For the past 20 months, I have been using the Canon S100 with RecSea housing, and I have gotten some great pics with it. I dive a lot, and I did about 300 dives with it. The housing has stood up very well, despite quite a bit of use and abuse. I took so many photos with it that I actually burned out the on-board flash on my first S100 a few months ago, but luckily I had a second one as back-up. You can see my best pics with it by following the smugmug link below. (If anyone wants to buy an S100 with a burnt-out flash, make me an offer! It's about $150 to replace the flash, so a bit of a toss-up as to whether it is worth replacing the flash. Or if someone has a dead S100 with a flash that still works, maybe we can make a deal!).
So then I was on my second S100 in the same housing, with no more back-up. I felt that I had sort of reached the maximum of what the camera could do anyways, and was ready to make the jump to a higher-end set-up. I really like the Canon S100 for the ease of the control of shooting full manual underwater, and the colours that Canon somehow gets, they just seem better to me than Nikon or the other brands. So I wanted to stay loyal to the Canon brand. I was thinking mirrorless, but the Canon EOS M was late to the game and the reviews were not good (main complaint is poor auto-focus), so I was thinking of just going for SLR. However, the more I researched, the more I started to realize that mirrorless (IMHO) is the way of the future for underwater photography. I didn't like the idea of using an optical viewfinder underwater, live-view seems better for underwater, and I was already used to live-view. SLR just seemed too bulky for me, and all that bulk for an optical viewfinder I didn't even want to use. Plus, cameras now have so much computing power, shutter-lag and live-view lag are a fading issue.
So in June-July, when Canon cut the price of the EOS M in half to about $400, and also released a firmware update to improve the autofocus, I decided to take the plunge. I purchased the Canon EOS M in July. It came with the 18-55 mm EF-M kit lens. I also bought the $200 adaptor so that it could take any Canon SLR lens, because I wanted to use the Canon 60 mm EFS lens (which I also bought) that is very popular for underwater macro. I also put in an order for the Nauticam housing, along with both available ports, i.e., the 18-55 mm kit lens and the 60 mm macro.
Nauticam is the only housing available for this camera so far, and it is high-quality machined aluminum for around $1500, which is half the price of a similar-quality SLR housing. According to topside reports, the image quality of the EOS M is as good or better than the Rebels (they have the same sensor). The question is, how would it perform underwater? Would it focus?
I haven't seen anybody write a review for this camera for underwater use yet, so I thought I would share what I have found out so far.
First of all, the Canon EOS-M is a great little camera, and is fun to use topside. I had to wait a while before the housing came in. I finally got the housing in September, but initially only with the kit lens port. The housing seems to be of very good quality. I tried a few dives with it, but quickly realized the kit lens is not suitable for underwater, because the minimum working distance is too long. Totally useless for macro! It also didn't seem to focus particularly well compared to my compact S100. It was perhaps OK for bigger stuff, but even then, the working distance seemed too long. Here is the best shot I could manage after 2 dives with the kit lens:
(wolf-eel shot)
So I went back to my Canon S100 and waited for the 60 mm macro port to come in, thinking that would be my salvation. Well, I finally got it last week, and here is the best shot I got so far:
(head of an octopus)
If you want to see a few more shots, check out: Canon EOS M - robertroy
What I found was that it did not focus particularly well unless it had a lot of light (luckily I have a good focus light in the Sola 800). It does take nice sharp macro when it does focus, but it was at times quite difficult to achieve focus. Maybe because there was not enough light, not enough contrast, or I was too close. I even tried the manual focus with some limited success. Also, the 60 mm macro lens is significantly bulkier than the kit lens (the native EF-M lenses are nice and small, but there are only three so far, and a port exists only for the 18-55 so far). I also found that the fixed focal length of the 60 mm is very limiting underwater. It is basically only good for shooting small stuff, i.e., nudibranch-size or smaller, say about 4 cm or less. With any larger subject, you have to back off too much and your image quality goes down rapidly. The octopus above was small, his body was maybe 10 x 15 cm, but I couldn't quite get his whole body in the frame without backing off too much. So the best shot I could manage was of just his eyes.
So then I thought, great, I've just wasted $4k on a rig that works less well than what I already had. The Canon S100 focuses very well, and is nice and light-weight, and takes great video. I get nice macro with the accessory wet lens (2 x 3 diopter flip lens), and decent wide-angle with the accessory wet wide-angle lens (although the wet lens is optically not super-sharp). But even without accessory wet-lenses the S100 is still quite versatile.
What I needed was a diopter for the kit lens, but I am not sure what wet lens would fit on my housing. So I had the bright idea last week to buy a dry macro lens. After a quick internet search, I bought a set of three 52 mm screw-on close-up lenses for about $60. They fit on the end of the lens like a filter. The set came with a +1, a +2 and a +4 diopter. Basically they are reading glasses for your lens. They can also be stacked, although 2 stacked barely fits in the housing (it actually bangs lightly against the dome if you zoom in all the way). Topside tests seem promising. It seems to focus very well close-up, and the minimum working distance is nicely reduced. I will report back when I have tried it underwater! (which unfortunately might not be for another week or two!)
So bottom line is, if you are a beginner underwater photographer, get a Canon compact! I.e., S100, S110, S120, or G15, G16.
