If i both have d90 and d40, which is more "cost effective" to set up??

[kenz0]

As the title goes, a friend can't decide on which housing to order on ikelite though its both i think around roughly $1400.

I said go with the D90 for the HD video but he said he's kinda afraid to flood it vs the D40 which is alot cheaper but I told him that its gonna get much more expensive if he chooses d40 and decides to upgrade in the future.

Your comments will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks! :D

[marcaumarc]

I would recommend housing the d90. Because housings are more expensive than bodies, I think it usually makes sense to house the latest body so the effective lifespan of the housing is as long as possible. Plus, the d40 doesn't have a focus motor in the camera, so that is a limitation on what lenses you can use with it.

The only reason I would house a D40 is if I got a really inexpensive used housing.

[scottfiji]

d90, by a longshot! I really don't think much about the entry level Nikon dSRL's, but the d90 is a great camera.

good luck,
Scott

[Chuck Tribolet]

The D40 can give quite nice results underwater. My GF, Adm. Linda, recently won first place in
the Advanced California Cold Water category of the Northern California Underwater Photographic
Society's SEA 2009 International Photo Competition with a shot with a D40. The present crop
of lenses is quite adequate for the D40.

That said, I'd house the D90.

Do not assume a priori that Ikelite is the least cost option. Linda went with an Aquatica housing
because it would take Nikonos synch cords, and we have a drawer full. Investigate total cost
of ownership.

[JackConnick]

D90 in the new Nauticam housing! Awesome housing for the money...$2300, plus ports etc.

Jack

[fppf]

I would recommend housing the d90. Because housings are more expensive than bodies, I think it usually makes sense to house the latest body so the effective lifespan of the housing is as long as possible. Plus, the d40 doesn't have a focus motor in the camera, so that is a limitation on what lenses you can use with it.

The only reason I would house a D40 is if I got a really inexpensive used housing.

You have not bought a housing for a D700 or D3x huh

[CT Sean]

I'd opt for the D90 due to previously mentioned focus motor plus much better high iso capability. That plus cheaper (due to no need for AFS) fast glass = winner. Plus it's just a better camera

About the only advantage the D40 has is it's cheaper to replace if (when?) the housing floods. Based on that logic everyone should be driving a Kia

[marcaumarc]

You have not bought a housing for a D700 or D3x huh

Okay, housings are more expensive than camera bodies...except when they're not. But for the cameras in the original question, a new housing is definitely more expensive than the body.

[Mariozi]

need another vote for D90???

[jcclink]

House the D90 & insure your system against flood, thief, loss, eaten by shark, everything. I have this type of coverage on homeower's policy - personal articles rider. You do have a Platinum Card - right??? Don't forget that getting a new system has a snowball effect - spares (anything electronic), bigger faster computer (larger files), external drives for backup, etc. You probably have a laptop that will work for a trip, but it also needs a backup hd or similar. Its only $$$$$$$$. Have fun!

[Chuck Tribolet]

I think the big advantage of the D90 over the D40 is that the D90
has more focus points. I forget how many, but it's more than the
D40's three focus points. This gets to be really important when
you want to put the focus on the fish's eyeball.

[WetLens]

I really see an advantage to the larger screen on the D90 and I've found the "Info" button to be indispensable. Another vote for the D90.

[kenz0]

Thank you all!

[kenz0]

Sorry for double posting, I can't seem to find the edit button.

BTW, we got a 50mm 1.4G prime lens and an 18-200mm zoom lens.

Are these lens ideal? I got prime and macro in mind though..

THANKS!

[marcaumarc]

Check out this thread for lenses:

http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/nikon-niche/308022-af-s-85mm-3-5g-vr-micro.html

One very common setup is the Tokina 10-17 fisheye for wide angle and either the 60mm or 100mm macro, but now there is a 35mm macro from Tokina and soon an 85mm macro from Nikon.

[scottfiji]

Sorry for double posting, I can't seem to find the edit button.

BTW, we got a 50mm 1.4G prime lens and an 18-200mm zoom lens.

Are these lens ideal? I got prime and macro in mind though..

THANKS!

Both are excellent for topside (portraits and travel photography respectively), but both are very poor choices for underwater imho. Check out my underwater lens (http://www.uwphotographyguide.com/admin/reports/underwater-photography-lenses) page.

[MikeKeating]

I am currently looking at the same thing. But I have a D40x.

My initial thought was to house the D40x as it has decent functions and keep the D90 for out of water use. I understand the house the latest and greatest, but I am scared of flooding my nicer camera and being left with nothing.

Of course, now I am thinking about housing the D90.

Do people use live view or not when using the D90?

[cberk]

I have a D90 and Ikelite set up with a Tokina 11-16 lens and it works great.
Live view will be very difficult to use. It would be very slow to focus and you will miss many shots.

[HerraduraDivers]

I have a D90 too and i think that it's one of the uw-camera with the best quality/price relationship.
I know people shooting excellent pictures with a D40 abut i belive that the same shot with a D90 would be somehow "better".
The idea with the D40 underwater setup is intriguing because you can buy a used D40 cameras quite cheap.
But don't forget that you mostly flood the lens as well and then the whole story start to get expensive.
From my point ov view, the right approch to uw-photography is to do the best that you never flood anything, eve if sooner or later you will...

Chris