all in the housing making an external strobe a necessity.

I was kinda' worried about the same thing, so I took the camera into a totaly black dark room and found that as long as you are not wide angled out all the way - set at about the 1/2 way mark of the zoom, then if you about about 2 1/2 - 3 ft from the subject, the internal flash seems to light up the entire subject.

I shot this picture of a picture in our classroom with the lights off and the door closed - and it's hard to tell since it is a night shot to begin with... but you kinda' get the idea that the coverage seems to work pretty well.

Of course, there are always advantages to the external strobes - better lighting, less back scatter, interesting shadows for a more 3D look, etc. And they do have two pretty inexpensive strobe options... either about $150, or up to $300... But the shot below is with no externals.

 

[scubajunkee]

I would suggest starting with a brand name digital camera and get either their recommended housing or a higher end brand like Ikelite. It's a good idea to practice with your camera on land and learn about it's features. Once you get below the surface, you'll have a better understanding on how to shoot confidently.

I have a Canon Powershot S40 with the Canon DC300 housing. I started out shooting with the internal flash. I got decent results, but after seeing my friend's pics with same camera but with an Inon strobe and lenses, I upgraded. I dive weekly in the Monterey, CA area and have been shooting in all kinds of conditions.

I suggest take the time to learn how your camera works and talk to others in the forum and ask how they manage to get great pictures.

Ericson

Hi all, (thanks in advance for the advice/opinions)

I've itching to bring a digital camera down for some pictures. I'm a fairly new diver, so I'm not going to be hauling dual strobes etc... I just want to bring a point and shoot digital camera down knowing the limitations that come with that and also not break the bank.

A basic question:

Is there an advantage to buying one of the "Underwater" brands such as Sea Life verses going with a more traditional "topside" digital and buying the housing for it?

I saw the Sea Life DC 250 on closeout for $199 on ScubaToys (hope it's ok to mention shops on this board). I've seen other Sea Life cameras and the low-mid range ones are a bit cheapie feeling (the cameras themselves), but for 200 bucks, that's about what I'd spend on a housing and I wouldn't have to worry in the event of a flood that the rest of my vacation photographing is down the tubes.

However, it seems by going the point and shoot (such as a Nikon or Canon) and buying the housing, I'd be increasing the quality without too much more money - of course with the risk of a camera loss through a flooded housing.

I added a poll just to get a feel for how much the flooding risk is...

Thanks!

 

[NAIBdiver1]

The sealife IS a very cheap camera, it's a Vivitar that you can get at Wallmart for $100. They put the crappy camera in a nice housing, but you're still shooting with a crappy camera that puts out crappy photos on land or underwater. There is also little or no controls with it either.



I had a DC310 for 2 days before I took it back to the store for my money back.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry to disagree, but I very much like my DC310 (I've posted some shots - take a look). It's a very easy camera to use and the results are very good + SeaLife is excellent with repairs and replacements.

I use it and let students use it when they'd like to try their hand at u/w photography.

just my 2 cents

 

[Grajan]

Suprising,
If it really is a prototype and you have some influence it would be good to have a forward mounted diffuser a la Canons. The strobes may be low cost but they add considerably to dive clutter.....

I was kinda' worried about the same thing, so I took the camera into a totaly black dark room and found that as long as you are not wide angled out all the way - set at about the 1/2 way mark of the zoom, then if you about about 2 1/2 - 3 ft from the subject, the internal flash seems to light up the entire subject.

I shot this picture of a picture in our classroom with the lights off and the door closed - and it's hard to tell since it is a night shot to begin with... but you kinda' get the idea that the coverage seems to work pretty well.

Of course, there are always advantages to the external strobes - better lighting, less back scatter, interesting shadows for a more 3D look, etc. And they do have two pretty inexpensive strobe options... either about $150, or up to $300... But the shot below is with no externals.

 

[SFScuba]

...Does your camera have a TTL flash? you'll want one that can accomodate this style of flash as opposed to scattering/reflecting the flash all around.

My current digital doesn't have a TTL. Are there any "point-and-shoot" types that do? Or am I getting into the pro-sumer/DLSR area with a TTL?

It's understandable that you wouldn't want to lug a strobe about, but at 80', it doesn't matter how clear the water is; you're gonna need some kind of light source so that you images don't come out "blue struck"....

I say this now, but will probably change my mind later... I think I'm willing to live with the limitations of the onboard flash and just try to get closeups. The strobe just seems like a bulky thing for me to be carrying as a vacation type diver.

