Help! Which Specs better for Underwater?

I'm looking at two cameras. I won't say which ones as a lot of people have strong brand biases. I will just give some key specs and findings that I've discovered testing both cameras topside.

This camera will be used for underwater only about 1/3 of the time. I'm tired of having two cameras.

Camera A:

Size: Compact. Bigger/heavier than Canon Elph and Panasonic Lumix but still pocketble although maybe a tad uncomfortable from weight standpoint in a pair of beach shorts.

Lens: Leica F3.3-F4.9 / 28mm-228mm zoom lens, yes in a near ultra compact! - Don't give it away!) No barrel distortion, purple fringing, or corner softness - awesome lens although a little slow at 28mm.

CCD - 7 megapixel. It's actually an 8 megapixel CCD that shoots 7MP at 4:3 and 8 MP at 16:9 aspect ratio so it isn't just cropping the CCD in wide mode! (crops on the sides in standard 4:3 mode)

Video: Wide screen capable (848x640 30fps) and looks really good but poor audio quality (not big deal for underwater but sucks top side)

Picture Quality: Superb - A bit aggressive on noise reduction on ISO 400 but I think up to ISO 800 is usable on up to 8x10 prints with a little post processing. Colors are near spot on.

Indoor Flash Picture Quality - Not good. Gives flesh tones a blue/gray tune. Need to set Color mode to 'Warm' which makes a tad to warm but decent. Flush is fairly week, photos seem underexposed a tad without changing exposure.


Camera B:

Size: Smaller than A, ultra compact. Easily pocketable.

Lens: F4.6-5.9 / 28mm-105mm zoom (less zoom than A but faster at wide end, slower at tele end.) Optics good but has slight barrel distortion (only 1.1%) and a very small amount of smearing in the very ends of the corners. Not noticeable unless you really look for it - very minor.

CCD - 8 megapixel

Picture Quality - Amazing. Colors, exposure, focus, are all spot on in most all scenarious with only rare need to adjust camera settings. It has better in-camera processing than (A) which provides a better balance of noise reduction without losing detail up to 400 ISO. Beyond 400 it has much more noise where camera A just smears everything. I would prefer to do my own noise reduction at that point anyway.

Indoor Flash Photos - Spot on. Great color and exposure. Slightly stronger flash than (A).

Cost on these is roughly the same adding camera plus underwater housing.

I'm basically wondering which one will be the better underwater camera, and given it is used as one only 1/3 of the time, is it better enough to go for or is the other camera probably going to do better as an all around camera and do fine under water.

I've previously shot with a Canon S50. It's done well underwater but I've found I've had to use ISO 400 a lot which has a lot of noise otherwise fish are usually too far away to use zoom and not get motion blur. I'm just a casual underwater photographer so I'm not considering external flash and that sort of thing.

It seems I have a choice between larger zoom in a larger camera with slightly better lens, versus a smaller camera with only 3.8x zoom and a tad slower at the tele end , but seems to take better all around pictures in various scenarious out of the water.

Any insight or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

For underwater:

#1 feature you should look at is the ability to shoot in full manual

#2 would be manual White Balance or RAW.

Dave

Thanks for the reply. I think my S50 does full manual but I hardly ever use it. Took pretty good shots underwater, only probably was capturing moving objects when zoomed out at depths below 40 ft. That's an issue of the lens not being fast enough not inability to use manual controls or raw. I realize the benefit of both though.

Out of the two cams I listed though which would you tend toward for underwater?

You don't say whether either of the above can be shot in manual, whether you can manual WB or if either shoots RAW. All of the other info you posted above is meaningless UW (IMHO).

Dave

Neither shoot manual. Find me a ultra compact digital with a 28mm wide angle lens with manual and I'll buy it.

Both can manually set white balance. How do you pull that off, bring a white piece of plastic with you and keep setting it at varying depths as the color spectrum changes depending on the depth you are at???

Neither has raw but Camera B does has a 'superfine' JPEG mode that use less compression that Camera A's fine mode. I don't like using RAW anyway, it produces files that are way to large creating need for multiple memory cards (my PC only reads up to 2GB cards) and makes the images much harder to work with. I know the philosophy is getting an unprocessed image so you can process it yourself. But I think you mistaking me for a 'serious' underwater photographer. I'm a 'casual' underwater photographer, if I was serious I wouldn't be looking to use a compact point and shoot digital camera for underwater photography, I'd have a separate professional setup. I've got too many other hobbies.

Both cameras have underwater mode which I forget what they do but they definitely change the white balance and add a lot more red to the photos (which I usually do myself in Photoshop) and probably change the shutter or aperture priority, esentially doing some of the things you would do in manual mode for you but without giving you control.

dbh:

You don't say whether either of the above can be shot in manual, whether you can manual WB or if either shoots RAW. All of the other info you posted above is meaningless UW (IMHO).

Dave

Click to expand...

The RAW or manual WB is essential for shooting WA w/o a strobe IMO.

If I were getting a compact, I would get a Canon G9....but it is 35mm at the widest...which doesn't meet your criteria.

Get whichever of the above cameras feels best in your hands. Either will give you mediocre results underwater....with an occasional really good shot. Again, this is MHO.

