recommendation reflex camera

i am looking in a 10-12 mpixels range reflex camera with ikelite housing
that goes with it and i was wondering wich ones have the best caracteristics
for underwater photography , my first choice would be the Nikon D40x but
i would like to have some recommandation from you guys


thanks ...

jfproul:

i am looking in a 10-12 mpixels range reflex camera with ikelite housing
that goes with it and i was wondering wich ones have the best caracteristics
for underwater photography , my first choice would be the Nikon D40x but
i would like to have some recommandation from you guys


thanks ...

Click to expand...

Find a DSLR that will allow you to hold the camera’s viewfinder about 3 inches from your eyeball (average space of the dive mask and housing) and still see the entire image, edge to edge in sharp focus.

Until you do you should consider a DSLR with a Liveview feature like the newer Nikons, Olympus or better yet the newer point and shoot (rangefinder) camera with 10-12mp like the Canon G9 or A650/A640.

IMO the DSLRs are going to be of limited use underwater due to the outrageous cost, size and the lack (some) of Liveview plus the fact that the PS cameras are really coming up in megapixels yet the prices are staying the same or lower.

This maybe the reason why the DSLR makers are jumping in on the Liveview bandwagon, DSLRs maybe limited to wide angle U/W shooting for which it has an advantage over the PS.

Back in the days of film the only SLRs worth putting in an U/W housing were the Pro models like the Nikon F3,F4 etc. and the Canon F-1 both have removable viewfinders for which a large viewfinder or speedfinder can be installed. In fact some housing makers did not make housings for the non speedfinder models.

I am partial to the Nikon D200. As the D300 is the hot new Nikon you might be able to pick up a used camera and housing at a good price.

I love the D200 underwater. Having the ability to view split hystograms really helps with my shooting.

As far as live view is concerned to me it's over rated. I don't see a need for it under water.

f3nikon:

IMO the DSLRs are going to be of limited use underwater due to the outrageous cost, size and the lack (some) of Liveview plus the fact that the PS cameras are really coming up in megapixels yet the prices are staying the same or lower.

Click to expand...

I switched from an Oly 5050 (live view only) to a DSLR a few years ago and in 100's of dives I have never once missed the live-view. I am planning on getting a D300 next month and I am really hoping the live-view feature can be turned off to save battery life.

Megapixels are actually meaningless (IMHO). What sets the DSLR's apart from the compacts is superior sensors, no shutter lag, larger buffer, less noise and superior AF.

Dave

jfproul:

i am looking in a 10-12 mpixels range reflex camera with ikelite housing
that goes with it and i was wondering wich ones have the best caracteristics
for underwater photography , my first choice would be the Nikon D40x but
i would like to have some recommandation from you guys
thanks ...

Click to expand...

I wouldn't go lower than a D50. The D40 has a very limited lens selection that can be shot AF. If you look at housing prices, the difference in price between one for a D50 and one for a D200 is minimal. The ports are all the same. I would go with the best body that I could afford (D80 mnimum in the Nikon line). Canon also has some great selections.

HTH,
Dave

i would check out canon. the new canon d40 has live view and has a sensor that is virtually noise free up to about iso 800. it is a great camera i got to shoot with one on several occasions. it has a lot of really nice features that is my honest opinion make it a better camera the than the Nikon. the other camera to look at is the canon 5D it is a 12 mp camera with a full frame sensor. it has best color of any camera on the market. i have personally shot with both these cameras and love them and will one day upgrade to the 5D or its predecessor. i am currently shooting with a canon 30D and love it i have it housed in an aquatica housing and love it. i use it for both top side stuff like wedding, and sports, and as my primary underwater camera. its is a well built camera that will give years of problem free service. i beat mine around a lot and it still works like the day i bought it. and ikelight does make a housing for it.

Dave & fish have some great advice.

Liveview is the new "thing", it seems. I'm sure it's great. It hasn't even made it on to my wish list. Yes, changing to using the viewfinder is a change. It's not as drastic as it's made out to be, you just need to learn to adjust. It took me a little bit when I moved from my trusty Oly 5050 to DSLR, but in retrospect it wasn't as traumatic as I had been led to believe it would be.

Again, it's a tool. Get it if you think it's important, but, frankly, I wouldn't be throwing a model out that didn't have it.