I've only been diving in warm (really clear) water once, so, being used to Carmel/Monterey's waters, you can understand how I would be partial to using strobes.
I noticed you hail from SF; do you ever dive in Monterey?

Yup, live in the city. Certified off Coast Guard Pier/the Breakwater. I think we had 45 degree water the first day with 20-25 foot vis. The second day was strong surge, 10-15 foot vis. That was spring over a year back. Haven't been back... my wife (better half) really isn't amenable to more frigid waters, though I wouldn't mind trying again.

By the way, any dive shops that you like around the area? Bamboo Reef in the city is pricey and some of the guys there have that Scuba shop mentality.

 

[SFScuba]

Larry,

Thanks for the camera info... will check that out as an option.

Also, have you shot with, have any pictures with the DC250 that is for sale (and any opions on the camera)? I noticed in your "How To" section you show a picture of an eel that looked neat with a DC200 which I assume is an older model (I also realize that it had a stobe attached).

By the way, on an unrelated note, we bought our computers from you before our Costa Rica trip this spring - 2 Aeris Atmos 1s, Air only which works fine for the type of divers my wife and I are. They were a good value for the money and worked great.

We calculated the tables our based on our dives manually just to compare. We definitely would not have been able to follow some of our second dive (much less 3rd, afternoon dive) profiles/depths if we were dive planning using manual tables. Which is interesting, because there were others in the group that were not calculating their tables and did not have computers either... I guess they assumed the dive master was keeping them on a safe profile (which can't be assumed) do others see this with recreational divers?

 

[RonFrank]

I shot mostly RAW UW, but was running out of card space in the middle of my second dives on a couple days, so shot some jpg.

RAW is the cat's meow as to getting the most out of digital images. I use photoshop CS to process my RAW images, and it has a lot of flexibility. The RAW support that came with the ZoomBrowser for the S70 is MUCH more limited. Canon MUST have a better tool than ZoomBrowser for their higher end camera's, I'm going to look into that.

From my experience, I will never shoot jpg UW again. I solved my storage problem by simply pulling my 1gig card out of my DSLR, and used that UW for the rest of my diving. The amount of control I have with a RAW image makes adjusting the color balance and white balance easy. With my jpg files, if I did not nail the WB in camera, adjustments were time consuming, and difficult.

Just something else to consider.

 

[scubajunkee]

I agree with RonFrank on shooting in RAW mode for the Canon cameras. Nothing beats being able to tweak every shot in Photoshop. I have several CF cards and when space becomes an issue, I transfer the pics to my laptop. For samples of my pictures, check out http://photos.yahoo.com/scubajunkee.

Ericson

I shot mostly RAW UW, but was running out of card space in the middle of my second dives on a couple days, so shot some jpg.

RAW is the cat's meow as to getting the most out of digital images. I use photoshop CS to process my RAW images, and it has a lot of flexibility. The RAW support that came with the ZoomBrowser for the S70 is MUCH more limited. Canon MUST have a better tool than ZoomBrowser for their higher end camera's, I'm going to look into that.

From my experience, I will never shoot jpg UW again. I solved my storage problem by simply pulling my 1gig card out of my DSLR, and used that UW for the rest of my diving. The amount of control I have with a RAW image makes adjusting the color balance and white balance easy. With my jpg files, if I did not nail the WB in camera, adjustments were time consuming, and difficult.

Just something else to consider.

 

[WolfyWho]

I've had the prototype of the new Sealife DC500 for a bit.
Until these were out, I could see someone who wanted more flexibility getting a camera and housing, but now, unless you have very special needs - I think this thing will take over the camera market.

Hi Larry,

Have you taken any pictures (topside and underwater) with the camera that you could share? It would be nice to see some samples. Thanks!

Scott

 

[ChrisA]

....and I wouldn't have to worry in the event of a flood that the rest of my vacation photographing is down the tubes.
Thanks!

I don't understand why there would be a dfferent risk of flooding. Any camera if you get some sand in the o-ring is going to flood. There is no difference, digital, film housed or UW camera the riskis about the same. Well, there is one difference: cost. Flooding a $1,000 camera is 5 times worse than flooding a $200 camera but the chance of it happening is about the same.

One thing to do is to think well ahead. What system do you want down the line. Think about flash(es) how they will attach and sync to the camera and a posable wide angle lens and how you will store and transport the equipment. So for example if you think that comtrollable flash output might be an impotent feature down the road, get a camera that will allow use off a flash with that feature.