Dave

Well without having the underwater case, I can't tell which one feels best in my hands. Remember, this camera is only 1/3 or less used for underwater. It's primary purpose is topside P&S. I refuse to invest in two cameras. My Canon S50 did fine underwater. Like you said, most pictures okay, some awesome. As long as I get a few awesome ones I'm satisfied.

I was having some trouble captureing moving fish greater than say 5 or 6 feet away with the zoom out since the shutter had to stay open too long. I mitigated that a bit by either upping the shutter speed via manual control, or putting it in 'sport mode', or just locking the ISO at 400 which gives quite a bit of noise that needs to be cleaned up later.

The lens specs on these other two are similar except for the one with 10x zoom but unfortunately that one takes terrible topside flash pictures and it's a bit too heavy/bulky to comfortably pop in my shorts (but doable). The smaller camera with the 3.8x zoom has less noise reduction. Both cameras have about same noise and detail up to ISO200. Starting at ISO400 the one with the 10x lens has aggressive noise reduction in camera that begins to wipe out detail to remove noise. At ISO 800 and up it really starts to lose fine detail whereas the other camera has a little more noise at 400 (little enought to live with without post processing) and a lot more at ISO 800 but if you clean it up with something like Noiseware later, the finished product has much more detail with less noise then what comes out of the camera with the 10x lens.

The problem is I haven't done much SCUBA photography to where I have a feel for what is going to be more important/useful when I'm divining in the 50-100 foot range - a 10x zoom, or a camera that takes better low light pictures up to ISO 800 and does better all around topside?

I think what you say probably makes sense. They'll probably both perform 'okay' underwater and I should focus more on my topside use which means the smaller, more pocketable camera that takes far better indoor photos is probably the ticket.

Zoom is not an issue underwater, so toss that spec out.

Low light and less noise is always a good thing.

As you're only using this underwater for 1/3 of the time (probably a high estimate, too, I'd guess!) - go for the camera you like best topside as long as there is a good case for it.

Once you get frustrated with the limitations underwater, you'll add another one for more dedicated underwater stuff - I speak from experience LOL I currently have about four cameras for various things...it just seems to happen!

jc2:

I was having some trouble captureing moving fish greater than say 5 or 6 feet away with the zoom out since the shutter had to stay open too long. I mitigated that a bit by either upping the shutter speed via manual control, or putting it in 'sport mode', or just locking the ISO at 400 which gives quite a bit of noise that needs to be cleaned up later.

Click to expand...

When you say "zoom out" you mean zoom in, right? (lens extended, not retracted right)? If the S50 was similar to my old S70, the AF was an absolute unmanageable pig if I zoomed in (even a little bit) on a blue water shot and even macro shots. But Alcina has a point. If you have to zoom in a lot on a wide angle shot, there's too much distance between you and the subject. The pic is gonna be crap unless you're in some gin clear water and with a lot of light...

Maybe a test to do if you have access to both cameras again is... Test their AF in a low light situation (a dark room, etc). See which one locks focus better. Try zooming in a bit and see how the AF performs.

Also, based on your scenario above, you would want the camera that would allow you to go to a higher ISO with an acceptable amount of noise for your taste.

As for having manual, I agree with MJH that this is a big plus, but since you didn't use these manual controls on the S50 when it was available, I guess you probably wouldn't use them with the new camera. Problem with these auto settings on P&S u/w is that the low light will always make the camera pick a wide aperture and/or a really slow shutter speed. There are a few tricks with non-manual cameras by selecting certain scene modes if you get to understand what presettings they use.

Based on the info provided, I agree with Alcina, go with B if the high ISO performance is better. Sounds like you would also be happier with this topside where you expect to use it most of the time.

cheers,

My requirement in an UW camera are not what others may choose. The features I look for in an UW camera as as follows:

Available Housing!
Wide as possible, wet lenses on the housing are a plus.
Macro capabilities, wet lenses a plus.
Full manual control.
Manual WB settings.
Hot shoe for external flash use.
RAW
Fast shutter response, little focus lag IOW's shutter delay.
Fast Write speeds.
The Lens should be as fast as possible.

There is more to a camera than just specs, and the handling of most PnS models, and button placement (or lack there of) is something that is bothersome UW. Going to a menu to do most everything UW is time consuming, and requires mastery over the camera to change settings quickly.

Is there an ultra compact camera with all these things? Not that I'm aware of.

Digital PnS's have become cheap enough that one may want to purchase a camera for dedicated UW use, and then another for topside use, however the list I've provided applies for me topside as well. This is why I shoot DSLR's rather than accept the limitations and compromises of the PnS variety.

Upon taking a quick look at the current offerings, I'd say the Fuji 50fd looks like a very promising UW tool, but the lens is not wide at 35mm, and it lacks RAW capabilities.

Another option I'd seriously consider would be to get a camera for UW use that is NOT an ultra compact. The Oly Evolt E-330 is a heck of a good UW camera (much better than ANY PnS out there), and can be had for a song.... $330 new. Unfortunately the housing is expensive.

Sorry I can't give you a better comparison of your camera's as listed, but you don't provide much information. I'd provide the camera models, and assume that most of use are not blinded by a name. I am not shooting either model, so regardless of who makes it, I'm not biased in favor of ANY PnS camera.