Can't afford video so going with DSLR opinions

Okay guys. Since my budget isn't going to allow me to get a video system before my trip to Rotan and Belize this Feb. I decided its time to go with a better DSLR setup. Now in order to stay somewhat in the price range I want I am looking at the following cameras.
Nikon D40 or D80 and the Oly E410 or E510.
The biggest difference I have seen in the 510 over the 410 is the image stabilization. And that the 510 is a little larger than the 410. Also the only people i have seen a housing for the 510 from is Ikelite at a price of 1299.00 not to mention the camera is 749 and up. The 410 has a housing from Oly that is around 999. or a little less and I can get that camera with a couple of lenses for around 549. Not a bad deal overall.
Nikon of course makes great cameras as well. And I can get into the D40 for around the same money as the 410. But I think the housing will cost a little more. And of course the D80 will run about what the E510 runs. as well as the housing around the same money. Does anyone have any other thoughts on these cameras? Other suggestions for around the same price range I may look at as options?

If you're strictly looking budget, the E-410 makes a lot of sense. You can get the camera and Oly Housing for about $1600 combined with the two lens kit right now. The 14-54 kit lens seems just about perfect for all purpose UW use, and Gary (CE4Jesus) seems to be getting good results with his. In addition, the camera/housing is very light and compact, and supports ttl with Oly strobes, slave strobes, or non-oly with a HW converter. Oly also has very nice lenses, which seem to be somewhat more reasonable than Nikon.

Uhh, you should be able to get into video (no lights) for under $1200 new, or under $800 used. I got a $600 Ikelite housing and a Canon DV camera for under $250. Works great.

Talk to Ryan at Reef photo and video. He can get you into the housing and port for under $1000. The Camera on Ebay at official Olympus resellers is running $599 with two lenses. The 14-42 kit lens is good but if you really want to get some good range underwater, Oly just came out with a 12-60mm lens. I'm not sure there's even a port for it yet but Ryan would know. With the money you save on the camera and housing you can then afford an Inon Z-240. Anyway, enough on toys. I had the same dilemma between the d-80 and Olympus. I chose olympus because my wife already has some lenses. You can't go wrong with those cameras. I'm not sure Ike has a housing out for the E510 yet so you might check.

BTW, the only other camera I can think of in the same class and price range is the Canon xti. You can try Fantasea for a well built, cheap housing.

The Olympus has a smaller sensor than Canon/Nikon, giving you a greater crop factor (awkward for wide-angle photography) and technically, lower image quality (not that it would be really noticable). I think it also uses a different aspect ratio (3/4 instead of the standard 2/3) so many standard-sized prints (4X6)would have parts of the image cropped off. It may be better for 5X7 and 8X10 prints, though.

The Olympus has a smaller sensor than Canon/Nikon, giving you a greater crop factor (awkward for wide-angle photography) and technically, lower image quality (not that it would be really noticable). I think it also uses a different aspect ratio (3/4 instead of the standard 2/3) so many standard-sized prints (4X6)would have parts of the image cropped off. It may be better for 5X7 and 8X10 prints, though.

Click to expand...

The aspect ratio is 4/3. The image quality and noise of the cameras is favorable in comparison to both Canon (xti) and Nikon (D80) in all the online tests I've reviewed. I'd give a slight edge to the Canon in image quality to noise ratio with the Nikon falling inbetween. However the difference is almost negligible. I'm not sure what you mean by "awkward for wide angle" since there are WA lenses built for the 4/3 system it should not be an issue. I've seen wonderful results underwater with the Olympus 7-14mm on 4/3 systems. Given that I just picked up a used E-410 with two kit lenses for $470 for a backup camera, its really one of the best options out there for people not wanting to sell a kidney. I think anyone coming from a P&S is going to love the entry level Olympus Cameras underwater.

ce4jesus:

I'm not sure what you mean by "awkward for wide angle" since there are WA lenses built for the 4/3 system it should not be an issue. underwater

Click to expand...

I meant that there probably would not be as many lens options for wide-angle (maybe just the one from the camera manufacturer) since the lens optics would have to be designed to cover a wider angle of view and still be reasonably rectilinear. I don't know if this means that they would be more expensive and the quality would suffer (quality super-wide lenses are difficult to make) or if that was just a problem in the old days.

Olympus OM series non digital lenses are plentiful and cheap on E-Bay. They require an adapter available for $100 or less to fit digital models. I've seen excellent examples taken with these lens/adapter combos, including close-ups using diopters or extension tubes. They're readily available online. Just Google Olympus OM on Digital cameras and you'll get pages of them. Don't know if you're going to find gears for these MF lenses to fit your ports, however.

Larry C:

Olympus OM series non digital lenses are plentiful and cheap on E-Bay. They require an adapter available for $100 or less to fit digital models. I've seen excellent examples taken with these lens/adapter combos, including close-ups using diopters or extension tubes. They're readily available online. Just Google Olympus OM on Digital cameras and you'll get pages of them. Don't know if you're going to find gears for these MF lenses to fit your ports, however.

Click to expand...

For super-wide angle photography using these lenses, you'd have to use a fisheye to get a reasonably wide (90+ degrees) angle of coverage on the cropped sensor. Did Olympus make a fisheye in this series?

I just did Google it and there are 16mm and 8mm fisheyes in that range. The 16 probably isn't wide enough on that sensor (probably 24mm equivalent), but the 8mm (circular) would probably turn into a nice full-frame fisheye on the smaller sensor.