Anyone use the 300D or a DSLR underwater?

[bakpakka]

Any serious photographers here who bring your DSLRs beneath the seas? Do the photos turn out any better than a point and shoot camera?

I have a 300D and am not sure if I should invest in an underwater housing, or whether I should just stick with a simple point and shoot camera + housing combo. Would the quality turn out a lot better?

I currently am subscribed to www.shuttermap.com which is a very interesting stock photography website with a twist, and I want to upload high quality underwater images there. Perhaps someone can advise me on this?

All the rest who take brilliant underwater photos, do sign up at ShutterMap too. It's pretty fun and you could make some money there!

 

[alcina]

I haven't moved to dslr but if/when I do I'll be popping that baby in a housing from day one.

chippy shoots a fuji, I believe. Mike V also shoots dslr. There are others that aren't springing to mind yet.

If you are aiming at seriously selling, and you already have the camera, get the housing.

 

[sitka diver]

Had a Reefmaster camera for a while... Last year I bought a Canon 10d then looked at housings... when the camera 1st came out there were no housings for it.... Then I desited on a Ikelite housing w/the ds125 strobes...I was very happy till the 20d came out later that year.... So I bought the 20d and all I need now is another housing for it and strobes.... U got to remember its just money..

 

[dbh]

Here is a thread that you may find useful:

5050 to DSLR

I have not regretted making the switch.

HTH,
Dave

 

[bakpakka]

yea I guess sitka diver is right, "it's only money" - grin... therein lies the problem, no?

I suppose I'd be less heartbroken if for some reason my housing flooded with a simple camera over my DSLR!

How much do those spankin' Ikelite housings cost?
And another technical question is whether or not it is easy to manipulate the DSLR under water, what with tweaking the dials, and having to squint through the small viewfinder? Isn't it a lot harder to look thru the viewfinder over the big LCD display cameras?

You guys seem to have nice pictures, do post some up on ShutterMap.com to show the world your country and where you are / have dived before! I'd love to see the outcome of your DSLRs.

 

[alcina]

You know, I'm thinking anything you take in the water should be insured.

So in reality, who cares what camera is flooded? Insurance replaces it coz that's what you have insured. Unless you get attached to your equipment

From those who have made the switch the viewfinder doesn't seem to be an issue. See the thread linked in dbh's post above.

 

[Dr. Doug Ebersole]

The most important part of an underwater camera is the photographer, not the camera. Some photographers seem to get outstanding photos with disposable cameras. For the rest of us, a better camera system can truly improve our images.There are a multitude of advantages of DSLR cameras over the point-and-shoot variety to include image quality, no shutter delay, wider variety of f stops & shutter speeds, multiple lenses, etc. The only downside is cost -- but, hey, it's only money! For detailed discussions and information, I would recommend www.wetpixel.com and www.digitaldiver.net.

 

[Curt Bowen]

I shoot a Nikon D100 DSLR in an Aquatica Housing

 

[dsafanda]

The point of owning a nice camera is to use it as much as possible. IMHO

Currently using a D100 in a Light&Motion Housing. Envious of those with the Nikon D2X.

 

[alcina]

The only downside is cost -- .

Actually, there are some other downsides that make dslr not right for everyone - have a look at the link above (5050 to dlsr) some great points that one might not think of already.

My quick list of things to keep in mind:
-cost
-flexibility
-size
-extra maintenance
-learning curve
-weight
-continuing accessories

Some may apply to some folks and not to others. I'm not anti-dslr, but I am not someone who believes that every diver needs the latest and greatest either