MPs are not where it's at. It's about the sensors. Sometimes a camera will have more MP but won't be "as good" as a camera with fewer MP as they've crammed them onto the same size or smaller sensor. MP is a marketing tool that's easy for sellers to push to consumers who don't really understand (or want to) the whole intricate mess. As long as you are looking at fairly recent technology (say three or so years ago til now) you should be fine.

I have and love the Canon 20D. She's a workhorse and does all I need her to do. Will I change systems? Perhaps, but I'm in no great rush. The newer models in both Nikon and Canon's range have some lovely advancements and if I was buying now I'd likely head to the 400D or the 40D by Canon. The 400D in a SeaTool is just TOO sweet...

But there are many many compact choices that might suit you very well, too...and the money you save by not going dslr can get you diving


oh yeah, most people I know who shoot dslr also have a compact camera! So even if you start with a compact, it's not useless if you decide dslr is for you!

dbh:

I switched from an Oly 5050 (live view only) to a DSLR a few years ago and in 100's of dives I have never once missed the live-view. I am planning on getting a D300 next month and I am really hoping the live-view feature can be turned off to save battery life.

Megapixels are actually meaningless (IMHO). What sets the DSLR's apart from the compacts is superior sensors, no shutter lag, larger buffer, less noise and superior AF.

Dave

Click to expand...

I can understand your comment about not missing the liveview feature from your Olympus C5050

My question to you is why are you getting a liveview camera? Or why is Nikon even going down that liveview road?

Because I am noticing some individuals who think that a DSLR will improve their poor photography skills, this maybe be true with land photography where ones eyes can be placed right on the camera’s viewfinder, but taking the camera U/W will work against you if the camera does not have liveview.

With a non liveview DSLR your dive mask and housing thickness is keeping your eyes away from the viewfinder, preventing you from seeing the entire frame without shifting your head around to see what is in the frame. Yes, there are bolt on magnifiers out there to get most of the frame into view but the image is smaller, distorted, a bit darker due to transmission light loss and you still have jam your mask near the camera housing. Plus the price of these magnifiers can be up to $1000!

If one did not master the basics of composition before, this type of shooting will certainly not help.

Where as with a PS or liveview DSLR you are viewing the entire frame from a relaxed distance away, another plus is the size of the PS housing, since they are much smaller than the DSLRs you can look at the scene from the top of the housing for a quick check of the subject before snapping the picture.

Keep in mind that the earlier PS at 6mp has greatly improved to the quick focusing, brilliant colors and clear optics of the 10-12mp PS of today. From the images I am seeing, I cannot tell which picture were taken by PS or DSLR except for the wideangle images. The proof is in the pictures because megapixels does matter and getting over the 5 to 10 time price difference between a DSLR and PS is too big a hurdle to over come...and for what, snapshot U/W images?

Al

It's not the camera it's the lens(s). Oh yeah, also 4-6 frames a sec RAW, seeing actual focus, battery life, and on and on.

I shot a couple of 10MP Fuji P&S for 3 years and they were fine. But nothing compared to my D80 with a 60mm macro. And I'm sure the Canon's are just as nice.

I'm blind as a bat, middle-aged and wear contacts UW. I can see the viewfinder in my D80 just fine. Can I see all the edges at one time? Sometimes, but it really doesn't matter. I can shoot 4 frames in the time I could shoot one with a P&S, because I have a frame buffer.

Size and weight is bigger, but I find that my Fantasea FD80 housing isn't that much more to swim than my old Ike Fuji system because it's much less negative.

Yes, the new P&S, like the Nikon P5100, are awesome for $399 list. Throw it in a small Fantasea FP5000 for $209 and off you go.

If you want instant, repeatable shooting, much greater versatility, sharp as a tack shots and much more, get a DSLR.It really comes down to your budget.

BTW, the D300, etc with live view have not hit the streets yet it may be several months before housings and so forth are out. Also yet out is quite how well you can focus with LiveView.

Jack

It sounds like the OP has made up their mind and wants a DSLR. Take a close look at the new Canon 40D. It's an awesome little camera. I'm not sold on the liveview function since you can't use liveview and AF at the same time. But for doing manual focus macro work the liveview might be just the ticket.

But the files look great and the camera handles very nicely. I'd take a serious look at this one.