I haven't given up yet on the EOS-M and I hope that I will get good macro shots with the kit lens and a +4 dry diopter, but I will have to let you know in the next few weeks!
p.s. I tested the image quality of the 18-55 vs. the 60 mm macro and they are the same as near as I can tell with my eye. The 18-55 is brighter (lets in more light at a given aperture) but has a longer working distance. Hopefully with the diopter it will be just as good for macro as the 60 mm, and a lot more versatile if a bigger subject comes along.
cheers and happy diving!
So then I was on my second S100 in the same housing, with no more back-up. I felt that I had sort of reached the maximum of what the camera could do anyways, and was ready to make the jump to a higher-end set-up. I really like the Canon S100 for the ease of the control of shooting full manual underwater, and the colours that Canon somehow gets, they just seem better to me than Nikon or the other brands. So I wanted to stay loyal to the Canon brand. I was thinking mirrorless, but the Canon EOS M was late to the game and the reviews were not good (main complaint is poor auto-focus), so I was thinking of just going for SLR. However, the more I researched, the more I started to realize that mirrorless (IMHO) is the way of the future for underwater photography. I didn't like the idea of using an optical viewfinder underwater, live-view seems better for underwater, and I was already used to live-view. SLR just seemed too bulky for me, and all that bulk for an optical viewfinder I didn't even want to use. Plus, cameras now have so much computing power, shutter-lag and live-view lag are a fading issue.
So in June-July, when Canon cut the price of the EOS M in half to about $400, and also released a firmware update to improve the autofocus, I decided to take the plunge. I purchased the Canon EOS M in July. It came with the 18-55 mm EF-M kit lens. I also bought the $200 adaptor so that it could take any Canon SLR lens, because I wanted to use the Canon 60 mm EFS lens (which I also bought) that is very popular for underwater macro. I also put in an order for the Nauticam housing, along with both available ports, i.e., the 18-55 mm kit lens and the 60 mm macro.
Nauticam is the only housing available for this camera so far, and it is high-quality machined aluminum for around $1500, which is half the price of a similar-quality SLR housing. According to topside reports, the image quality of the EOS M is as good or better than the Rebels (they have the same sensor). The question is, how would it perform underwater? Would it focus?
I haven't seen anybody write a review for this camera for underwater use yet, so I thought I would share what I have found out so far.
First of all, the Canon EOS-M is a great little camera, and is fun to use topside. I had to wait a while before the housing came in. I finally got the housing in September, but initially only with the kit lens port. The housing seems to be of very good quality. I tried a few dives with it, but quickly realized the kit lens is not suitable for underwater, because the minimum working distance is too long. Totally useless for macro! It also didn't seem to focus particularly well compared to my compact S100. It was perhaps OK for bigger stuff, but even then, the working distance seemed too long. Here is the best shot I could manage after 2 dives with the kit lens:
(wolf-eel shot)
So I went back to my Canon S100 and waited for the 60 mm macro port to come in, thinking that would be my salvation. Well, I finally got it last week, and here is the best shot I got so far:
(head of an octopus)
If you want to see a few more shots, check out: Canon EOS M - robertroy
What I found was that it did not focus particularly well unless it had a lot of light (luckily I have a good focus light in the Sola 800). It does take nice sharp macro when it does focus, but it was at times quite difficult to achieve focus. Maybe because there was not enough light, not enough contrast, or I was too close. I even tried the manual focus with some limited success. Also, the 60 mm macro lens is significantly bulkier than the kit lens (the native EF-M lenses are nice and small, but there are only three so far, and a port exists only for the 18-55 so far). I also found that the fixed focal length of the 60 mm is very limiting underwater. It is basically only good for shooting small stuff, i.e., nudibranch-size or smaller, say about 4 cm or less. With any larger subject, you have to back off too much and your image quality goes down rapidly. The octopus above was small, his body was maybe 10 x 15 cm, but I couldn't quite get his whole body in the frame without backing off too much. So the best shot I could manage was of just his eyes.
So then I thought, great, I've just wasted $4k on a rig that works less well than what I already had. The Canon S100 focuses very well, and is nice and light-weight, and takes great video. I get nice macro with the accessory wet lens (2 x 3 diopter flip lens), and decent wide-angle with the accessory wet wide-angle lens (although the wet lens is optically not super-sharp). But even without accessory wet-lenses the S100 is still quite versatile.
What I needed was a diopter for the kit lens, but I am not sure what wet lens would fit on my housing. So I had the bright idea last week to buy a dry macro lens. After a quick internet search, I bought a set of three 52 mm screw-on close-up lenses for about $60. They fit on the end of the lens like a filter. The set came with a +1, a +2 and a +4 diopter. Basically they are reading glasses for your lens. They can also be stacked, although 2 stacked barely fits in the housing (it actually bangs lightly against the dome if you zoom in all the way). Topside tests seem promising. It seems to focus very well close-up, and the minimum working distance is nicely reduced. I will report back when I have tried it underwater! (which unfortunately might not be for another week or two!)
So bottom line is, if you are a beginner underwater photographer, get a Canon compact! I.e., S100, S110, S120, or G15, G16.
I haven't given up yet on the EOS-M and I hope that I will get good macro shots with the kit lens and a +4 dry diopter, but I will have to let you know in the next few weeks!
p.s. I tested the image quality of the 18-55 vs. the 60 mm macro and they are the same as near as I can tell with my eye. The 18-55 is brighter (lets in more light at a given aperture) but has a longer working distance. Hopefully with the diopter it will be just as good for macro as the 60 mm, and a lot more versatile if a bigger subject comes along.
cheers and happy diving!
Last edited:
