Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 205,000 divers from around the world discussing all things related to Scuba Diving. To gain full access to ScubaBoard (and make this large box go away) you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 5,500,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from well over 100,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
So, I am looking at a nikon DSLR. I spoke to a professional topside photographer friend of mine and she recommended a D7000 (she uses a D700).
The camera will be used both topside and underwater - but from an underwater perspective - are there any glaring deficiencies between the d7000, the d5100, and the d90 that would make a significant diffence? It looks like they all use the same sensor? I know there are control issues (one wheel vs two wheels for f-stop and shutter speed). The lenses that I would most likely use are a 60mm macro and the 10-17 toktino, and maybe an intermediate lense.
One thing that was mentioned by my friend was the superior ability at high ISO with the d7000 - one thing I have never really used with my current p5100 - I get so much noise above 200 that I rarely use it there.
If I was trying to cut down on the expense of a camera system Im sure you can find a good used D90 housing and camera. The D90 is a very good camera. From your post above I see that you have ruled out the D5100 and I would have told you the same. If you are going to have to buy a new housing the few bucks you would save on the D5100 vs the D7000 just wouldn't be smart money saved. My advise is get the D7000 if you are going to have to buy a new housing. The difference in $$ from a D90 or D5100 to the D7000 just isn't worth it when a new housing is close to the same price for each. If however, you can find a good used D90 setup or D300 I wouldn't be scared of owning those. Don't entertain the D5100 as an option.
I'm no expert (am perfectly happy with my D80) but everybody seems to be agreed that the D7000 has much better video than the D90 and has superb ISO qualities, i.e. little or no noise even at very high ISO values.
Typically a housing life span will far outlast the camera it was designed for, my recommendations is to get the latest camera model and as good a quality as you can afford, in this essence the Nikon D700o is unbeatable, it is the latest technology, has impresive video quality and has dual control (one for shutter speed and one for aperture) the D5100 has a single control that need to be toggled, this is relatively easy topside, but can be downright agravating underwater. as much as I respect the D90, and trust me when I say that in most case you would have the same results as the D7000, the only issue I have with the D90 is that it is on itslast leg, it might still be available, but that will be for a short time, if you get a brand new housing, you would want to get one for a camera that is just starting it life cycle if you can.
Other than the newest processor, which seems to be equal to the D300, the D7000 will autofocus in video mode. The D90 must be manually focused in video.
The autofocus on the D7000 (I own one) in video mode is pretty laughable. Topside, I just manually focus. The two times we've taken it underwater, we just use a very wide angle lens, set focus a few feet a way, and stop the lens down slightly and you get about a foot away to infinity in focus.
Well, even the Ike housing costs $1500 and then you have to add 2 lens port, a couple of strobes, a couple of lenses and other assorted gear. When you add it all up, you are talking a minimum of over $4K. If you go with an aluminum housing, you are talking $6K. So economizing on the camera body does not seem to make a whole bunch of sense. On DX cameras, that leaves you with either the Nikon D300S or the D7000. The D7000 has the newest sensor with 16 megapixels and I understand the best iso performance. The D300s with 12 megapixels is supposed to have a more sophisticated auto focus system. Either camera would probably serve you well. The megapixel thing is not that critical. Other things like noise, iso performance and dynamic range are just as or more important. The D90 is also a very nice camera, but why economize $500 on the camera body when you are spending about 10 times that for the housings, lights, and lenses? It just seems like a missapplied sense of economy. But that is just my 2 cents. It is your choice and your money.
3Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by rjack321
